Out

TEACHER STRESS: EFFECTS ON OCCUPATIONAL
PERFORMANCE IN AN URBAN DISTRICT
by
YVETTE BALBOA
A DISSERTATION
Presented to the Educational Leadership Program of the College

of Saint Elizabeth in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
May 2020
ProQuest Number: 27962547
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
ProQuest 27962547
Published by ProQuest LLC ( 2020 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All Rights Reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
Copyright 2020, Yvette Balboa
iii
APPROVAL PAGE
iv
ABSTRACT
An abstract of the dissertation of Yvette Balboa for the degree of Doctor of Education in the
Educational Leadership Program of the College of Saint Elizabeth presented May of 2020.
Title: TEACHER STRESS: EFFECTS ON OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE IN AN
URBAN DISTRICT
The prominent and concerning problem of teacher stress and its effects on work performance
continues to alarm the educational field. This educational action research study identifies
stressors affecting teachers' performance and factors influencing teachers leaving the profession
and predicts which teachers would leave the profession based on these factors. This study
reported results on three behavioral questionnaires that assess cognitive overload, occupational
stress, and teacher performance. Two groups of participants completed the questionnaires: the
current teachers' group who are currently working as teachers and the former teachers' group
who are either former teachers who resigned the field or early retirees who left early because of
the overwhelming stress. In this study, these three behavioral measurements were linked with an
interview, an open survey, and socio-environmental factors that impact stress responses. This
study indicated that occupational stress influences cognition and affects teacher performance.
v
DEDICATION
This paper is dedicated to all the teachers worldwide who feel stressed while performing their
occupational responsibilities. The meaningful intent of this project was borne out of my
experiences as an educator and became the most heart-welcoming challenge of my life. My
quest to search for meaning behind the plague of teacher stress widened my understanding of the
nobleness of this profession. Moreover, after listening to the overwhelming stressful experiences
of my colleagues, it gave me the strength to place attention on the choices and sacrifices that lay
ahead. Beneath the decades of research on teacher stress, the continuous cycle of educators’
suffering led me to a profound awareness and acceptance of myself. Teacher stress disrupts the
continuity of valued educational processes and reflects upon students, staff, and community,
eventually becoming harmful to public health. Paulo Coelho wrote, “Love is the force that
transforms and improves the Soul of the World, nourish it because we were all made by the same
hand; therefore, the same soul.” I am grateful for God, family, friends, professors, and colleagues
who guided me to walk in the light throughout this unfolding, peaceful journey.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The pursuit of my Doctorate Degree at the College of Saint Elizabeth has been one of the most
spiritually rewarding challenges of my life. Research on teacher stress has existed for decades
and continues to plague the 21st century worldwide. College of Saint Elizabeth (CSE) professors
inspired me to explore the field of neuroscience, and I obtained my Masters at Teachers College,
Columbia University. I was determined to understand unanswered questions, reflect on the value
of education, and cultivate my spirituality based on my decision as a servant leader. The
generous benefit of this doctoral dissertation gives testimony to my tenacious perseverance and
love of education.
I am grateful for Dr. Neigel's guiding light, Dr. Ciccone's belief, Dr. Cavanna's courage, Dr.
McDade's faith, and the support of my CSE professors. This fantastic journey became possible
because of my loving parents, Alan and Elisa Balboa; my daughters, Nicole and Christina, the
shining lights of new possibilities; the strength of my brother, Douglas, and his wife, Jen; and the
support of my nephew, Anthony, and his fiancée, Brynne. I wish to acknowledge the rest of my
family and friends, as well as the staff, students, and parents of the school in which I work; Dr.
Maria de los Angeles Cabrera, and her husband, Dr. José Cabrera; Dr. Bhalla; Dr. Fink; Dr.
Holland; Dr. Froud; Dr. Dunn; Dr. Peterson; Dr. Lau; Mr. Carriero; Irene Alvarez; and Terry
Gibson. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the unwavering dedication of my Teachers College
professors and colleagues which strengthened my core beliefs in myself.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL PAGE......................................................................................................................... iv
ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................................v
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................ vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ vii
LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................... xv
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... xvi
CHAPTER I: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Background ................................................................................................................................. 3
Teacher Well-Being .................................................................................................................... 5
Teacher Performance .................................................................................................................. 7
Effects of Stress on Job Retention .............................................................................................. 8
Statement of Purpose ................................................................................................................ 10
Area of Inquiry .......................................................................................................................... 10
Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 11
Design of the Study ................................................................................................................... 12
Demographics ........................................................................................................................... 13
Rationale and Significance of the Study ................................................................................... 14
Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................................. 16
viii
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER II: Review of Literature .............................................................................................. 19
General Overview ..................................................................................................................... 19
Historical Framework of Teacher Stress............................................................................... 20
Organization of the Review .................................................................................................. 20
Sources of Stress: How Stress Affects Health ..................................................................... 21
Causes of Stress .................................................................................................................... 27
Employer Contribution Reduction in Pension and Health Benefits ......................................... 40
Effect of Stress .......................................................................................................................... 41
Teacher performance ............................................................................................................ 41
Teacher absenteeism ............................................................................................................. 44
Teacher self-efficacy ............................................................................................................. 45
Student achievement ............................................................................................................. 46
Job satisfaction ...................................................................................................................... 46
Teacher retention .................................................................................................................. 48
Turnover Behaviors .............................................................................................................. 49
Cost to School Districts ........................................................................................................ 51
School Culture ...................................................................................................................... 53
Transformational Wellness Stress Policy ................................................................................. 55
Servant Leadership in an Ethical, Moral Culture.................................................................. 55
Coping with the Stress .............................................................................................................. 64
Cognitive Self-Efficacy Thinking with Mindfulness Professional Development ................ 64
ix
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 67
Chapter III: Methodology ............................................................................................................. 70
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 70
Rationale for Research Design.................................................................................................. 71
Research Questions and Assumptions ...................................................................................... 74
Methods of Data Collection ...................................................................................................... 76
Participants ............................................................................................................................ 76
Procedure .............................................................................................................................. 79
Online Open Survey .............................................................................................................. 79
Online Questionnaires ........................................................................................................... 80
Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) .......................................................................... 81
The Occupational Stress Questionnaire ................................................................................ 82
Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) ........................................................................... 82
Interview with Human Resources Department Representative ............................................ 83
Analysis and Synthesis of Data............................................................................................. 85
Issues of Trustworthiness ...................................................................................................... 87
Reliability and Validity ......................................................................................................... 87
Ethical Considerations .......................................................................................................... 87
Action research and ethics .................................................................................................... 88
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................................... 90
Chapter IV: Results and Findings................................................................................................. 91
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 91
x
Organization of Chapter IV ...................................................................................................... 92
Research Participants ................................................................................................................ 93
Data Sources ............................................................................................................................. 94
Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 95
Instrumentation ......................................................................................................................... 95
Cognitive Load Questionnaire - Environmental Preference Inventory ................................ 95
Occupational Stress Questionnaire ..................................................................................... 101
Work Performance Questionnaire - Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) Short Form
............................................................................................................................................. 103
Open Survey........................................................................................................................ 105
Interview with Human Resource Department Representative ............................................ 106
Analysis of Data ...................................................................................................................... 106
Findings and Results ............................................................................................................... 108
Finding 1 ............................................................................................................................. 108
Finding 2 ............................................................................................................................. 108
Finding 3 ............................................................................................................................. 109
Finding 4 ............................................................................................................................. 109
Finding 1 ............................................................................................................................. 110
Survey results ...................................................................................................................... 110
Occupational Stress Questionnaire ......................................................................................... 125
Perceived weight of work responsibility................................................................................. 130
Finding 1 Summary................................................................................................................. 130

xi
Finding 2 Summary................................................................................................................. 140
Semi-Structured One-to-One Interview Results. .................................................................... 153
Stress Factors that Affect Performance................................................................................... 154
Stress Factors that Affect Teachers Leaving Their Jobs ......................................................... 155
Finding 3 Summary................................................................................................................. 156
Open Survey Results. .............................................................................................................. 158
Semi-Structured One-to-One Interview Results ..................................................................... 165
Measures Schools Have Taken to Help Reduce Stress ........................................................... 165
Effectiveness of Stress-Reducing Activities ........................................................................... 166
Activities to Reduce Stress from DEMP’s Perspective .......................................................... 167
Experience in Diverse Setting................................................................................................. 168
Finding 4 Summary................................................................................................................. 169
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................... 170
Chapter V: Findings, Discussion, and Recommendations ......................................................... 172
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 172
Organization of Chapter V ...................................................................................................... 173
Interpretation of Findings ....................................................................................................... 174
Data Sources ........................................................................................................................... 174
Research Question 1 ............................................................................................................... 175
Finding 1: ............................................................................................................................ 176
xii
Finding 2: ............................................................................................................................ 179
Finding 3: ............................................................................................................................ 181
Finding 4: ............................................................................................................................ 184
Limitations of Study ............................................................................................................... 187
Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................. 187
Summary and Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 190
Reflection ................................................................................................................................ 191
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 199
APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................................... 200
APPENDIX B ......................................................................................................................... 201
APPENDIX C ......................................................................................................................... 202
APPENDIX D ......................................................................................................................... 203
APPENDIX E ......................................................................................................................... 204
APPENDIX F.......................................................................................................................... 205
APPENDIX G ......................................................................................................................... 206
APPENDIX H ......................................................................................................................... 208
APPENDIX I .......................................................................................................................... 209
xiii
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 210
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Triangulation Matrix (Data Collection Plan) ...................................................................73
Table 1. Factor 1, 2: Categorical Contingency Table ................................................................111
Table 2: The Stress-Related Symptoms ......................................................................................112
Table 3: The Five EPI Scores of the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) ......................114
Table 4: The 47 Items of the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) ..................................114
Table 5: Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) ..................................................................119
Table 1: Factor 1, 2, 3: Categorical Contingency ......................................................................125
Table 2: Factor Analysis ............................................................................................................126
Table 3: Means and Standard Deviations of Factor Scores .......................................................129
Table 4: Means and Standard Deviations of Factor Scores Chart ..............................................129
Table 1: Items on the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Survey ........................................................135
Table 2: Factor Analysis .............................................................................................................136
Table 3: Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scores – Means for Efficacy Scores ..............................137
Table 4: Efficacy Response Item Scores for Items 3, 4, and 11 .................................................139
Table 1: Stress Factors ................................................................................................................144
Table 2: Decision to Leave Factors ............................................................................................149
Table 3: Prevent from Leaving Factors ......................................................................................160
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Stress-Related Symptoms Chart ..................................................................................113
Figure 1: Bar Graph Chart ..........................................................................................................117
Figure 2: Bar Graph Chart ..........................................................................................................118
Figure 1: Factor 1: Work Negative Features..............................................................................127
Figure 2: Factor 2: Perceived Weight of Work Responsibility..................................................128
Figure 3: Factor 3: Independence and Autonomy in Performing Work ....................................128
Figure 1: Bar Graph ....................................................................................................................138
Figure 2: Bar Graph ....................................................................................................................138
Figure 3: Bar Graph for Item #11 ...............................................................................................139
Figure 1: Stress Factor Bar Graph ..............................................................................................145
Figure 2: Current Teachers Stress Factors ..................................................................................146
Figure 3: Stress Factors for Retired Teachers .............................................................................147
Figure 4: Decision to Leave Factors ..........................................................................................150
Figure 5: Decision to Leave – Current Teachers ........................................................................150
Figure 6: Decision to Leave – Retired Teachers .........................................................................152
Figure 1: Prevent from Leaving Factors – Current and Retired Teachers ..................................161
Figure 2: Prevent from Leaving Factors – Current Teachers .....................................................162
Figure 3: Prevent from Leaving Factors – Retired Teachers ......................................................163
xvi
CHAPTER I: Introduction
Teacher occupational stress persists in the United States. According to the Common Core
of Data (2019), 3.1 million teachers at all grade levels instruct every single day while dealing with
school-related violence, parent-teacher conflicts, test anxiety, state-mandated evaluations,
unrealistic workload expectations, and low wages. This crisis is corroborated by decades of
research publications (Abel & Sewell, 1999; Borg, Riding, & Falzon, 1991; Greene, Beszterczey,
Katzenstein, Park, & Goring, 2002; Kelly & Berthelsen, 1995). The detriments of stress and the
consequences of burnout, termed as the “Health Epidemic of the 21st Century" by the World
Health Organization (Saxena, 2016), suggest that teaching is a high-risk, stressful profession
(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Simbula et al., 2012).
