This study aims to understand teacher emotions through interviewing 28 primary teachers in Hong Kong. The study employed content analysis to analyze the data. The results were allocated to three dimensions of teacher emotions—student and learning, teacher and teaching, and the contextual factors. These teachers described 78 emotions of which approximately an equal number were positive and negative. Emotions relating to the student and learning dimension are the most intense, followed by those in the teacher and teaching and contextual factor dimensions. Data also indicated that teachers can hold positive and negative emotions simultaneously (e.g., happy yet pressurized by child's unconditional trust) and can suffer from paradoxical emotions (e.g., regarding education reform). Teachers demonstrated different ways to manage emotions contingent on their demographic background. Given the powerful role that emotions play, recommendations for including teacher emotion education in both initial teacher education and professional development have been proposed accordingly. Copyright © 2018 Education Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.

Background: Research into teacher emotion has attracted increasing attention in the last two decades. The relevance of teacher emotion in education has been highlighted. However, evidence of how teacher emotions impact their teaching approaches is rather limited.Aims: This study investigated the relationship between two self‐report instruments – the Teacher Emotion Inventory and the Approach to Teaching.Sample: There were 1,830 teachers were approached from 43 primary schools in China and 12 primary schools in Hong Kong.Methods: Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modelling were utilized in the analysis procedure.Results: As a result, a five‐factor TEI model was identified with two positive factors (Joy and Love) and three negative factors (Sadness, Anger, and Fear). A ATI model involved was confirmed with three factors (Knowledge Transmission, Student‐Teacher Interaction, and Student Focus). Structural equation modelling demonstrated that more student‐centred approaches are the consequence of positive teacher emotions while a teacher‐centred approach is the consequence of negative teacher emotions although there are two surprising links.Conclusions: Identifying this pattern of relationships will contribute to understanding the reasons why new teaching strategies are often not adopted despite well‐designed professional programs and educational reform and will provide implications for teaching improvement through teacher emotion. Copyright © 2018 The British Psychological Society.

This study aims to understand teacher emotions through interviewing 53 primary teachers in Hong Kong and Mainland China. Content analysis was employed to analyze the data. Teachers reported 68 different types of emotions which decreases as distance from the teachers increases at the five nested ecological system – microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macro-system, and chronosystem. Teachers mentioned the most emotions at the microsystem level (50 emotions), followed by the exosystem (36), the mesosystem (30), the macrosystem (10), and the chronosystem (seven) levels. These emotions comprised 34 positive emotions (e.g., happiness, caring, pride) and 34 negative emotions (e.g., pressure, sadness, worry). Attention should be paid to the high proportion (50%) of negative emotions described by Hong Kong and Mainland China teachers. Findings may help teachers to understand how to regulate their emotions but also provide strong references for teacher education, teaching, and teacher lives.
[Copyright © 2017 James Nicholas Publishers.]