A Correlation between SDG 4 (Quality Education) and Emotional Disposition of Teacher Educators in Hyderabad District

The present study explores the correlation between SDG 4 (Quality Education) engagement and emotional characteristics of teacher educators in the Hyderabad district of Telangana. With the global push towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education under SDG 4 has become a critical priority for educators, policymakers, and researchers alike.” understanding how teacher educators emotionally perceive and engage with educational quality enhancement is critical. A stratified multistage random sampling design was adopted. The study involved 60 teacher educators (30 Male and 30 female) from government and private teacher education institutions. The Structured SDG Goal 4 Engagement Scale was developed by the researcher to measure teacher educators’ engagement with the principles of Sustainable Development Goal 4: Quality Education. The scale underwent content validation through a panel of five experts in education, psychology, and sustainable development, who reviewed items for clarity, relevance, and alignment with SDG-4 targets. Items with a content validity index (CVI) of ≥ .80 were retained. For reliability, a pilot study was conducted on a sample of 30 teacher educators (not included in the main study). Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which yielded an overall value of α = .86, indicating high reliability. The Structured SDG Goal 4 Engagement Scale demonstrates acceptable validity and reliability, making it suitable for use with teacher educators in the present study. Two standardized tools were used: the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) to assess emotional characteristics, and a self-structured SDG 4 Engagement Scale based on UNESCO indicators to assess their involvement in SDG 4 practices. Descriptive statistics (mean, SD) and inferential statistics (Pearson correlation, t-test, and regression analysis) were employed to analyze the data. The findings revealed a positive but weak correlation between both positive and negative emotions with SDG4 engagement. However, the relationship with negative emotions was marginally significant (p = 0.058). No significant differences in SDG 4 engagement were observed across gender or locale. The findings suggest that emotions alone exert only a limited influence on SDG 4 involvement, as indicated by the weak correlation and the low explained variance (6.9%). This implies that while emotional disposition contributes to teacher educators’ engagement with SDG 4, other contextual or institutional factors not captured in this study may play a more significant role. This research emphasizes the need for emotionally intelligent teacher training programs to align with SDG goals. It calls for further large-scale studies to explore how affective dispositions of educators influence sustainable educational outcomes.

SDG Goal 4, emotional Disposition , teacher educators, Hyderabad, positive affect, negative affect, sustainable education

1. Antoninis, M. (2020). All means all: An introduction to the 2020 Global Education Monitoring Report on inclusion. Prospects, 49(3–4), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09505-x PubMed [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Burić, I., & Frenzel, A. C. (2023). Teacher emotions are linked with teaching quality: Cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence from two field studies. Learning and Instruction, 88, 101822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101822 Science Direct Research Gate Springer Link [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Cristóvão, A. M., Valente, S., Rebelo, H., & Ruivo, A. F. (2023). Emotional education for sustainable development: A curriculum analysis of teacher training in Portugal and Spain. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1165319. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1165319 Frontiers+1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Frenzel, A. C., Fiedler, D., Marx, A. K. G., Reck, C., & Pekrun, R. (2020). Who enjoys teaching, and when? Between- and within-person evidence on teachers’ appraisal-emotion links. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1092. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01092 FrontiersPMC [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. UNESCO. (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education—All means all. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718 EdTech HubUNESCOUNESCO Digital Library [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. UNESCO MGIEP. (2020). Rethinking learning: A review of social and emotional learning frameworks for education systems. UNESCO MGIEP. https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/250021eng.pdf GCED Clearinghouse [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Wang, H., Yin, L., & Hall, N. C. (2023). Teacher anger as a double-edged sword: Contrasting trait and daily anger in relation to student engagement. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14(8), 1531–1543. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221147623 PMC [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• A Comparative Study of Adjustment Level, Parental Income and Academic Achievement of Adolescent Girls
• Increase in STIs among Adolescents in Masvingo District