Furthermore, researchers reported this daily exposure to high levels of stress negatively
affects a teacher’s well-being, reflective practice, and self-efficacy, as well as teacher-student
relationships, critical issues which plague all disciplines within the educational system (Carlyle &
Woods, 2004a; Carlyle & Woods, 2004b; Johnson et al., 2005; Lhospital & Gregory 2009a;
Mazzola, Schonfeld, & Spector, 2011; Nubling et al., 2011; Slay & Smith, 2011; Urzua &
Vasquez, 2008). In the urban low-income school district in which this researcher works, teacher
stress is at extreme levels as a result of unemployment, poverty, crime, unsafe working conditions,
and low school funding.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2018) and the National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in 2014 reported that 75% of Americans believe their
current stressors are higher than those of the prior generation, and 25% of Americans perceive
work as stressful. Occupational stress fills the work environment, and McCormick (1997a and
1
1997b) stated employees consider it the primary challenge in their lives. Galinsky et al. (2005)
reported 78% of employees believed they needed to multi-task and 69% of employees felt
overworked.
Over the last ten years, according to an American Psychological Association (APA) 2017
survey, significant stress factors felt by most Americans included the economy (44%), terrorism
(34%), and mass school shootings or gun violence (31%). The 2016 APA survey indicated the
factors affecting the physical and emotional health of most Americans included money (61%), the
economy (50%), and work (58%). In addition, 80% of Americans reported headaches (34%),
feeling overwhelmed (33%), and feeling sad or depressed (32%), which led to unhealthy behaviors
(APA, 2017).
According to the 2017 APA survey, women more than men stated money (64%) and family
responsibilities (56%) were significant stress factors. Gender differences were notably reported,
except for a minimal decrease in 2017 stress levels (5.0 women vs. 4.6 men in 2016 and 5.3 women
vs. 4.9 men in 2015). On a 10-point scale, the survey noted that 3 in 10 Americans had experienced
stress in the past year (31%), and 20% had rated stress in the 8, 9, or 10 categories (extreme
importance) (APA, 2017).
According to Schonfeld et al. (2017), teachers experience higher occupational stressors
when compared to other professional groups, including high stakes testing, interpersonal conflicts,
accountability, balancing family with work obligations, and emotional conflicts with parents,
faculty, administration, and students. These stress factors affect teacher well-being, and research
demonstrates declined mental health and increased burnout (Johnson et al., 2005; Lambert &
McCarthy, 2006; Mazzola, Schonfield, & Spector, 2011; Nubling et al., 2011; Saleem & Shah,
2011; Simbula et al., 2012).
2
In the United States, public schools are facing critical levels of teacher turnover and
retention. Hudson (2004) pointed out that beginning teachers in the United States leave the
profession within three years, and researchers indicate that approximately 500,000 teachers move
to other districts or find other jobs. Teacher turnover rates are 30% higher than engineers (16%),
nurses (19%), and the police (28%) (Haynes, 2014; Ingersoll, 2014; Rumschlag, 2017). In addition,
Ingersoll (2019) found there was a higher turnover for minority teachers as opposed to White
teachers. Job retention is not only an American concern, but it is also a global issue. Studies in
Denmark (Wieclaw, Agerbo, Mortensen, & Bonde, 2005), Finland (Kokkinen, Kouvonen,
Koskinen, Varje, & Väänänen, 2014), England (Stansfeld, Rasul, Head, & Singelton, 2011), China
(Lee et al., 2007), and Australia (Finlay-Jones, 1986; Tuetteman & Punch, 1992) revealed teaching
is a stressful profession which impacts a teacher’s well-being, especially their mental health. This
adds to the highly recognized global turnover (Abel & Sewell, 1999; Carlyle & Woods, 2004a and
2004b; Chan, 2002; Johnson et al., 2005; Lhospital & Gregory, 2009b; Mazzola, Schonfield, &
Spector, 2011; Nubling et al., 2011; Payne & Furnham, 1987; Simbula et al., 2012).
Teacher stress continues to exist in the 21st century worldwide, leading to negative
consequences for teachers and disruptions in the educational system itself. These disruptions in
school cultural norms affect students and school personnel, resulting in outcomes of poor
performance for both teachers and students. Despite the overwhelming proof of teacher shortage,
the problems of chronic stress, burnout, and the decline of teacher-student relationships are often
neglected (Galand, Lecocq, & Philippot, 2007).
Background
Every day, teachers in public schools face unrealistic work expectations, the pressure to
increase students' academic performance, low wages, excessive workload, and unsafe working
3
conditions, all of which threaten their well-being. The background of my research study has three
sections on how stress effects: Teacher Well-Being, Job Performance, and Job Retention.
These occupational stress factors accumulate, incubate, and ultimately result in
psychological and psychosomatic disorders for teachers that contribute to adverse cardiac
consequences and self-destructive behaviors from burnout (Ganster & Rosen, 2013; Harden, 1999;
Van Voorhees, 2007; Fink, 2016; Esler, 2017). The ability of a teacher to use reflective reasoning
in problem-solving and innovative thinking decreases as his/her professional identity diminishes
(Slay & Smith, 2011; Urzua & Vasquez, 2008).
A teacher’s work performance diminishes swiftly as a result of stressful experiences in
their work environment. These constant demands affect their ability to function, creating a toxic
change in physical and emotional responses. As a result, productivity diminishes, and attention,
teamwork, and interpersonal relationships are hindered. The literature is replete with evidence
that health and job performance are harmed by occupational stress (Maume & Purcell, 2007).
Humboldt, Leal, Laneiro, and Tavares (2013) reported: “occupational stressors from work
relationships, inefficient leadership, overwhelming workload, time constraints, and the pressure to
perform” (Humboldt et al., 2013, p. 413). In addition, employees who have minimal free time, as
well as time constraints within which to achieve enhanced results, suffer a severe imbalance in
occupation and life responsibilities (Tayfur & Arslan, 2013; Callan, 2007; van der Lippe, 2007;
Watts, 2009).
Teacher attrition and retention is a crisis nationwide and has had an adverse impact on
districts, educators, and students (Ingersoll et al, 2014). In urban communities, teachers do not
last more than five years (McCleskey & Billingsley, 2008), one-third higher than in suburban
districts (United States Department of Education [USDE], 2016). For this reason, the National
4
Association of School Psychologists (2016) referred to retention as the teachers' career service
pathway for their profession. Specifically, The New Teacher Project (TNTP) (2013) claimed
teacher retention in urban districts as a crisis. Most importantly, the TNTP reported that for every
urban teacher who left the district, it could take that district’s Human Resources Department 11
new hires before one teacher is found who would stay for five years in the neighborhood. These
reasons support the development of initiatives or policies by school leadership to understand and
rectify the effects of stress on teacher retention before 50% leave the profession within five years
in urban school districts.
Stewart (2012) cites the crucial need to prepare students for a competitive global workforce
so that future challenges will be met, leading to increased functional demands and pressure on the
availability of resources (Kinman, 2005). Specifically:
Montgomery and Rupp (2005) noted teachers' contractual obligations constrict them to a
limited number of hours for managing the overwhelming workload. In effect, working
more extended hours to meet curriculum standards and state-mandated testing
requirements for student achievement creates pressure for teachers to cram cognitive skills,
thus limiting abilities in creative reasoning and innovation. (as cited in Rich, 2016, pp. 107-
121)
Teacher Well-Being
These work stressors hinder the work performance of teachers. Studies have found that
school-related violence contributes to stressful learning environments and has made teachers more
susceptible to developing severe psychological disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD) and burnout. Daniels et al. (2007) and Galand et al. (2007) examined teachers and school
staff who experienced fear from victimization in school settings. Such situations trigger acute and
5
chronic post-traumatic disorders and other stress symptoms, as stated in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV-TR) (American Psychiatric
Association, 2000). Such disorders can occur when an individual learns of, witnesses, or is directly
affected by a threat of severe injury or death. The cluster symptoms of PTSD include fear,
flashbacks, avoidance, absenteeism, or career change (Cheshire, 2009). Surprisingly, over
234,000 teachers in the United States who experienced school-related violence received little to
no treatment from professional psychiatric services.
Consequently, teachers suffered victimization as a result of school violence. They
developed acute and long-term psychological trauma symptoms in their physical, emotional,
behavioral, and cognitive processes (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004).
These symptoms included tightness in the chest, gastrointestinal distress, anxiety, fear, grief,
impaired cognitive processes, diminished concentration, and complete or partial amnesia. Self-
criticism, after the act of school violence, added further stress.
Binns and Markow (1999) analyzed a survey by Louis Harris and Associates and found
that 90% of teachers reported students as the perpetrators in school-related violence. For this
reason, Elliott, Hamburg, and Williams (1998) found that fear and stress led to diminished work
performance, and Nims (2000) pointed out that it led to PTSD and burnout symptoms. Teachers
are leaving the profession in unsafe schools where illness, divorce, and burnout are rampant
(Neuman et al., 2004).
To further examine the issue, Rogers and Kelloway (1997) investigated a model by Barling
(1996) on the belief that future fear can predict fearful reactions, causing negative impacts on
psychological health, such as depression and anxiety. Thus, research demonstrates detrimental
effects on an adult brain from repetitive chronic stress, which impairs memory and cognitive
6
processes. Importantly, these consequences threaten the well-being of an individual (Calvo &
Garcia, 2016). Taken together, these findings on prolonged chronic stress can directly influence a
teacher's performance.
Teacher Performance
Workplace stressors in the school learning environment originate from many sources.
Siegrist (1996) cites how stressors can stem from either natural sources that affect an individual's
motivation or external forces, which arise from functional responsibilities. For example, teachers
encounter daily conflicts with students, faculty, administrators, parents, and district initiatives.
These workload stressors, compounded with technical demands from different intrinsic and
extrinsic elements, most likely influence an individual's work performance. Consequently,
employees cited how stressors were more profound in the work environment as compared to
everyday life stressors. Therefore, there is further pressure to achieve adequate job performance
(McCormick, 1997a and 1997b).
Sancini et al. (2010) indicated that teachers who taught kindergarten reported higher
occupational stress related to perceived work responsibility and independence/autonomy in
performing tasks, resulting in adverse effects on their psychological and physical well-being.
Kindergarten teachers' responsibilities required higher attentional demands and effort when
making decisions about children and their parents. These constant work demands occur in
classrooms, and this isolation deters them from establishing interpersonal relationships with their
colleagues. The repetitiveness of these responsibilities contributes to decreased job performance,
ultimately affecting the learning environment.
Other factors affecting the learning environment are new technologies, which must be
adopted by many organizations in America to compete in today's global society. Boards of
7
Education need to coordinate curriculum standards underlying state common core requirements to
achieve each benchmark for annual high-stakes assessments. Additional demands are placed on
school districts to design goals for individual schools to meet their criteria for future funding.
These constant demands can influence a teacher’s job performance either positively or negatively
and impact their decision to stay teaching or quit the profession. Therefore, high-grade teacher
performance is critical for a school system to succeed in preparing students to compete in the
global market. Negative stressors can directly affect job retention.
Effects of Stress on Job Retention
Increasing stressors in the 21st century are directly related to increasing teacher turnover
and shortage. These adverse outcomes influence a school culture every day by debilitating
teachers' cognitive processes, well-being, and capacity to impact student achievement and
performance. In general, Deal and Peterson (2016) advise school personnel to investigate the
positive and negative aspects of their own school culture. A toxic culture detracts from supportive
collaboration, blames students for showing no progress, and encourages violence.
In comparison, a positive culture celebrates accomplishments, fosters collaboration, and
values commitment from its staff who engage in distributive leadership and learning. An influx
of toxic elements into a school culture – personnel shortage, heavy workload, lack of
administrative and district support, parental conflicts, school-related violence, and student
misbehavior – creates unsafe conditions for both teachers and students. These stress factors
influence the development of neuropsychiatric disorders in an individual and affect work
performance.
Under such harsh conditions, Vettenburg (2002) reported that teachers expressed a lack of
motivation and commitment to their job performance. Carver-Thomas, Desiree, and Darling-
8
Hammond (2017) found teachers left the profession due to dissatisfaction in accountability and
testing (25%), minimal administrative support (21%), disinterest in teaching as a career (21%),
lack of upward mobility in the profession (31%), and unsafe working environments and other
reasons (13%). Together with these findings, teacher turnover rates based on 2012-2013 surveys
nationwide revealed that 55% of teachers were dissatisfied with their job and 66% left to teach in
other school districts. These statistics support the national trend of teacher turnover, where 90%
is attributable to teachers leaving the profession nationwide. Adding to the approximate growing
cost of $20,000 to replace a teacher in an urban school district, there is an 8% United States attrition
rate with a recent climb of 3%, totaling 90,000 new teaching positions (see Figure 1 in List of
Figures). Specifically, among teachers dissatisfied with their profession, 8% changed to different
school districts, with 8% leaving teaching entirely, a total of 16% based on both voluntary and
involuntary decisions.
