Mind Matters—Exploring Mental Health and Well-Being in the Education System

1. Introduction

Mental health in education has become a pivotal issue for contemporary research and practice, transcending disciplinary boundaries and institutional levels. The COVID-19 pandemic may have heightened awareness of mental distress, but the roots of psychosocial strain, emotional regulation difficulties, and well-being in education long predate it. This Special Issue, “Mind Matters—Exploring Mental Health and Well-Being in the Education System”, brings together a diverse collection of empirical and theoretical contributions that illuminate how mental health is shaped within both school and higher education contexts. The contributions coalesce around two thematic clusters: mental health and psychosocial support in schools; well-being, stress, and structural pressures in higher education. Each contribution also offers methodological insights, advancing a deeper understanding of how mental health is experienced, studied, and addressed across the education system.

2. Mental Health and Structural Conditions in Schools

In Section 2.1, we explore how emotional labor and processes of digitalization shape the everyday culture and relational dynamics of schools, emphasizing their impact on teacher well-being and school development. Building on this, in Section 2.2, we turn to the mental health of student populations who are particularly affected by structural disadvantage and situational vulnerability, including those in digitally mediated or socially precarious learning environments. In Section 2.3, we shift the focus from individual experiences to institutional conditions, examining how systemic factors—such as leadership, school climate, and workload—drive teacher engagement, stress, and professional sustainability.

2.1. Digitalization in School

Several contributions explore how schools—both as relational environments and organizational systems—influence the mental well-being of teachers and students.

In their theoretical article “What Does Digital Well-Being Mean for School Development?”, Philipp Michael Weber, Rudolf Kammerl, and Mandy Schiefner-Rohs offer a comprehensive review of existing concepts of digital well-being specifically with a focus on educational relevance and demonstrate its strong relationship to digital inequality. The authors argue that fostering digital well-being must go beyond promoting individual media literacy or behavioral self-regulation. Instead, they call for an integrative perspective that includes structural reflection on the conditions under which digital education occurs—such as unequal access to technology, divergent usage norms, and the reproduction of social hierarchies through digital practices. By highlighting the interplay of pedagogical, technological, and organizational dimensions, this article outlines how digital well-being can be meaningfully embedded in whole-school development processes. This conceptual approach encourages educators and policymakers to see digitalization not merely as a technical challenge but as a socio-cultural transformation requiring participatory equity-oriented strategies.

The contribution “Students’ Well-being in Digital Learning Environments: A Multilevel Analysis of Sixth-Graders in Comprehensive Schools” by Wilhelmine Berger, Eva Grommé, Ferdinand Stebner, Tobias Koch, Christian Reintjes, and Sonja Nonte investigates how digital learning conditions affect the school-related well-being of sixth-grade students in Germany. Using multilevel modeling based on data from 1033 students, the study examines the relationship between digital education factors—such as perceived gains in digital competencies and digitally supported instructional practices—and students’ emotional experience at school. The findings indicate that students who perceive themselves as acquiring digital skills report higher levels of school well-being. In contrast, digitally individualized instruction shows a slight negative association with well-being, possibly due to increased social exposure in classroom settings. The study highlights the need for inclusive equity-oriented digital learning environments that support both academic achievement and students’ psychosocial development.

2.2. Vulnerable Students and Social Inequality

This Special Issue also features research focused on students facing heightened mental health risks due to structural or situational vulnerabilities.

In their article “Impact of COVID-19 School Closures on German High-School Graduates’ Perceived Stress,” Tim Rogge and Andreas Seifert analyzed how personal and contextual resources predict perceived stress during exam preparation among Abitur candidates during pandemic-related school closures. Based on data from a cross-sectional online survey (N = 2379) and using structural equation modeling, the authors identified academic self-efficacy and perceived teacher support as key protective factors that significantly reduced student stress, whereas cancelled lessons increased stress. Additionally, teachers’ digital competence lowered stress directly and indirectly via perceived support. These findings underscore the importance of pedagogical presence and digital readiness in distance learning contexts. The study offers timely insights into student resilience amid educational disruption and highlights the urgent need to equip teachers with both technical and relational competencies to safeguard students’ well-being under crisis conditions.