Carver-Thomas and Darling-Hammond (2017) remind us how the Great Recession
involuntarily cut back teaching jobs by 14% during the 2012-2013 school year in comparison to
the 8% turnover rate from 2008-2009. For this reason, schools closed, student enrollment dropped,
and severe budget cuts diminished the quality of education. Long-term substitutes were hired for
qualified teaching positions as well as traveling teachers to cover multiple school sites. Thus,
teachers left the profession between 2011 and 2012, which added to the 18% turnover (see Figure
2). Research confirms that critical teacher turnover impacts school cultural competence and
contributes to low academic performance (Gaikhorst et al., 2015). Therefore, districts fail to retain
quality teachers, increasing occupational stress in the workplace. Administrations and educational
systems face harmful consequences and implications of the retention crisis.
9
Statement of Purpose
This study seeks to examine, based on the literature, significant occupational stressors that
hinder teachers' work performance and create cognitive overload, resulting in susceptibility to
long-term stress disorders. In effect, these occupational stressors affect neuronal functioning in
brain regions that mediate cognitive processes and emotional regulation, impacting an individual's
well-being. Thus, teacher stress refers to the strain or distress that alters their state of equilibrium,
contributing to anxiety, tension, and adverse outcomes.
This new literature may contribute to a reduction of occupational stressors for teachers,
addressing the correlation of findings between both former and current teachers, and ultimately
benefit their health and well-being. These research findings may improve the continuity of their
job performance and prevent educators from leaving the profession, thus decreasing turnover and
improving retention.
Area of Inquiry
Economic, technological, and political trends in the 21st century, as well as teachers' belief
platforms to meet challenges from unrealistic workload demands, continue to induce and promote
significant bureaucratic intervention, creating stressors which directly affect teacher health.
Decades of research confirm the severity of teacher occupational stress, and new literature based
on educational and scientific observation can shed light on this urgent issue. Stressful
circumstances lead to a substantial decline in teacher retention rates every year, contributing to the
crisis of teacher shortages in urban districts (Aragon et al., 2014; Ingersoll, 2015; Ingersoll &
Merrill, 2012).
The problem of occupational stress alarms the teaching community; therefore, an in-depth
scientific perspective is necessary to assuage the harmful effects of stress on the health of teachers.
10
The negative impact on teachers' cognitive processes that influence their mental and physical well-
being is especially disconcerting. Teacher attrition and decline in retention rates lead to student
underachievement and a financial burden on the district and leaves inexperienced teachers in the
system. These cascading problems can change if educational policies are developed to reduce the
stressors and thereby improve teachers' job performance.
The purpose of this study is to investigate specific occupational stressors and analyze the
factors that can influence teachers' physical and mental well-being and turnover. This body of
knowledge examines the relationships between stressors affecting job performance and teachers
leaving the profession, then analyzing the predictions based on these factors.
This qualitative study is based on the triangulation method by analyzing scores of an
interview along with surveys, three behavioral questionnaires, and an open survey. It reports the
results of collected data from current and former teacher groups to determine to what degree
cognitive overload and occupational stress affect teachers' performance, influence their cognition,
and directly impact teacher turnover.
Research Questions
The stress factors identified in this study may reveal avoidable risk factors that can affect
teachers' performance, depending on their years of service, and influence their decision as to
whether or not to leave the teaching profession. The research questions designed for this study
were asked of approximately 40 teachers (20 current teachers and 20 former teachers) in an urban
school district in Paterson, New Jersey. The data collected identify stressors and factors affecting
teacher performance and determining whether or not these factors are ultimately responsible for
teachers leaving their profession. This data were examined to assess these components to predict
results better.
11
1. What are the levels of occupational stress reported by the two groups of teachers?
2. What are the levels of occupational performance reported by the two groups of
teachers?
3. To what extent are the levels of occupational stress related to the levels of
occupational performance among the two groups of teachers?
4. What policies and procedures might be implemented by administrators to mitigate
the possible effects of occupational stress among teachers?
Design of the Study
This mixed methods research study is based on an action research method. A balance of
quantitative and qualitative methods used in this study structure provides valid perspectives,
findings, and opinions, as pointed out by Johnson et al. (2007). These diverse methods can identify
stress factors for teachers using questionnaires, surveys, and an interview (Buckley and Chiang,
1976). Bloomberg and Volpe (2012) suggest utilizing the triangulation matrix design to tackle the
process.
The researcher surveyed 40 teachers within Urban School in Paterson, New Jersey, for this
study. One group of participants (20) consisted of currently employed teachers. The second group
of participants (20) included former teachers who are no longer working as teachers, whether they
retired early due to work-related stress or because they left the profession entirely. Potential
participants were contacted, and those selected completed an open survey and an online
questionnaire (comprised of three separate questionnaires but combined on Survey Monkey).
These instruments provided demographic data, occupational stress levels, and cognitive
performance levels from teachers in an urban district.
12
An interview was also conducted with an appointed staff member of the school district’s
Human Resources Department. The interview delved into the problem of teachers leaving their
profession due to work-related stress and included questions on teacher performance, teacher
stress, and the perceived effects of this stress on teacher retention. The interview with the
representative from the Human Resources Department was transcribed and kept confidential.
Demographics
This study was performed in an urban school district consisting of 25,000 students from 56
different schools, including pre-kindergarten through 12th grade, and students who receive special
education and bilingual/ESL services to accommodate a diverse student population encompassing
40 languages. The different ethnicities of Hispanic, African-American, Caucasian, Middle Eastern,
and Asian cultures continue to expand. Thus, the district continues to progress in its five-year
Bright Futures Plan.
The Paterson Public School District, during the 2009-2010 school year, developed a far-
reaching plan for the next five years to turn its urban school system into a high-achieving system.
The administration wanted to increase academic outcomes for students, improve the school
culture, and increase family and community involvement. Bright Futures includes the vision for
Paterson Public Schools “to be a leader in educating New Jersey’s urban youth and its college
ready mission to prepare each student for success in the institution of higher education of their
choosing and in their chosen career” (Evans, 2011, p. 1).
According to Evans (2011), there are four priorities organizing this strategic
plan: “Effective academic programs: programs are research-based and outcomes-driven; safe,
caring, and orderly schools: schools are safe, which enable teachers to teach and students to learn;
family and community engagement: district and school staff collaborate with and engage families
13
and community institutions, organizations, and agencies; and efficient and responsive operations:
operations support the district and school’s core business and are responsive to the needs of staff,
students, and the community” (p. 1).
Each priority has 23 measurable goals and school improvement strategies, in the hope that
these priorities create a well-run and synchronized school system, create a strong support system
at the district level, and encourage parents and alliances in the community to be involved with the
school district. Many of these strategies have already been implemented (Evans, 2011).
The Paterson Public School District is continuing to strive to realize the goals of this plan
by maintaining local operations control and dealing with personnel and fiscal management to
achieve high performance in an urban school system. Furthermore, the plan aims to prioritize
student achievement, school culture, operational control, family, and community during the 2014
to 2019 period (Paterson Public Schools, 2015).
The district’s problematic issue of teacher performance and retention continues to diminish
the quality of the school’s learning environment. Occupational stressors affecting teachers’ well-
being are at epidemic proportions. In this study, demographic variables (such as gender) were
collected based on years of working experience and current employment as teachers. These two
variables had an equal number of participants, so participants are not identifiable via these two
variables, thereby supporting confidentiality.
Rationale and Significance of the Study
Research indicates teacher stress minimizes work performance due to cognitive overload,
increased absenteeism, decreased job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover. In effect, researchers are
exploring educational and scientific evidence to help teachers understand the complexity of stress.
There is limited literature concerning the relationship between stress and teacher occupational
14
performance. There is also a lack of research measuring cognitive overload, occupational stress,
and work performance between former and currently employed teachers. Based on the results of
this research, this qualitative study may inform school districts of scientific and educational
research on occupational stress and lead to the possible adoption of programs to combat high
teacher turnover and teacher shortage and improve well-being.
Furthermore, the failure of public school districts to align their priorities on the teacher
turnover crisis each year directly impacts student achievement and creates gaps between low-
income and affluent schools, impacting costs of quality education (Ronfeldt et al., 2015; Grissom,
2011; Papay & Johnson, 2012). Teachers may benefit from this qualitative research, which
addresses unique occupational stress factors and potentially guide districts to develop programs
that will reduce the negative impact of stressors upon the mental and physical health of teachers.
Also, students will benefit from teachers who care about themselves and cultivate a healthy school
culture.
This mixed-method study conducted by the researcher provided confidential information
to protect possible bias related to the researcher's position. The questionnaires were developed by
educational researchers with no affiliation to the researcher, so the questions given to the
participants were not biased to the situation at the school. These questionnaires consisted of an
Environmental Preference Inventory developed by a group of researchers in Educational and
Counseling Psychology at the University of Albany, an Occupational Stress Questionnaire
developed and translated by a group of researchers at the University of Rome, and a Teachers'
Sense of Efficacy Scale (short form) developed by researchers at Ohio State University and the
College of William and Mary.
15
Definitions of Terms
This section provides definitions of terms for the clarification and understanding of the
topics and concepts discussed in this qualitative research. The following words and descriptions
include:
Action Research. An analytical or efficient investigative way of solving the educational
problem by researching schools (Lewin, 1946).
Burnout. Burnout is defined as the loss of emotional and physical energy (Maslach,
Schoufeli, & Leiter, 2001), feelings of loss in social and professional life (Gold & Bachelor, 2001),
and exhaustion, detachment, and lack of appreciation for personal achievements (Maslach,
Schoufeli, & Leiter, 2001; Koruklu et al., 2012).
Cognitive Overload. Cognitive overload refers to an individual receiving too much
information or tasks at the same time, causing the learner stress or anxiety due to their inability to
process the information adequately and thus influencing their learning (Fink, 2016).
Cultural competence. Cultural competence refers to the healthy relationship between the
individual and organization within its cultural platform (beliefs, needs) based on the individuals
from the communities (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016).
Mindfulness Stress Reduction Training. The Mindfulness Stress-Reduction Training
Program (MSRTP) (Kabat-Zinn, 2017) was adapted only for teachers during the last eight weeks
of the school year. The goal of the program was to show positive outcomes based upon stress-
induced responses impacting hippocampus neurogenesis and the formation of dendritic spines of
the amygdala (Czeh & Fuchs, 2016; Fink, 2016).
Job Satisfaction. Job satisfaction is defined as people enjoying their jobs and refers to the
positive emotional state from job experiences (Fritzsche & Parrish, 2005).
16
Occupational Stress. Physical or mental overload due to role responsibilities or overload
from the environment (Osipow, 1998).
Servant Leadership. A servant leader is someone who has the inner desire to serve others,
believes in engagement, actively listens to others, forms trusting relationships, supports
stewardship and foresight, strengthens the community, and fosters growth in people (Greenleaf,
2002).
Stress. A state resulting from the stress of bodily tension resulting from factors that tend
to alter an existent equilibrium (Merriam-Webster, 2020).
Stress Response. Stress activates endocrine system-releasing glucocorticoids (stress
hormones) from the adrenal cortex. The impact will alter brain function due to the events in the
environment (Reul et al., 1990; Czeh & Fuchs, 2016; Fink, 2016).
Teacher Attrition. Teacher attrition is defined as an individual transferring within the
educational field or leaving the profession (Ingersoll, 2015).
Teacher Retention. Teacher retention refers to individuals remaining in their professional
career paths (National Association of School Psychologists, 2016).
Teacher Voice Behavior. Teacher voice behavior refers to a teacher’s freedom to speak
their thoughts and behaviors within a shared ethical leadership administration (Sagnak, 2017).
Triangulation. Triangulation is defined as the use of different data sources and collection
methods to add credibility and validity to understand the research study (Bloomberg & Volpe,
2012).
Urban. Urban is defined as cities and the people who reside in them (Merriam-Webster,
2017).
17
Summary
The researcher attempted to study the stress factors that influence teacher performance and,
ultimately, their decision whether or not to leave the profession. It was necessary to collect data
by interviewing former teachers to find out why they left their teaching profession in an urban
district, to investigate the types of stress that teachers experience, and to predict if these stressors
might influence teachers leaving their jobs. It was also crucial to recruit currently employed
teachers who had just started their careers as well as teachers who have been working for a longer
time (those who might have experienced more stress at work).
This action research addresses the problem of teacher stress and its influence on work
performance and job retention. It allows administrators and policymakers to consider teacher
stress as an essential component in their work performance and potentially help introduce de-
stressing activities that would increase teacher job performance and retention in an urban district.
18
CHAPTER II: Review of Literature
General Overview
Daily stress for teachers is unavoidable in the 21st century. For decades, numerous
researchers have provided data to suggest harmful stressors that influence a teacher’s well-being
and health: excessive accountability to state measures, teacher evaluations, workload, violence,
parental conflicts, and increased mass shootings in schools. Consequently, teachers nationwide
leave the profession, and retention is a crisis. In addition, occupational demands may suggest that
unrealistic expectations influence teacher behavior and physiological responses, possibly
necessary for mental and physical performance (McEwen, 2016). These consequences are
addressed below in a contextual framework to suggest improvements for teacher performance and
retention.