In their article “Do Refugee Students Feel Well at School? An Analysis of the Influence of Individual, Social, and Structural Factors,” Gisela Will, Andreas Horr, Regina Becker, and Christoph Homuth used the Cultural Stress Theory to explore the well-being of refugee students in German secondary schools, focusing on factors on the individual, social, and structural level. Drawing on data from the German study “Refugees in the German Educational System (ReGES),” the authors analyzed responses from over 2415 refugee students. The inclusion of migration- and refugee-specific factors significantly improved the explanatory power of the models, suggesting that understanding the unique challenges faced by refugee adolescents is crucial. The results demonstrate that perceived discrimination, problems due to cultural and religious differences, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are significantly associated with lower well-being at school, supporting the tenets of the Cultural Stress Theory. Importantly, the study also found that teachers’ support plays a vital role in fostering positive well-being among refugee students. The results underscore the need for inclusive school environments that actively promote social belonging and institutional support to foster refugee students’ well-being and educational success.

In their article “Happiness at School and Its Relationship with Academic Achievement,” Hernán Hochschild Ovalle, Miguel Nussbaum, Susana Claro, Pablo Espinosa, and Danilo Alvares examined how students’ subjective well-being at school related to their academic performance. Drawing on data from over 292,725 students in Chile, the authors employed multilevel modeling to assess the relationship between school happiness and standardized test scores in mathematics and language. The key contribution of this research is the finding that the impact of school happiness on academic achievement differs depending on a student’s socioeconomic status, gender, age, and ethnicity. The study reveals that while wealthier students initially benefit less from school happiness, by 10th grade they experience greater academic gains, particularly in mathematics. This underscores the importance of tailoring interventions to students’ age and recognizing how the role of happiness evolves throughout their education. Building on these results, the authors argue that emotional well-being is not only a valuable educational goal in itself but also a meaningful predictor of academic success. They advocate for the integration of well-being promotion into educational policy and practice, especially as a means to support equity and student engagement across diverse school contexts.

2.3. (Institutional) Drivers of Teachers’ Well-Being

Teachers’ mental health is another key area of inquiry in this Special Issue, with three contributions.

In their conceptual systematic review “A Systemic Perspective on Teacher Well-Being: A Review of Recent Empirical Research (2020–2023),” Laura Maria Kurrle and Julia Warwas synthesize empirical studies on teachers’ well-being published over the past three years. Analyzing 168 peer-reviewed articles from diverse educational contexts, the authors identify and categorize dominant conceptualizations and operationalizations of teachers’ well-being. While most studies adopt multidimensional models—encompassing emotional, cognitive, social, and physical aspects—they diverge notably in their theoretical grounding and methodological rigor. Kurrle and Warwas highlight the decisive influence of organizational factors such as leadership, school climate, and policy environments on teachers’ well-being and call for greater theoretical coherence and contextual sensitivity. The review proposes a framework that understands teachers’ well-being not as an individual condition but as a systemic and relational construct, central to educational quality and sustainability. These conceptual insights provide the foundation for the empirical studies that follow, which explore how leadership, institutional culture, and crisis contexts affect teachers’ well-being in practice.

In their article “Buffer or Boost? The Role of Job Resources in Predicting Teacher Work Engagement and Emotional Exhaustion,” Christian Reintjes, Till Kaiser, Isabelle Winter, and Gabriele Bellenberg present findings from a representative study of 5859 teachers in North Rhine-Westphalia. Their analysis reveals significant differences across school types: teachers at vocational and special needs schools report higher work engagement and lower emotional exhaustion. Individual resilience and supportive school leadership emerge as the most robust predictors of positive outcomes. Notably, the study introduces a crucial distinction between the buffering and boosting effects of job resources. While resources are often conceptualized as buffers in high-demand settings, this study finds stronger boosting effects—resources are particularly effective in already supportive environments. These findings underscore the systemic importance of leadership and professional climate in fostering teachers’ well-being and provide valuable guidance for education policy and school development.

In her article “Emotion Management as Key to Mental Health? Teachers’ Emotions and Support Systems,” Ricarda Rübben presents a qualitative study based on interviews with 51 primary and secondary school teachers in Germany. The study investigates how teachers regulate their emotions in response to the emotional demands of their profession and how institutional and personal support systems contribute to their mental well-being. The findings reveal that teachers commonly use suppression strategies—particularly within the classroom—to manage negative emotions such as anger and frustration. Outside the classroom, antecedent-focused strategies, in particular, cognitive change, as well as attentional deployment, are most frequently used. These strategies promote cognitive reappraisal and emotional stability. The study highlights the vital role of a supportive school culture—characterized by collegial exchange, professional counseling, and leadership support—in reducing emotional strain. Especially in times of teacher shortages, providing structured opportunities for supervision and peer consultation during work hours may represent a valuable investment in sustaining teachers’ mental health and retention.

3. Mental Health and Structural Conditions in Higher Education

The increasing visibility of mental health concerns in higher education has drawn sustained attention to the structural and institutional pressures shaping students’ psychological well-being. The COVID-19 pandemic acted as a magnifying lens, intensifying pre-existing strains and revealing systemic weaknesses in academic environments. Against this backdrop, in this section, we describe how study-related demands, digital learning conditions, and cultural transitions impact students’ emotional health, academic engagement, and dropout intentions. The included contributions focus on diverse groups—including psychology students in distance education, international students, and student teachers—and apply established frameworks such as the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) and Study Demands–Resources (SD-R) models. Together, these studies shed light on the psychological costs of higher education under crisis conditions and emphasize the importance of resource-sensitive, inclusive, and structurally responsive support systems.

3.1. Study Stress and Institutional Support in Higher Education

The pressures of study demands, especially under pandemic and post-pandemic conditions, are central themes in several contributions.

In their article “Study Demands and Resources in Distance Education—Their Associations with Engagement, Emotional Exhaustion, and Academic Success,” Ina E. Pumpe and Kathrin Jonkmann investigate how students’ experiences of demands and resources in distance learning environments related to their academic engagement, emotional exhaustion, and academic achievement. Grounded in the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model, the study surveyed 286 German university students during the COVID-19 pandemic, a period marked by the rapid shift to remote education. The authors distinguish between different types of study demands (e.g., time pressure and difficulty of learning material) and study resources (e.g., social support and decision latitude) and assessed their influence on academic outcomes. Path analysis showed negative correlations between study intensity and academic success that were partially or fully mediated via emotional exhaustion and various dimensions of engagement. The decision latitude results revealed a positive association with subjective academic success (but no significant correlation with GPA) that was partially mediated by emotional exhaustion and engagement. No significant associations were observable between social support and emotional exhaustion, engagement, and academic success. The findings underscore the critical importance of balancing demands and resources in distance education. The study offers practical implications for designing supportive learning environments that foster student well-being and academic performance under remote or hybrid conditions.

Focusing on international students in Germany, Juan Serrano-Sánchez, Julia Zimmermann, Edgar Hahn, and Dina Kuhlee in “Life Satisfaction of International Students: (How) Do Study Demands, Institutional, and Individual Resources Matter?” investigated how academic demands, institutional support, and acculturation orientations jointly shape student well-being. Drawing on cross-sectional data from 503 international students at over 20 German higher education institutions, the authors extended the Study Demands–Resources (SD-R) model by incorporating affective and cognitive acculturation orientations toward both host and home cultures. Structural equation modeling revealed that lower study-related demands were predictive for lower stress and higher student engagement, which was associated with greater life satisfaction. While institutional support enhanced engagement, it surprisingly correlated with increased stress. Importantly, an affective orientation toward the host culture—reflecting feelings of acceptance and integration—emerged as a key personal resource reducing stress and promoting engagement. The study highlights the need to address both structural and intercultural dimensions to foster the well-being of international students and offers actionable insights for inclusive higher education policy and practice.