The purpose of this study is to examine the correlations between specific occupational
effects from stress and their transformative changes in cognition, leaving teachers no choice but to
exit the profession. Taking this into consideration, the researcher sought to gain knowledge on the
different correlations between sources and effects of teacher stress to explore the teacher retention
crisis further. The researcher also sought to discover ways in which administrations and school
districts can implement policies to reduce the effects of stress on teachers and create a more
positive school culture that will enhance teacher performance and student achievement.
The following four research questions drove this study:
teachers?
19
Historical Framework of Teacher Stress
Kyriacou and Sutcliffe (1978) examined Dunham’s (1976) research based on a large
sample of 658 teachers who experienced acute and chronic effects of stress from their occupation.
For this reason, despite the broad studies on occupational stress and controversial definitions, the
researchers’ concept of teacher stress expanded further investigation (Cooper & Marshall, 1976;
Ferguson, 1973). Kristensen et al. (2005) reported that 40% of European teachers were
experiencing chronic stress. Fink (2016) reminds us that Selye (1936) explored essential data on
the exposure to chronic stress that consequently led to diseases of adaptation influencing the
immune system and adrenal glands. In addition, Lazarus (2000, 2006), a cognitive psychologist,
described stress as the “main problem in human life” and urged the World Health Organization to
examine stress as the “Health Epidemic of the 21st Century” (p. 1). Stress costs American
organizations $300 billion annually and affects 300 billion people worldwide. Additionally,
findings reported that 50% of Americans felt that stress influenced their occupational performance
and, most importantly, excessive work demands were cited as the primary source of stress for
employees (Fink, 2017). The escalation of stress for 3.1 million teachers has put this crisis on the
map as a nationwide progressive epidemic.
Organization of the Review
20
The researcher completed an in-depth study of the literature. This framework focused on
how teacher stress affected occupational performance and, consequently, job retention. A review
of the literature included the significance of cognitive overload on one’s well-being and its impact
on occupational performance, thereby influencing retention. This investigation studies how teacher
stress affects occupational performance (diminished self-efficacy and the probability of burnout
and turnover).
This research was based on a selection of scientific journals, educational journals, books,
dissertations, periodicals, and electronic sources. Finally, a framework on transformational
leadership within an ethical, moral school culture could utilized a Mindfulness-Based-Stress
Reduction (MBSR) (Kabat-Zinn, 2017) program as a way of reducing critical stress levels and
improving teacher retention, thereby increasing self-efficacy and performance outcomes.
Therefore, the sources of stress and how they affect health needed to be identified.
Sources of Stress: How Stress Affects Health
Stress, “silent death,” is a situation that causes specific acute and chronic physiological
changes in the mind and body; it is detrimental to individuals worldwide. Despite its global
attention, Selye (1936), an endocrinologist, provided the first scientific investigation on the three
sources of stress: psychological, behavioral, and physiological. Consistent with this, each source
depends on an individual’s coping mechanisms to stressful experiences from the environment.
Recent studies by Kim and Diamond (2002) further examined the effects of stressful experiences
on cognition. They explored three areas to provide answers: excitability (E), aversive perception
(A), and uncontrollability (U) (formula S = E x A x U). Specifically, stress exposure to extreme
working conditions accumulates the responses into allostasis. Allostasis is when one achieves
21
stability through physiological or behavioral change. Large amounts of cortisol or stress hormones
are released into the body from stimuli (Austin et al., 2005; The Centre for the Studies of Human
Stress, 2017).
Researchers have described environmental demands without available resources as toxic
(Okeke & Dlamini, 2013; Dlamini et al., 2014). Moreover, stress may influence the areas of
cognition: learning (thinking skills), decision-making, problem-solving, memory, and attention.
In effect, stress may hinder cognitive performance. McEwen (2016) suggested that these
biological changes alter cognition circuitry in healthy brains. Consistently, repetitive or chronic
stress (allostatic load) may contribute to physical and mental disorders, influencing our well-being
and, consequently, our productivity.
In addition, Sapolsky (2004) reported daily acute psychological stressors and physical
stress, such as violence against teachers. Wilson et al. (2011) examined 731 teachers and cited
female teachers as having higher symptoms in the workplace environment than men.
Consequently, these stress symptoms become chronic and accumulate into long-term or allostatic
overload, leading to teacher burnout. In effect, Dantzer (2016) explored how mental disorders such
as depression, anxiety, post-traumatic disorder, and suicide are the negative consequences
resulting from these stress factors in the social and physical environment.
In particular, Haydon et al. (2018) explored special education teachers from different urban
and suburban Midwestern school districts. Teachers reported exhaustion, anxiety, obsessive-
compulsive disorders, and obesity as factors that influenced their mental health (Katz et al., 2016).
Camacho et al. (2018) examined 160 urban educators’ emotions in challenging learning
environments requiring problem-solving solutions outside the classroom and causing a lack of
control in different situations. These socio-emotional factors in urban settings are significantly
22
different when compared to suburban school districts (Atlins, Graczyk, Frazier, & Adil, 2003).
The feelings of anger, sadness, emotional exhaustion, and confusion that arise from such urban
school settings may be ameliorated by supportive networks or programs to enable teachers to self-
manage occupational stressors.
According to figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) in Great Britain,
“63 primary and secondary teachers took their lives in 2009 compared to 35 in 2008; a spike of 80
percent” (p. 1). According to Johnny McDevitt of Channel 4 News: “…the growing trend of older
teachers committing suicide could be linked to another trend of younger teachers walking away
from the job when they begin to find their workloads unmanageable” (p. 1).
According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, there were 47,173 suicides
in the United States in 2017. While these statistics are broken down into gender, age, race, and
socioeconomic categories, there is scant scientific research showing the actual number of teachers
who commit suicide every year due to stressful occupational factors. An Illinois teacher took her
own life on Thanksgiving Day, 2011. She was employed at the urban Cottage Grove Middle
School in Ford Heights, Illinois, and left a note stating how hostile her work environment had
been. Again, there are no accurate statistics on the rate of teacher suicides across the country. In
this age of education reform, the systematic harassment of teachers is widespread.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) studied the suicide deaths of 22,053 Americans of
working age by using information gleaned from the 2012 and 2015 National Violent Death
Reporting System (Centers for Disease Control, as cited in Fox News, 2018). There were 17 states
that submitted data to this system. Using the Standard Occupational Classifications from the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, it was found that the occupational group with the lowest suicide rate
was education, training, and library (which included teachers, professors, and
23
archivists). However, more research still needs to be done to ascertain the number of teachers who
commit suicide every year due to occupational stress.
Another study by Daniels et al. (2007) explored 234,000 teachers nationwide who were
victims of violence every year. They only received minimal treatment from medical personnel as
a result of these violent episodes. This minimal treatment highlights the significance of research
by Walter B. Cannon regarding behavioral stress responses in the body’s “fight-or-flight” system
necessary for our adaptation, as reported by Akhlaq et al. (2010) in a study on homeostasis or
balance for our survival.
Nevertheless, the traumatic stress crisis affects the school community. McCarty (2016)
described how homeostasis imbalance deregulates stress responses in the individual and increases
susceptibilities to the immune system within seconds, making one more prone to illnesses. For
example, stressful working conditions may distort thinking processes and perception of reality and
create feelings of helplessness, vigilance, and emotional numbness. Ultimately, chronic
psychological distress may trigger consequences of heart disease and panic disorders, and
ultimately death from accelerated exposure to stress, as reported by Esler (2017). A study by
McEwen (2000) described “voodoo death” and stated that fear, which accumulates over time, may
produce health hazards in the “age of stress anxiety” (Prasad et al., 2016).
Additionally, these stressors may suggest occupational risk hazards on well-being and
performance and the inability to cope with these stressors during excessive social, environmental,
and physical demands due to significant life changes, according to Everly and Lating (2012).
Similarly, Burchielli and Bartram (2006) reported that teachers often assume multiple roles to meet
the complexities of learning environments. Some studies disregard teacher stress and its
implications; however, decades of data report teacher stress as a crisis worldwide. Oliver and
24
Venter (2003) and Bantwini (2010) reported that teachers’ occupational demands influence
psychological and physical well-being and thus hinder adequate work performance in school
settings. However, failure to address sources of teacher stress and its effects increases the causality
of teachers leaving the profession (Kyriacou, 2001).
Repetitively, the effects of stress caused by administration policies, classroom settings, and
interpersonal conflicts all influence an individual’s emotions. These include anger, frustration,
and anxiety from overwhelming work demands that fail to meet available occupational resources
(Kyriacou, 2001; Griffith, Steptoe, & Cropley, 1999; Richards, 2012). Researchers have examined
a model to explain teachers’ perceptions of stressful events to determine the factors associated with
these emotions and how appraisal may change behaviors in work settings (Lazarus & Launier,
1978; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Hinton & Rotheiler, 1998). These stressful responses from
excessive occupational demands produced teachers who left the profession. Chaplain (2008) cited
research by Kyriacou and Sutcliffe (1978a, p.3) on stress reactions and noted their model on the
causes of stress. Kyriacou and Kunc (2007) examined detrimental occupational health hazards.
Consequently, studies on teacher stress and burnout led to an investigation by Sass, Seal, and
Martin (2010). Despite these studies, a lack of research on reducing a teacher’s stress levels which
lead to exhaustion, chronic stress, burnout, and suicide continues to exist.
More important, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)
(American Psychiatric Association, 2013) reported that acute and posttraumatic stress disorders
were classified in the 1980s as mental disorders. The diagnosis for acute stress disorder included
symptoms such as emotional detachment or lack of awareness, and posttraumatic stress disorder
was described by Myers (1915) as shellshock causing traumatic flashback episodes or lack of
feeling. According to Fink (2017), these repetitive symptoms may contribute to an individual’s
25
social, physical, and occupational dysfunction. He suggested that the vast literature on human
stress requires even further research.
Moreover, the American Institute of Stress (AIS) (2017) examined a total of 50 signs and
symptoms that produce adverse effects on well-being, such as heartburn, headaches, and nausea.
These also include changes in behavior and emotions, primarily caused by socio-economic factors
that strain the availability of resources. Stress affects all individuals with diverse educational and
cultural backgrounds. Smith and Perez (2018) indicated that systemic multidisciplinary
understanding is needed to improve teacher well-being and performance possibly.
Achu (2012) examined the relationship between work stress and job performance. Results
conclude that coping strategies to minimize work stress are difficult to enforce because of the trust
factor with leadership. In addition, Klassen and Chiu (2010) reported higher levels of stress
symptoms for female teachers age 40 and above and teachers less than age 30 (Phil & Manjula,
2012). Schools failed to address the job responsibilities and social needs of teachers, thus causing
burnout (Kaur, 2011). Hence, the correlations between burnout levels depended on gender, age,
relationships with new administrators, and new curriculum (Koruklu et al., 2012). For example,
teacher stress may increase from overwhelming assessments, influencing low self-efficacy,
satisfaction, motivation, and engagement in their profession (Gonzalez, 2015).
Over time, research by Koruklu et al. (2012) found that teachers deteriorate throughout
their careers with physical symptoms such as cardiovascular and neurological problems (Talmor,
Reiter, & Feigin, 2005). They also suffer from psychological symptoms such as rage, depression,
confusion, anxiety, low self-esteem, and substance abuse (Black, 2003; Naylor, 2001; Sari, 2004;
Talmor et al., 2005. Wood (2002) cited cultural differences. Coping attempts to mediate the
physical, physiological, and psychological consequences may influence the core belief in oneself
26
(Kyriacou & Sutcliffe, 1978a). Consequently, teachers lose their capacity to keep up with the
modernization and globalization of 21st-century technical demands. This competitiveness
produces detrimental stress effects on well-being, resulting in diminished cognitive functioning
and teacher turnover. Each of these causal factors is addressed below.
Causes of Stress
Cognitive Overload
According to Miller (1956), public school teachers in the United States experience
cognition strain or overload in memory capacity. His research suggests that excessive
occupational load demands override a teacher’s potential to cope with task completion
responsibilities. Sweller’s (1988) cognitive load theory examines how instructional design may
induce a correlation between overload and problem-solving: the intrinsic (effort on a topic), the
extrinsic (delivery of information), and the germane cognitive load (schema or knowledge
constructs). Most importantly, this mental effort is unique for everyone because their information
processing capacity differs. For example, if students had lower achievement gaps, this suggests
children lacked general knowledge due to the lack of cognitive control development that limits
switching between tasks and inhibits abstract goals in working memory (Bunge & Zelazo, 2006;
Morton & Munakata, 2002a; Munakata et al., 2012). Interestingly, researchers exploring cognitive
overload found that older adults experienced imbalances more than other age groups (Scandura,
1971; Voorhies & Scandura, 1977; Paas et al., 1993; Skulmowski & Ray, 2017; Andersson et al.,
2002; and Frein, et al., 2013).
Furthermore, the literature indicates that the processing of information in schema
development is acquired incrementally through dichotomous controlled and automatic schema
27
growth mechanisms necessary for learning and problem-solving (Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977;
Kotovsky, Hayes & Simon, 1985). For example, individual differences may suggest slow
cognitive shifts occur when needing extra time for practice, and more effort is needed to gain
insightful information to achieve intellectual performance from the low-high continuum for
acquiring learning (Sweller, 1994). Similarly, research by Miller (1956) on differences between
long-term and short-term memory suggested that working memory is reduced due to this
mechanism’s characteristics.
Consistent with this previous study, Driscoll (1994) noted that learners experience the
world and transfer knowledge from the environment into their reality in a precise way, where
cognitive information processing theory develops. The cognitive psychologist, Donald Broadbent,
indicated how abstract ideas on human performance transmit into information processing. Barnet
& Ceci (2002) asserts we still question the nature of transfer mechanisms, and they examined
when, where, and how transfer takes place. Gick & Holyoak (1983) pointed out how analogical
thinking transfers knowledge through mapping. This comparison and induction from a concept to
a general schema examines the mechanisms of analogical transfer. Overall, the analogical transfer
of knowledge through planning and organization can suggest improvement in human performance.
Consequently, the burdensome effect of cognitive overload may influence the disparity of
errors or incorrect faults, such as forgetfulness or misjudgments in occupational situations that
interfere with the completion of tasks. Interestingly, multimedia learning may provide solutions
to alleviate cognitive load. However, Mayer et al. (2001) found that excessive information from
onscreen text deterred an individual’s memory from retaining, processing, and understanding the
information. Similarly, Hemp (2009) explored whether the unsustainable information load
involved in a teacher’s profession influences their cognitive capacity to sustain effective
28
occupational performance. Specifically, the challenges of making difficult decisions due to the
complexity of today’s information age, including social information overload, contribute to these
distractions and possibly cause daily interruptions (Speier et al., 1999). Consistent with this
research, these distractions can lower an individual’s attention span and ultimately result in
ineffective decision-making (The Pieces Framework, 2015). This suggests diminished cognitive
control and, ultimately, work productivity due to excessive amounts of data that implicate limited
cognitive functioning.
These negative consequences demoralize teachers and create depression, insomnia,
addictions, and suicide. These unrealistic demands also influence quality productivity concerning
time. In the CEP survey (2015), 96% reported that teachers’ occupations impacted their cognitive
abilities to excel and achieve state curriculum and policy goals, students’ initiatives with target
assessments, and voluntary student extracurricular activities. According to the Learning Policy
Institute, these factors impact the recruitment and retention of teachers, where only 212,000
teachers were employed in 2016 (Sutcher et al., 2016).
There is a teacher shortage crisis in the United States resulting from multiple
responsibilities that require information overload or infobesity, such as managing a classroom
learning environment in an urban district with poor working conditions and no available resources
(Fantuzzo et al., 2012; Yang, Ge, Hu, Chi, & Wang, 2009). For example, Sancini et al. (2010)
found that occupational stress negatively affects teacher performance. These researchers reported
on different sources of stress based on female kindergarten teachers and their working conditions.
Results suggested stressors at play such as repetitive work and continuous demands on
instructional time, workload with students, and parent-constricted assignments in the school setting
where interpersonal relationships were at risk. In effect, stressful working conditions identified
29
by questionnaire data can lead to possible crisis prevention strategies that reduce harmful stress
before burnout occurs.
Acute stress can hinder cognitive processes that utilize the implicit, explicit, and working
memory; specifically, the executive functioning, goal-directed behaviors that influence the rate of
information processing. This acute stress from information workload influences learning,
encoding, and memory consolidation, and minimizes cognitive flexibility. The continuity of
repetitive or allostatic stress builds up throughout an individual’s career and damages their well-
being. Moreover, workload stressors impair cognitive functioning, memory, and retrieval,
especially working memory, which affects well-being, based on an investigation by Subramanyam
et al. (2013).
Consistent with this study, Fink (2016) reported that physical and emotional exhaustion or
“mental breakdown” may lead to compassion fatigue. This fatigue is due to non-teaching
responsibilities or “banned tasks,” such as photocopying and managing databases. These added
responsibilities are detrimental to one’s capacity to learn, focus, solve problems, and retain
information for effective performance, thus simultaneously influencing academic success. Staff
development, accountability standards, planned initiatives for better teacher pay, and more school
resources can minimize these outcomes (Fink, 2016).
Ultimately, cognitive dysfunction suggests learning impairments such as thinking skills,
memory, problem-solving, and goal-directed behaviors, as well as mental disorders such as post-
traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Ongoing stress
may lead one to engage in negative behaviors, such as drinking and other addictions (Fink, 2016).
Consequently, McEwen (2016) suggested this acceleration may promote detrimental occupational
outcomes, possibly influencing the capacities of learning environments and making it more
30
difficult for teachers due to cognitive overload to learn complex information and to assimilate only
scanty, segmented information (Hunter et al., 2012; Hunter et al., 2013).
Most importantly, an investigation by Haase et al. (2016) on the concept of polychronicity
reported differences in time management among cultures during activities based on Edward Hall,
the anthropologist who studied space and time. In this study, the development of a revised, reliable
47 question (Likert Scale) measure called the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) measured
an individual’s capacity for tolerance to information overload through different stimuli and
multiple sources in occupational settings. The inventory categorizes five information processing
subscales: information load, interpersonal load, change load, activity, and time structure. Results
were validated based on the 431 employed participants’ responses on these dimensions: “Realistic,
Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional (RIASEC) categories of Holland’s
taxonomy” (Haase et al., 2016, p. 133). The distinctions between the dimensions suggest the
dimensions of Artistic and Enterprising claim the highest capacity for tolerance; on the contrary,
the Social and Realistic dimensions reported less tolerance. All of these cognitive concepts are
factors necessary for information processing and multitasking (Wickens & Flach, 1988; Konig,
Buhner, & Murling, 2005; Meyer & Kieras, 1997a, 1997b; Pashler, 1994). In addition, Logan
(2002) cited serial and parallel processing.
Multitasking
One example that causes cognitive overload is multitasking, which is typical for educators.
This human cognitive behavior requires shifting and alternating between two or more tasks
simultaneously using cognitive resources such as short-term memory, perception, and processing
of information. For example, an educator teaching students academic skills while at the same time
performing data entry increases the possibility of cognitive inflexibility. Multitasking increases
31
demand on working memory and attention, consequently diminishing the cognitive resources
necessary for information processing and goal-oriented behaviors (Baddeley, 1996; Gopher,
Armony, & Greenspan, 2000; Lee & Taatgen, 2012; Meyer & Kieras, 1997b; Roger & Monsell,
1995; and Wickens, 2002, 2008). Interestingly, minimizing cognitive control by shifting between
sub-goals and engaging in larger goals influences performance. Studies on cognitive overload
suggest that impulsive behaviors from environmental demands may limit decision-making
processes. These gains, losses, or other environmental demands contribute to a lack of sensitivity
and inability to take complex actions (Pabst et al., 2013; Buckert, M. et al., 2014; Radenbach et
al., 2015).
For this reason, Lee et al. (2013) reported that multitasking continues to impact an
individual’s cognition learning and memory in work settings. This study by Lin examined
participants’ personal stories related to multitasking and found that cognitive factors were affected,
such as attention, experience, and technological information processing. Specifically, the internet
is a modern way of acquiring information for communication. Its constant non-linear hyperlinks
and graphics appearing on the screen alter cognitive thought processes for reading and seeing
visual information. Also, it has been suggested that with internet use, an individual’s perception
of time is either monochromic (linear) or polychromic (cyclical), impacting one’s multitasking
capacity to view one or several tasks at a time (Hall, 1959; Bluedorn, 2001).
Additionally, research by Rideout, Foehr, and Roberts (2010) indicated that younger
generations spend, on average, 7.3 hours daily communicating through media such as telephones,
computers, and televisions, thus reinforcing multitasking behaviors and skills required for student
performance. Consequently, the younger generation possibly has difficulty achieving satisfactory
work performance due to a lack of face-to-face interpersonal interaction. Moreover, Schweickert
32
and Boggs (1984) reported that cognitive processes are needed for multitasking responsibilities
because concentration is required; therefore, the pressure on supply and demand of attention
accumulates during multitasking and results in the inadequate performance of completed tasks.
The act of skimming information between tasks limits the capacity of information for learning and
memory. Consistent with the previous study, Jackson (2008) suggests that this limitation leaves
no time for reflection. Furthermore, this limitation deters learning opportunities for connection to
our inner selves and the world, which are essential for the preservation of our well-being and
survival (Saxena, 2016).
It is incumbent upon educational administrators across the country and worldwide to create
school cultures in which teachers can voice their opinions, take empowered action to solve
problems in their classrooms, and participate in stress-reducing measures to more effectively cope
with the stress that they encounter on the job. How well a teacher deals with stress is directly
connected to an administration’s accountability measures, practices, and protocols.
Accountability
Efforts by teachers to meet high-pressure accountability measures due to changing urban
educational policies, which are highly influenced by the outcomes of post-industrial society, are a
source of teacher stress. The high-stakes accountability measures in urban districts create
additional responsibilities for teachers to raise student achievement (Bailey, 2000; Lambert &
McCarthy, 2006; Valli & Buese, 2007). Consequently, researchers found occupational pressures
influence teachers’ resilience to stress, primarily resulting from having to deal with the daily social
and emotional needs of their students (Stillman, 2011; Valli & Chambliss, 2007), as well as
accountability educational policies and limited resources (Atkins, Graczyk, Frazier & Adil, 2003;
Cappella, Frazier, Atkins, Schoenwald, & Glisson, 2008, Shernoff et al., 2011).
33
Teachers are required to administer numerous assessments and data analysis reports in
high-performing school districts, described by Troman (2008) as ‘testing regimens” (p. 619). Both
positive and negative factors were reported affecting primary teachers’ identities and commitments
to their profession from different socio-economic backgrounds (SES) in England. Significantly, a
teacher’s professional autonomy was affected by these cost-effective, test-driven educational
policies that do not take into account the reality of the workload necessary to raise student
achievement and meet school goals.
Similarly, Skinner et al. (2018) pointed out that bureaucratic accountability practices affect
teachers’ well-being due to the pressure to provide student data for district purposes. These
practices may negatively influence relationships between students and teachers. Lyotard (as cited
in Ball, 2003) described this as the “exteriorization of knowledge” (p. 226), which diminishes
meaningful relationships. Fernet et al. (2014) suggest a loss of professional identity along with the
collegiality in the school culture from such rigorous accountability demands.
Another source of accountability stress for teachers is the evaluation or performance visit
by the administration. Lavigne (2014) reported that these “external assessors” (p. 10) increase a
teacher’s stress. These assessments erode a teacher’s job satisfaction, influence teacher stress
levels, and affect teacher attrition rates in low socioeconomic school districts (Calderhead, 2001;
Valli & Buese, 2007). Meeting administrative accountability measures creates a continuous
struggle for teachers to self-manage their performance while safeguarding their mental health
(Skinner et al., 2018).
Administration Style Practices
School management practices in the workplace may determine teacher performance.
According to Kyriacou and Chien (2004), educational management styles can be a source of
34
teacher stress (as cited in McKinney-Thompson, 2015). Previous meta-analyses suggest negative
consequences resulted from authoritarian styles, lack of fair delegation, and lack of adequate
communication. This micromanagement induced daily stressors for teachers, such as loss of job
control and failure to cope.
In particular, Baker and Moore (2015) examined the correlation between the stress levels
of teachers in Australia and their intentions to quit in three geographic regions. Most importantly,
evidence reported the highest stress levels in urban middle schools. These stress levels may
suggest a lack of administrative support and job dissatisfaction were negative predictors. Rhoades
& Eisenberger (2002) found staff perceptions of organizational support influenced educators’
stress levels and withdrawal behaviors. Furthermore, social networks and decision-making
empowerment may reduce stress effects for teachers (Ahghar, 2008; Barrera et al., 2007).
Okeke et al. (2014) pointed out that this relationship between work stressors and
demographic variables among South African preschool teachers determines psychosocial well-
being. Specifically, numerous studies suggest that safe environments for children are more
conducive for learning and that teachers’ mental states influence teacher-student relationships. For
this reason, administrative organizational practices may influence the formation of spikelet
(branch) role processes defined as the autonomy of a collaborative culture, teacher work demands,
and professional staff development training before resulting in teacher-student performance
shortfalls and burnout (Chang, 2009).
Extra-Role Behaviors
A growing body of research indicates that excessive mandatory and volunteer
workloads/activities negatively affected the well-being and careers of teachers (Vigota-Gadot,
2006; Bolino et al., 2010; Bergeron et al., 2013). More important, teachers performing
35
extracurricular (non-instructional) activities outside of their contract throughout the school year,
in addition to their regular job responsibilities, created concern. Organizational citizenship
behavior (OCB) or volunteer work impacts educators’ conservation of resources (COR). This
theory states that when individuals feel that their valued self-care resources are threatened, they
may experience psychological distress or chronic exhaustion from daily stressors (Maslach,
1982b).