In their article “The Mediating Role of Perceived Stress and Student Engagement for Student Teachers’ Intention to Drop Out of University in Germany: An Analysis Using the Study Demands–Resources Model Under Pandemic and Post-Pandemic Conditions,” Edgar Hahn, Dina Kuhlee, Julia Zimmermann, and Juan Serrano-Sánchez examined the interplay of study demands and institutional and individual resources in predicting student teachers’ dropout intentions in German universities during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on the Study Demands–Resources (SD-R) model, the authors used structural equation modeling to examine whether perceived study demands and available resources predicted dropout intentions via perceived stress and academic engagement. The study was based on data of two cross-sectional surveys of student teachers under pandemic (Dataset 2021 N = 510) and post-pandemic conditions (Dataset 2023 N = 433). The results showed that high study demands significantly increased the perceived stress, which in turn was linked to a stronger intention to drop out. The association between study demands and perceived stress, as well as between perceived stress and intention to drop out, was weaker under pandemic study conditions than under post-pandemic conditions. One explanation for these findings could be the relaxed regulations during the pandemic in Germany in regard to examination procedures and the standard period of study. In both groups, resilience was related to lower perceived stress. The study highlights the importance of managing stress and strengthening resilience through resource-oriented support structures in teacher education programs. Its findings offer practical insights for higher education institutions aiming to improve retention and resilience among student teachers, particularly in times of crisis or transition.

Collectively, these studies illustrate how a range of different approaches can effectively capture the multifaceted nature of student well-being in digitally mediated and structurally diverse higher education settings. By integrating model-based analyses with intercultural perspectives and differentiated student populations, the research highlights not only the psychological impact of academic demands but also the structural and cultural resources that shape engagement, satisfaction, and dropout intentions. This convergence of empirical insights underscores the importance of systemic data-informed approaches to fostering mental health and resilience in contemporary university contexts.

3.2. Gender, Career Insecurity, and Academic Mental Health

Academic staff, particularly mid-level and early-career researchers, face distinct pressures that affect their mental health and job satisfaction. In their article “Gendered Challenges in Academia: Exploring the Impact of Working Hours, Stress, and Job Satisfaction Among Mid-Level University Staff in Germany”, Heinke Röbken, Nicole Geier, Dorthe Behrens, and Anne Mertens examined the psychosocial factors affecting job satisfaction among 1442 mid-level academic staff. Their analysis revealed that perceived job insecurity, excessive overtime, and burnout symptoms were significant negative predictors of satisfaction, while work engagement emerged as a strong positive influence. Notably, the postponement of family planning for professional reasons was associated with markedly lower job satisfaction, highlighting the persistent tension between academic career structures and private life aspirations. Regarding gender differences, men reported higher levels of academic job satisfaction, self-efficacy, and overtime work and lower levels of burnout symptoms than women. These findings call for gender-sensitive reforms that address structural insecurities and promote sustainable inclusive academic career paths. The study offers robust empirical insights into a largely underexplored segment of higher education institutions.

4. Methodological Diversity and Theoretical Contributions

A central strength of this Special Issue lies in its methodological breadth and conceptual depth. Reflecting the complexity of mental health in education—from school culture and structural inequalities to institutional pressures in higher education—the included contributions span a wide range of qualitative, quantitative, and theoretical approaches. This diversity not only enhances the validity and contextual sensitivity of findings but also fosters the integration of psychological, organizational, and sociocultural perspectives across educational levels and settings.

4.1. Quantitative Approaches and Theoretical Transfer

Several contributions employed advanced quantitative methods grounded in established psychological frameworks, particularly the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) and Study Demands–Resources (SD-R) models. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used extensively to examine latent constructs such as emotional exhaustion, perceived stress, academic engagement, and life satisfaction in relation to contextual demands and institutional resources.

Multilevel modeling enabled a differentiated analysis of individual and systemic predictors of student well-being—for example, in digital classroom environments—while moderated regression approaches captured interaction effects between personal resilience and structural conditions. Notably, these studies demonstrate the productive transfer of organizational theories into educational research and illustrate how systemic demands and resource configurations shape mental health outcomes at both school and university levels.

4.2. Qualitative Approaches

Complementing the quantitative work, the study of Ricarda Rübben adopted a qualitative design. Her interview-based study on teacher emotional labor provides deep insights into affective self-regulation, social norms, and the role of support systems in everyday school life.