Caregiving (Compassion Fatigue)
Researchers have pointed out that teachers, mental health counselors, and other helping
professionals experience compassion fatigue. A study by Rothschild (2006) noted the negative
consequences of an overload of work. Maslach et al. (2001) stated that symptoms of
ineffectiveness, exhaustion, and depersonalization signaled compassion fatigue, manifested by
cognitive dysfunction and other mental disorders. Significantly, teachers who decided to work
longer hours in OCB had low task proficiency, lower salaries, and diminished career advancement
due to time spent on extracurricular tasks and performance constraints.
Consistent with this, Andreychik (2019) pointed out that teachers and mental health
providers who were exposed to repeated negative emotional connections were at risk for emotional
exhaustion and burnout. Specifically, Thomas and Lasley (2002) indicated that the multitude of
children who live in poverty in the United States without proper health care are deprived of healthy
cognitive development. The emotional, social, and physical needs of students may directly
influence a teacher’s emotional balance and mental state. On the other hand, positive emotions or
empathy within the learning environment may increase job satisfaction and reduce burnout.
Harmful exposure to these effects may produce health hazards. Accordingly, self-care preventative
strategies designed for caregivers would be beneficial for their mental and physical well-being.
36
Nell Noddings (1984), a philosopher of education and a scientific researcher, confirms how
the morals and ethics of conventional caring can be detrimental to the development of
compassionate, altruistic human relationships. When educators respond to their students’
overwhelming needs, and the diminishment of ethical caring by administrators lessens their natural
response to care for their students’ welfare, then educators must apply self-care when dealing with
detached emotions, stress, burnout, and suicide by changing their perceptual awareness of stress.
Research by Insel (2015) found that approximately $2 trillion are spent on mental health disorders
around the world, and the National Institute of Mental Health (2016) declared stress as the main
determining factor in the United States for these disorders.
Excessive Hours
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2009) reported on 27
member nations. They stated that teachers, on average, worked 1,913 hours (40 weeks) annually
compared to a full-time employee working 1,932 hours (48 weeks). These work demands add to
resource depletion, such as family or exercise time, because of cognitive overload. Consequently,
Schwab and Iwanicki (1982) found that teachers experience burnout from emotional exhaustion
(lack of emotional energy for others), depersonalization (disengagement from people), and lack of
career advancement and personal accomplishment (diminished feelings of job achievement).
Niles and Anderson (1993) pointed out that schools suffer financial loss because of costly
teacher turnover. Consequently, this shortage of teachers resulted in increased work hours and
workload for employed teachers. These internal and external losses lead to chronic stress from the
working conditions in the learning environment (Niles & Anderson, 1993).
Indeed, results on the 2017 Educator Quality of Work Life Survey showed that 61% of the
5,000 teachers who were surveyed reported “feeling” more stressed compared to other United
37
States (U.S.) employees from other professions. Female teachers aged 18-64 and male teachers
aged 35-44 reported a significant amount of days in poor health. They reported suffering one to
three days of poor mental health per month compared to U.S. adult workers who reported zero
days per month on their random sample. Overall, there was a significant increase of teachers citing
poor mental health (34% in the 2015 survey compared to 58% in the 2017 survey), highlighting
the lack of support for teachers’ mental health and well-being (American Federation of Teachers,
2017). The next logical inquiry is to understand in more depth why teachers have excessive work
hours.
Workload
A teacher’s workload consists of long hours, pressure from rigorous academic standards,
and insufficient time to handle lesson preparations during grade-level meetings, adding to their job
constraints in the workplace. Despite these conditions, 68% of teachers enter the profession to
make a difference in the lives of children, and 45% said they wanted their students to achieve their
dreams (Center of Education Policy, 2016). These stressful working conditions expose teachers
to negative outcomes that challenge their cognitive processes. In effect, “trying to catch up with
things from all the paperwork and objectives to improve student achievement may influence
emotions detrimental to mental health” (Skinner et al., p.10). Similarly, Kaur (2011) stated that
teachers needed to “always be on” and face pressure to collaborate with limited resources and
unsafe building conditions, thus straining their ability to concentrate, learn, and recall information,
and inhibiting their cognitive performance.
In support of this, Maria Ferguson, Executive Director of the Center on Education Policy
(CEP), reported that a 2016 survey conducted by the CEP revealed that half of the teachers thought
about leaving their jobs because of excessive stress, workload, and lack of participation in district-
38
level decisions. In 2018, 8,173 participants took the Northeastern University (NEU) workload
survey, and it was found that 81% of the teachers thought about leaving their jobs due to
unmanageable workload. Forty percent of the participants worked 21 or more hours a week, and
80% were working more than the average in 2016. The 2,500 teachers commented on the workload
and long hours, expressing frustration with their workload, and less than 15% had a proper work
and life balance (Rentner, Kober, & Frizzell, 2016).
In the YouGov (2015) survey, Faye Craster, a 22-year-old science teacher in London,
England, commented on her 65-hour workweek. She decided to let go and pursue another
profession because she had had enough. Many of her colleagues dreaded the upcoming school
years and thought about leaving the profession due to the toxic workload and working conditions.
It creates a “political football” arena in the field of education, commented a representative
from the National Association of Schoolmaster and Union of Women Teachers, where the
correlation between workload and stress becomes alarmingly significant, leading to inadequate
performances, and significantly high-minority and high-poverty communities of learning for
disadvantaged students are at a loss (Sutcher et al., 2016). In concurrence, when a Teacher Support
Network (TSN) reported an increase of staff occupational health concerns where 7 out of 10
educators and two-thirds of administrative leaders experienced it, the Health and Safety Executive
conducted an initiative to address workplace stress as a priority. The TSN hotline documented
two-thirds of their callers indicated stress, depression, and anxiety due to occupational stressors
(Bajorek, Gulliford, & Taskila, 2014). Based on these concerns, teachers were afforded holistic
health prevention strategies and monitoring supported by their employers to improve well-being.
Excessive teacher workload can imply high job demands, which may negatively influence
a teacher’s emotional and physical health. Therefore, teachers need to have access to adequate and
39
cost-efficient pension and health benefits so that professionals may address these stress-related
health issues. However, employee contributions to healthcare and pension benefits are also
sources of stress for teachers.
Employer Contribution Reduction in Pension and Health Benefits
Public sector employees, such as public school teachers, benefit from their pension
package. A study by Koedel and Xiang (2017) reported on this effect, determined by their years
left to retire and based on the 1999 enhancement formula for St. Louis, Missouri. Results
demonstrated similarity to other districts in the United States, where pension plans were not cost
effective to maximize retention in the public sector for employees. Novy-Marx and Rauh (2009,
2011, 2014), Biggs (2011), and Munnell (2012) reported that excessive maintenance of pension
plans lessened employee benefits. In effect, teachers are receiving fewer wages than previously
since districts are requiring them to pay for a portion of their health insurance and other benefits.
More important, other factors suggested that retention behaviors were influenced by other factors
with public-sector employees and teaching professionals (Boyd, Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff,
2011; Kersaint, Lewis, Potter, & Meisels, 2007; Loeb, Darling-Hammond, & Luczak, 2009;
Manoli & Weber, 2011).
Furthermore, the Economic Policy Institute reported an investigation by Keefe (2018)
regarding Pennsylvania teachers who were receiving a compensation package, which was 12.1%
lower when compared to other districts. This research was based on full-time, highly qualified
employees who saw a decrease in wages and benefits of 6.8%, and it was predicted that the
decrease would reach 10% in 2019. This more than likely impacts the teacher shortage and
retention trend crisis (Table 2, p. 10). Since 2010, legislation (Act 120) decreased pension benefits
for new hires in 2011 and, following this continuum, teachers hired in 2019 will receive further
40
financial cuts based on 2017 legislation (Act 5). Feng (2014) suggested that higher pay for teachers
was a solution to the teacher retention problem. The United States has the lowest teacher pay scale
and demonstrates the highest teacher turnover rates in comparison to other countries (OECD, 2009;
Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, & Carver Thomas 2016).
Interestingly, districts with higher female/male ratios reflected a lower pay scale for both
men and women; therefore, teachers as caregivers receive lower pay and, ultimately, the profession
is further devalued. Furthermore, lowering pension, health, and wage benefits possibly lower
teacher self-efficacy, increases financial hardships, and incrementally creates stress, which affects
well-being. This systemically increases the teacher retention crisis and negatively influences the
labor force.
To better understand the severity of teacher stress, it is not only important to identify the
sources of such stress, but also to pinpoint the effects of stress and suggest alternative methods to
reduce stress levels.
Effect of Stress
Teacher performance
In his book, Dying for a Paycheck, Dr. Jeffrey Pfeffer, a Stanford professor, describes
occupational stress as the “social pollution” of today. This view was based on Rachel Carson’s
previous study on environmental research where 120,000 lives were lost and $190 billion was
spent on healthcare per year in the United States. The American Institute of Stress reported $300
billion in costs to employers due to stress-related illnesses and $2 million for occupationally
inflicted violence in the workplace (Pfeffer, 2018). Helen Mann, an educator who suffered work-
related stress, committed suicide due to the pressure and fear of job performance failure (BBC
41
news, 2013). This unfortunate event affirmed that levels of stress directly impact occupational
performance (Avison, 2016).
Skinner et al. (2018), citing figures from the 2016/2017 Labour Force Survey (LFS),
reported a total of 526,000 cases of work-related stress or 1,610 per 100,000 employees. This data
suggests mental disorders and high levels of stress in the teaching profession are above average
when compared to other professions (Smith, Brice, Collins, Matthews, & McNamara, 2000;
Travers & Cooper, 1996).
Furthermore, extensive studies reported that job stress is detrimental to teachers’ well-
being and cognition. A study by Prasad et al. (2016) examined sources of occupational stress and
how these sources directly affected job performance. In this study, researchers examined 200
female and 100 male teachers in Hyberdad. The study was based on eight stress factors, and the
dependent variables were individual coping strategies. In this study, the results suggested no
gender differences. However, women reported chronic varicose vein disorders that influenced
their occupational performance. Another study by Van Horn et al. (2001) reported that 42% of
female teachers in India experienced chronic stress effects from different emotions that influenced
their occupational performance.
Similar studies by Ravichandra and Rajendran (2007) found that female teachers in the
Chennai Metro area in India, responding to a Teacher Stress Inventory on the eight factors, noted
teaching tasks, qualifications, and age as differences in how each reacted to stress. In research
done by Malik et al. (2017) with 531 university teachers based on the MANOVA Questionnaire,
it was found that the differences in results from Pakistan and Finland were due to differing social
support, promotion, and occupational conditions in each country. In effect, no similarities in stress
42
symptoms were reported, but Pakistani male teachers displayed a higher workplace incidence of
bullying than teachers in Finland.
Other research evidences the increase in teacher stress worldwide (Carton & Fruchart,
2014; Dinham & Scott, 1996; Munt, 2004; Schonfeld, 2001). Sahlberg (2012) described the
Global Education Reform Movement (GERM) as a measure of teacher performance. The pressure
to meet evaluation criteria within a managerial monitoring framework may hinder teachers’ self-
efficacy and more than likely cause emotional and physical disorders. In effect, teachers
experience constant pressure to meet targeted performance standards based on student outcomes,
and Ball (2003) argues that this puts “the teacher’s soul” at risk (p. 216).
Fundamentally, teacher-student relationships quickly diminish in a target-driven culture
where creativity and self-esteem are lost. Dr. Barbara Skinner, Professor Gerard Leavey, and Dr.
Despina Rothi (2019) specifically cited this narrative from an interview conducted by them in a
paper entitled "Managerialism and Teacher Professional Identity: Impact on Wellbeing Among
Teachers in the UK" and reported at Ulster University in the United Kingdom:
I think it’s heavily bureaucratic and I think there’s a great deal of pressure on people to
perform to targets and there seems to be a loss of spontaneity that teachers used to have,
and I think that, sadly, its gone. So it’s all conforming to syllabus and rigour of that
syllabus rather than responding to the children and pupils that you’ve got in your care. It’s
talk about statistics rather than the children. (p. 103)
Skinner et al. (2018) also reported the feelings of another teacher who had taught for 28 years and
had experienced distress and despair from a performance review:
I don’t like to say I attempted suicide but I just attempted to get myself out of the situation
in a drastic way because it felt like the only way out at the time. It felt like there’s no help,
43
there’s nowhere to go, there’s no point. I’m useless. I’ll never achieve what they want me
to achieve. I must be a rubbish teacher. All that sort of thing. (p. 71)
Teacher performance metric systems continue to change with new educational reforms.
Increased accountability measures may be the culprit behind increased teacher absenteeism. An
in-depth understanding of why teachers are chronically absent may lead to ways to decrease this
trend.
Teacher absenteeism
Mihaly et al. (2018) examined the well-being of staff and students in the urban school
district of Baltimore Public Schools. Reported findings suggest that there is a correlation between
teachers’ and students’ perceptions and mental health outcomes based on the school climate. For
example, this evidence suggests students thought about dropping out of school and a higher than
average absenteeism rate for teachers due to work demands. However, the health of teachers had
no relationship to student achievement. Another study by Virtanen et al. (2010) indicated that
3,063 Finnish teachers in low socioeconomic neighborhoods reported nine more days of absence
than did teachers residing in better neighborhoods. Medeiros et al., (2012) researched 1,980
teachers and found that teachers’ voice disorders or occupational dysphonia (prolonged use of
speech) and other factors contributed to absenteeism from municipal schools. Findings reported
that one–third of the teachers missed work because of voice problems, violence, depression, and
upper respiratory illnesses.
Regarding teacher absenteeism, Griffith (2017) pointed out that, on average, teachers are
“chronically absent” (ten or more days of absence in a year) due to sickness or personal leave.
Moreover, in Hawaii, three-quarters of the teacher population were chronically absent, cited the
44
Department of Education’s Office on Civil Rights. Educators receive approximately 12 sick and
personal days from the district as negotiated by the teacher unions. The School Board Advisory in
England quoted 200,000 days lost due to teacher absenteeism and a loss of £19 million from stress-
related illnesses such as depression, anxiety, and other medical illnesses. There is a full-blown
teacher crisis in Britain, and it was reported that 40% plan on possibly leaving the profession within
five years. In 2015, the local authorities in Wales and England reported 12 out of 22 counties with
high teacher absenteeism rates, consisting of 1,353 days lost in Cardiff and 1,664 days in the ERW
region, related to stress illnesses (Fleck, 2009; Brown & Roloff, 2011; National Education Union,
2018). Stress not only affects teacher absenteeism but also affects teacher self-efficacy.
Teacher self-efficacy
Teacher self-efficacy is the ability of teachers to believe and retain positive beliefs about
themselves and their judgments. This concept of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997) is widely studied
in education due to the impact of teaching effectiveness on teacher-student relationships and
student learning. This process changed throughout their teaching profession (Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2007; Tschannen-Moran, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Bandura stated that teacher efficacy is essential
for student achievement due to changing behaviors or “social-cognitivism.” Consistent with this,
the American nonprofit, Research And Development (RAND) organization, conducted teacher
efficacy studies to determine positive well-being and elicit what strategies could be used to change
policy to improve efficacy (Armor, D. et al., 1976); Berman, McLaughlin, Bass, Pauly, & Zellman,
1977). Low self-efficacy may be attributed to rising stress levels in educators, particularly urban
educators, negatively affecting their relationships, well-being, and teacher and student
performance (Shernoff, Mehta, Atkins, Torf, & Spencer, 2011).
45
Student achievement
According to Keith Herman et al. (2018), teacher-student relationships are more than likely
to suffer in stressful learning environments, ultimately affecting their emotional and physical well-
being. These researchers investigated 129 teachers and 1,817 students from an urban Midwestern
school district composed of nine K-4 elementary schools. It was found that teachers suffering
from high to moderate stress levels, burnout, and minimal coping mechanisms influenced student
behavior, and academic achievement showed the lowest results. Specifically, only 7% were in the
well-adjusted range (Herman et al., 2018).
Researchers have found that teachers’ instructional choices on tasks and instructional
strategies were directly correlated to student achievement (Ashton & Webb, 1986; Bandura, 1997;
Guskey, 1988; Ross, 1998). This was particularly true for students with special needs who required
extra instructional time (Gibson & Dembo, 1984). This suggests that teacher efficacy and student
learning engagement were directly related to goal-oriented behaviors (Good & Brophy, 2003;
Wolters & Daugherty, 2007). Significantly, Bandura (1977) reported that an individual’s beliefs
and professional judgments remained stable throughout their teaching career, which was necessary
for efficacy change (Yoo, 2016). Overall, studies suggest that teacher stress contributed to low
self-efficacy and a lack of student achievement, which directly influenced job satisfaction.
Job satisfaction
Researchers also found that teachers with high self-efficacy reported students engaged in
learning and lower stress levels. However, this depended upon their perception of job satisfaction
and working conditions in the environment. In comparison, teachers with low self-efficacy
demonstrated higher stress levels, contingent upon those same factors (Betoret, 2009; Klassen &
46
Chiu, 2010; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007). Despite these differences, researchers examined variables
such as time, different grade levels, and teaching experience to sustain accountability in the
profession, according to the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and National
Council on Teacher Quality. Within these organizations stems the 1983 publication entitled “A
Nation at Risk,” a report aimed at improving teaching performance (Wolters & Daugherty, 2007;
Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997; Woolfolk, Hoy, & Burke Spero, 2005). A study by Tschannen-Moran et
al. (1998) links self-efficacy changes with teachers’ experiences and advancement in the learning
environment, such as enrolling in continuing education courses; adversely, teachers might remain
complacent in their careers.
As Klassen and Chiu (2010) pointed out, although these mixed results demonstrate various
teacher self-efficacy pathways, further research on the effects of efficacy change in 21st- century
learning environments is needed to determine the correlation between teacher and student
performance in modern settings. Along these lines, efficacy change through rigorous training
sessions is needed, as reported by the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future
(1996) at Teachers College, Columbia University. Most importantly, the self-analysis process
through teachers’ reflections and professional development opportunities offer positive leadership-
follower mentoring relationships (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk, 2001).
On the contrary, research by Ouellette et al. (2018) on teacher job satisfaction and stress in
urban elementary schools showed that these factors resulted in no significant changes in
classrooms. However, school climate and social networks were organizational factors for change.
Specifically, researchers Beshai, McAlpine, Weare, and Kuyken (2016) suggested that the use of
mindfulness and stress interventions may improve a teacher’s ability to self-manage stress.
Additionally, school-wide urban policies focused on teachers’ well-being interconnected with
47
individual interventions may improve occupational stress and job satisfaction (Greenberg, Brown,
& Abenavoli, 2016).
Occupational performance within an organization is crucial for it to thrive and sustain a
healthy, productive workforce. Stress factors related to inadequate performance may suggest
dysfunctional results and diminishment in self-efficacy, student achievement, and job satisfaction.
Other reasons for the teacher retention crisis have to do with leadership-follower relationships, a
toxic school culture, and unrealistic accountability measures from urban, high-poverty schools.
Teacher retention
Glazer (2018) reported that teachers leaving their profession in the United States before
retirement raises significant concerns. Results show trends in novice and former teachers or
invested leavers exiting the profession due to better job security and treatment elsewhere despite
their qualifications. In one study, Deal and Peterson (2016) reported that a toxic school culture
hinders working conditions and affects well-being. In turn, teacher and student performance are
diminished due to school violence, staff victimization, and employee-parental role conflicts.
Compounding these negative stress factors, repeated harm to physical and mental well-being may
lead to depression, anxiety, and suicide from these toxic conditions. For these reasons, the crisis
of teachers leaving the profession nationwide was attributed to a lack of motivation and job
commitment (Vettenburg, 2002).
On the contrary, Kelchtermans (2009b) examined Nias’ (1989) flat career concept for a
productive workforce. He states:
From that perspective, career promotion is not so much a “moving up” in the hierarchy of
positions (since the position most often remains more or less the same), but rather a
48
“growing” of one’s professionalism. In that case, the focus of attention shifts toward the
experiences of the person in the job and, ultimately, in their working lives over time. (p.
29)
Significantly, Nias (1989) explored social promotion for teacher appreciation and
recognition utilizing horizontal level promotion for meaningful engagement; for instance,
leadership collaboration with staff on designing innovative programs for differentiated populations
suggests fundamental factors for a motivated, productive workforce. Horizontal promotion may
be a problem-solving approach for teachers to remain in the profession, despite the challenges
reported and may resolve sources of turnover behaviors.
Regarding younger generations of teachers, the Learning Policy Institute (as cited in
Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017) reported that college enrollment rates dropped by
35% between 2009 and 2014, causing a decrease of 240,000 teachers entering the profession,
adding to excessive teacher shortages (Broadbent, 1958; Fisch, 2000; Lang, 2001; Sutcher et al.,
2016). This cycle continues to influence occupational performance.
Turnover Behaviors
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 1990), in public school
where more than half of the students received either free or reduced-price lunches, teacher turnover
rates were higher (about 10 percent in the 1990-91 school year). By contrast, in public schools
where less students received either free or reduced-price lunches, the average turnover rate was
approximately 8 percent.
In a dissertation by Tina S. Johnson entitled, “An Exploration of Teacher Turnover and
Migration in an Urban Public School District in North Carolina,” which sought to explore high
49
teacher turnover in a large, urban, public school district in North Carolina, during the 2010-2015
timeframe, teacher turnover increased from 10.08% to 14.95%.
Waldman et al. (2015) reported on the effects of turnover behaviors and intentions to leave
through transformational leadership practices. In this study, generalized linear modeling (HGLM)
analysis monitored 375 Chinese employees from 96 workgroups and reported transformational
leadership findings at the group and individual levels to understand the turnover process. Results
suggest employees’ intentions were reduced with effective transformational leadership practices,
reinforcing March and Simon’s (1958) “push-to–pull” and “push-to-stay” leave factors on general
behaviors (as cited in Tse, Huang, & Lam, 2013, pp. 764-765). Mitchell et al. (2001) explored
withdrawal reasons based on social networks. Researchers cited negative occupational behaviors
due to dissatisfaction from abusive and unfair leadership practices that possibly result in
dysfunctional turnover instead of inspiring and supporting teachers, ultimately leading to negative
job productivity and performance (Reina et al., 2018; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999;
Bhattacharya, 2008; Campion, 1991; Holtom, Mitchell, Lee, & Inderrieden, 2006; Tepper, 2000).
Furthermore, teachers possibly exit the profession due to stress from unfair leadership
practices that linger and become occupational hazards linked to functional deficiency and
achievement gaps. The correlation between occupational stress and turnover behaviors may
influence teacher retention (Gilboa, Shirom, Fried, & Cooper, 2008). Alternatively, leadership
styles with developmental mentoring relationships create loyalty and growth within the
organization because they minimize decision tendencies to exit the profession, influence them to
stay, and may optimize work performance (Waldman et al., 2015).
In support, a study by Sun and Wang (2016) reported the relationship between actual
turnover and intentions in public organizations. Results demonstrate that actual turnover behavior
50
occurs with higher intentions, suggesting that transformational leadership practices may deter the
intentions and incline towards a more collaborative culture by hiring new employees and
establishing culture continuity (Boyne et al., 2011; Meier & Hicklin, 2008). Additionally,
McCarthy et al. (2011) found that a culture affording preventative strategies for teachers directly
correlated with 158 high school teachers’ perceptions of occupational satisfaction; however, this
study reported no intentions to leave the profession. Approximately 46% of the teachers’
intentions to leave and 53% of the teachers’ intentions to transfer in past years were significant in
the continuum between attitudes and behaviors. Therefore, perceptions are determining factors
that suggest that careful monitoring and balancing of occupational demands by the administration
may deter teachers from leaving the teaching profession. McCarthy et al. (2009) examined how
the prevention of stress may dismiss it altogether.
Such conclusions led researchers such as Jung (2010), Lee and Hong (2011), and Selden
and Moynihan (2000) to understand voluntary turnover based on a unit analysis. An investigation
by Pitts, Marvel, and Fernandez (2011) found that school districts’ responses to individual teacher
needs may reduce turnover factors and lead to an understanding of retention. Sun and Wang (2016)
found that turnover intentions lead to cognitive turnover decisions based on behaviors;
consequently, negative consequences reported a higher disparity from normal retention rates.
Furthermore, Jung (2010) examined the possibility of shaping and redirecting behaviors to increase
work performance from a collaborative standpoint and thereby to minimize the high cost to school
districts (Antonakis, Avolio, & Sivasubramaniam, 2003; Moynihan, Pandey, & Wright, 2012).
Cost to School Districts
51
Regarding the implications of teachers leaving the profession, a pilot study by Barnes et
al. (2007) reported significant results from five school districts based on the costs of teacher
turnover. Teachers in low-achieving schools reported higher shortages due to the districts’ lack of
investment in quality teacher training. Thus, the comparison between districts may skew the data
since hidden costs such as salaries, fixed costs, and average turnover are not represented in a fair
cost calculation. Interestingly, the Chicago public school district reported a cost of $17,872 per
teacher leaving the profession, totaling $86,571,968 with a population of 4,844 teachers in the
district. Specifically, the annual estimates totaling between $76 and $128 million for turnover
costs in districts with low student achievement suggest a relationship between teacher turnover
and loss of productivity.