4.3. Theoretical Reviews and Conceptual Innovation

In addition to empirical analyses, the Special Issue includes theoretical contributions that synthesize emerging research fields and extend existing models. The review article on digital well-being traces the evolution of the concept from individual coping to an institutional and systemic challenge, proposing a multi-layered framework that connects school development, media literacy, and health promotion.

The integration of acculturation theory into the SD-R model—used to analyze international students’ well-being—offers a cross-cultural extension that accounts for emotional adaptation and cultural orientation as psychological resources. Further conceptual work differentiates between hedonic (e.g., happiness, stress relief) and eudaimonic (e.g., purpose, engagement) dimensions of well-being, enabling more nuanced operationalizations in empirical research.

In sum, the methodological and theoretical contributions in this Special Issue reflect a shared commitment to examining mental health and well-being as both an individual experience and a structurally embedded phenomenon. By moving beyond narrow deficit-oriented approaches and embracing system-level, relational, and cross-cultural perspectives, the research presented here lays a strong foundation for evidence-based intervention, institutional reform, and critical policy discourse in education.

5. Conclusions: Toward a Cross-Level Integrated Health Agenda in Education

The research presented in this Special Issue converges on a crucial insight: mental health and well-being in education is not an individual concern—it is a systemic imperative. Whether in classrooms, lecture halls, staffrooms, or policy forums, well-being must be treated as a foundational element of educational quality, equity, and sustainability. It is shaped by institutional structures, leadership cultures, pedagogical practices, and technological conditions.

Across the diverse contributions, a common thread emerges: mental health is relational, contextual, and structurally embedded. Student learning, teacher engagement, and academic resilience are not merely outcomes of personal coping but are deeply influenced by environmental conditions. Schools and universities must move beyond individualized models of stress regulation and instead embrace well-being as an institutional responsibility and collective aspiration.

The theoretical syntheses in this Special Issue further emphasize the need for dynamic, multidimensional, and structurally reflective frameworks of well-being. They challenge fragmented and deficit-oriented views and advocate for approaches that integrate psychological, social, and organizational dimensions.

To advance a sustainable and equitable mental health agenda in education, coordinated cross-level action is essential. This includes the following:

• Investing in supportive institutional cultures: Positive school and university climates—marked by trust, inclusion, and participatory leadership—buffer against burnout and disengagement. Leadership development must center emotional intelligence, distributed responsibility, and psychological safety.
• Implementing gender-sensitive reforms in academia: Structural insecurity, precarious career paths, and work-life tensions—especially for early-career women—demand more than recognition. They require tenure-track access, transparent evaluation criteria, family-friendly policies, and inclusive mentoring structures.
• Shifting from individual coping to systemic well-being design: In the face of digitalization, mental health cannot be reduced to screen-time limits or self-care routines. Instead, digital well-being must be institutionally embedded—through equitable access, digital literacy, and protection against technostress and algorithmic strain.
• Adopting cross-sectoral integration: Mental health intersects with social justice, technological transformation, and pedagogical inclusion. Responses must therefore span micro-practices (e.g., feedback culture, relational pedagogy) and macro-structures (e.g., funding models, workload regulation).
• Grounding policy in evidence and participation: This Special Issue demonstrates the value of combining robust quantitative analysis with qualitative, narrative, and participatory approaches. Policymaking should be informed by interdisciplinary research and include the voices of practitioners, learners, and marginalized groups.

Ultimately, mental health and well-being must be understood not only as a personal trait but as a shared condition—co-produced through institutional culture, relational dynamics, and political design. Rethinking how we define success, resilience, and inclusion in education is no longer optional—it is necessary.

In sum, mental health must become a cross-cutting priority—across levels (students, educators, academic staff), sectors (schools, universities, ministries), and frameworks (educational, technological, social). This Special Issue makes clear: well-being is not a peripheral add-on but a precondition for educational futures that are just, effective, and sustainable.

In this sense, mind matters—for everyone, everywhere, and at all times. The challenge now lies in translating this insight into enduring structures and shared commitments that anchor mental health at the heart of education.