Recent studies from the National Analysis reported that teacher shortage costs were
approximately $2.2 billion annually, and nationwide recruitment costs were $4.9 billion annually
based on findings by Castro et al. (2018). Consistent with these findings, Haynes (2014) reported
costs of approximately $1 billion to $2.2 billion annually due to teacher attrition and turnover. The
2012 teacher shortage reported 500,000 or 16% of teachers leaving the profession by either
walking out or transferring to other districts. Also, the Department of Education Teacher Follow-
up Survey noted 19% to 30% of teachers left before their fifth year, and these figures more than
likely alarmed decision-makers and highlighted the turnover crisis in the United States. Finally,
the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF) reported costs of $7.3
billion nationwide due to teacher turnover (New York University, 2015).
The Morrison Institute (cited in Hunting et al., 2017) reported that teacher recruitment and
retention were factors that influenced an increase in student achievement because there were fewer
financial implications due to teacher turnover. Breaux and Wong (2003) reported costs of
52
approximately $50,000 in hiring new teachers, in comparison to Ingersoll and Perda (2009), who
reported costs of between $34,000 and $76,000. Similarly, Reina et al. (2018) determined that
employee retention costs can represent approximately 90% to 200% of a teacher’s annual salary.
Costs include the human resource hiring process and, most importantly, the losses due to damaged
relationships in organizations, as cited by Boushey and Glynn (2012) and Cascio (2015). These
losses to an organization affect its continuity as a whole (Allen, Bryant, & Vardaman, 2010;
Eckardt, Skaggs, & Youndt 2014); Heavey, Holweday, & Hausknecht, 2013; Holtom, Mitchell,
Lee, & Eberly, 2008).
The studies mentioned above and research may induce policymakers to consider these
astounding district costs as wasteful and lead them to value the benefits of staff wellness programs
and training to minimize the effects of stress, ultimately benefiting occupational and district
performance. Such teacher retention strategies or tactics based on an equitable moral school culture
that considers staff well-being can ultimately minimize stress on teachers and students (Haynes,
2014; New York University, 2015). Jackson (2014) suggested that looking into the mirror may
reflect why people quit bosses instead of jobs. These detrimental costs to the district may adversely
affect school culture and create even higher losses related to qualified professionals.
School Culture
Teacher self-efficacy, rooted in the belief norms of school culture, is unified through
perceptions of job satisfaction and working conditions. A school culture with both positive and
negative teacher-student relationships develops through bonding of commitments and through
examples that permeate school culture. Similarly, this extends to encompass parental and
community engagement, specifically through the acceptance of acculturation and diversity. This
53
shapes and maintains the traditions of a belief platform based on supportive leadership and leads
to a strong culture in continuous reform, which affects teacher-student achievements. Therefore,
these minimal efficacy changes based upon a constructivist platform are dependent upon staff
awareness to improve and act on learning practices, thus producing a competent educational
workforce. In effect, this suggests that students should adopt positive cultural patterns from
teacher-student relationships based on high performance and collaborative efforts while at the
same time cultivating individuality for growth.
Additionally, Figure 2.7, the How People Learn Framework (Guthrie et al., p. 52),
demonstrates the learning components necessary to better understand learning in both adults and
students, as well as teacher-student relationships, for optimal performance. A moral school culture
continuously supports efficacy change in a learning-centered environment. Such a culture aims to
achieve a platform of prior knowledge and the engagement of new knowledge in order to motivate
new constructs of knowledge. Anderson (2015) describes that children’s metacognitive awareness
of their learning is transmitted, negotiated, and recreated to construct meaningful new knowledge
in their lives, which may increase student performance. This suggests that adults’ metacognitive
awareness is a determining factor for knowledge constructs, linking teaching experiences and
bonding teacher-student relationships (Tschannen-Moran et al., 1998).
These group dynamics and relationships contribute to high achievement, especially in
school cultures that engage in reciprocity and maintain synergy in the socio-cultural learning
environment (Lee, 2010). In effect, risk-taking behaviors develop that are necessary for teaching
effectiveness and performance growth. The self-efficacy of a teacher changes within a school
culture. These changes are determining factors in how a teacher approaches the ever-increasing
21st-century accountability standards in education, and stress effects may mediate the outcomes.
54
Therefore, policymakers need to address the stress that teachers face in the 21st century by making
it a priority to change the unavoidable detrimental outcomes that may occur systematically.
Transformational Wellness Stress Policy
Servant Leadership in an Ethical, Moral Culture
Servant leadership is a leadership philosophy in which the primary goal of the leader is to
serve. This type of leadership differs from traditional leadership, where the leader's main focus is
the thriving of their company or organizations. A servant leader is one who values contributions
and opinions from everyone and regularly seeks out feedback and opinions.
A school’s policy should focus on a productive, healthy environment in which its staff
contributes to their professional development and performance, thus positively influencing their
health, behavior, and decision to stay in the profession. These outcomes depend mainly upon the
willingness of policymakers to make teacher wellness a priority, thus creating a healthy school
culture.
Castro (2017) pointed out how working conditions are essential factors that determine
whether or not teachers leave the profession. Ingersoll (2012) recommended that policies between
districts and school administrators be amended continuously. Servant leader policymakers should
engage in transformational practices through active communication and empathy to alleviate stress
factors within the working environment from physiological, physical, and behavioral perspectives,
which will ultimately influence teacher performance and retention.
Systemic healthy workplace policies provide necessary resources for schools and directly
influence communities by reducing teacher turnover and increasing student achievement. The
National Institute of Occupational Safety (NIOSH) conducts Health Hazard Evaluations (HHE) to
55
pinpoint health hazards in the workplace and provides recommendations on ways these hazards
can be reduced in order to prevent illness and create a safe environment. In 2015, such an
evaluation significantly found that children were experiencing negative symptoms such as
headaches, coughs, itchy eyes, sore throats, and runny noses at schools when compared with adults.
Stress effects existing in the learning environment may create detrimental occupational hazards on
well-being, suggesting that a school’s policy may be ineffective.
In Abbott v. Burke (1981), there was a complaint filed by the Education Law Center on
behalf of 20 children who attended public schools in the urban cities of East Orange, Camden,
Jersey City, and Irvington, New Jersey. The court ultimately found that school children from more
impoverished communities were receiving inadequate education and declared this
unconstitutional. After that, the court mandated the state to provide an equitable education to all
children. Thereafter, Abbott school districts in New Jersey were provided resources so that their
students would receive their constitutionally mandated public education.
Despite this ruling, in 2010, Governor Chris Christie halted school funding programs,
which provided resources to “unhealthy” schools. However, the New Jersey Work Environment
Council (WEC) works alongside community, labor, and environmental organizations to ensure
safe jobs and health school cultures. In 2016, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills researched
21st-century learning environments and examined the perspectives of the Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) regarding challenges presented in the 21st
century. It was recommended that learning environments be established with a holistic approach
by addressing an individual’s social, emotional, and physical well-being, all of which directly
influence positive relationships.
56
Eugene Bardach, a professor at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of
California, Berkeley, designed an eightfold path of policy analysis: “1) define the problem, 2)
assemble some evidence, 3) construct the alternatives, 4) select the criteria, 5) project the
outcomes, 6) confront the tradeoffs, 7) decide, and 8) tell your story” (2012, p. 10). Policymakers
in the urban Camden and Newark Public School Districts, for example, should engage various
constituents in policymaking. These would include the Board of Education, superintendent,
administrators, teachers, students, union, and the community, and follow Bardach’s eightfold
pathway to transform their policies so that they may keep pace with the increasing educational
demands of the 21st century.
One insight from Diane Ravitch (as cited in Miller, 2013) states:
Genuine school reform must be built on hope, not fear; on encouragement, not threats; on
inspiration, not compulsion; on trust, not on carrots and sticks; on belief in the dignity of
the human person, not a slavish devotion to data; on support and mutual respect, not a
regime of punishment and blame. To be lasting, school reform must rely on collaboration
and teamwork among students, parents, teachers, principals, administrators, and local
communities. (par. 31)
Significantly, policymakers may establish domains of learning (Bloom et al., 1956:1)
utilizing servant practices of empathy, active communication, and process development or
transformational policies, all of which may create effective teacher leadership and learning, as seen
on the Table 17.2 change model. What is servitude, and how does it apply to lessen the effects of
teacher stress and minimize turnover? Sun (2018) defined the servant leader as an active listener
engaging in honest feedback for growth opportunities. For example, when there are unjust
conscious decisions causing harm to others, it would be the responsibility of the aggrieved party
57
to make choices to bond communication channels for effective relationships. This suggests an
experiential process of changing the status quo and making a move towards compassionate
healing, creating opportunities to develop in conversations that will contribute to internal growth
through reflection practices (Nidditch, 1975). Moreover, this approach would minimize the effects
of stress on well-being, promote teacher efficacy and improve student performance, and positively
impact and bring stability to the nationwide teacher retention crisis.
Despite the persistent nationwide teacher retention crisis, Castro (2017) asserts the need
for further research specifically on teacher attrition at urban schools where the impact on student
academic achievement is more severe compared to suburban districts. In addition, the crisis may
engage policymakers to consider the constructivist approach proposed by Bandura (1977)
regarding the learning spectrum of thinking skills: cognition, environmental, and behavioral
(problem-solving, curiosity, and moral sense in thinking skills) within a psychological safety zone.
Researchers Avey et al. (2012) and Van Dyne et al. (2003) noted the potential increase in work
productivity essential for a learning environment while using a constructivist approach.
Moreover, policymakers might consider Deal and Peterson’s (2016) examination of an
ethical school culture based on a set of core moral beliefs. He suggests shaping leadership
standards on a belief platform of supportive staff, students, and community. In effect, he states
that a thriving culture can reform itself and promote teacher and student performance because it
fosters ethical norms in schools where policymakers make wellness a priority.
A study by Walumbwa and Schaubroeck (2009) examined the differences in ethical
leadership and teachers’ voice behaviors. Voice behavior is defined as behavior that emphasizes
the expression of a constructive challenge with the intent to improve rather than merely criticize.
Voice behavior challenges the way things are usually done and attempts to make changes that are
58
constructive rather than critical. Previous literature states that an ethical culture and psychological
safety determined the relationship between administrators and teachers (Detert & Burris, 2007).
For example, a current study by Sagnak (2017) recruited 345 teachers from 25 primary and
secondary schools in Turkey to complete four surveys and questionnaires to obtain information
about teachers’ attitudes in voicing their opinions and their administration’s leadership behaviors.
Findings reported a positive correlation between ethical administrative leadership and teachers’
voice behaviors, suggesting that administrators who distribute their decision-making power to
include their employees tend to have more empowered, productive teachers. Hence, it is evident
that differences between administrators’ leadership styles can impact their professional
relationships with teachers, minimize stress effects, increase job performance, and ultimately
increase student achievement (Sagnak, 2017).
Regarding a policy wellness plan that fosters student performance, research by Anderson
(2015) reported that children’s metacognitive abilities for learning are achieved through
transmission, then negotiated and recreated to construct essential new knowledge in their lives.
Most importantly, these connections influence the group dynamics of relationships within a school
culture by encouraging achievement. Hence, the ethical norms of trust, quality instruction, and
risk-taking character traits build growth essential for survival and adaptability in the competitive
21st century. If leaders want to promote an optimal ethical environment for staff and students, then
a psychological safety zone with open communication must be established to create a positive
climate. Lastly, the educational learning environment is complex, and authentic moral leadership
as a daily practice requires discourse engagement. An authentic moral foundation includes the
school’s community, policies, cultural norms, mission, and vision to realize effective,
transformative wellness policies.
59
The moral authenticity within a school culture supports positive relationships. This
sympathetic understanding of life and the self can further make connections to meet the needs of
children and adults (Dewey, 1932; Robert Coles, 2000). However, school leadership, driven by
performance and accountability measures using different instruments, including high-stakes
testing, can disrupt the nature of moral authenticity. For example, many conflicting situations can
arise when the demands of school districts’ initiatives collide with administrators’ values. Thus,
their ethical practices are compromised due to the demands of the system. We are reminded that
ethical leadership practices address the purpose of education and establish ethical behaviors that
promote collaboration and social justice and value the viewpoints of the less privileged (Starratt,
1996; Beck, 1992; Noddings, 1984; Shapiro & Gross, 2013). This may lead to retention of high-
quality teachers, this evidence-based research concludes.
Also, teacher retention depends on re-evaluating an authoritarian leadership style and
finding attributes that reduce occupational stress factors that deter from achieving optimal
performance. Notably, communication between administrators and teachers has been imbalanced.
For example, after each performance evaluation session, teachers are usually given only a pass or
fail “grade” in their performance without any constructive feedback to help them understand what
aspects of their work need further improvement. When a teacher voices his/her concern or provides
a reason for a specific situation related to a poor performance grade, these concerns are
immediately shut down by the administration instead of addressing them in a professional manner
(Sagnak, 2017).
This type of unidirectional communication fosters a hostile environment for teachers who
feel that they do not have a safe zone to express their opinions freely, thus creating stress factors
within the learning environment. While an authoritarian leadership does not give voice to its staff,
60
it does create a sense of efficiency in the workplace and influences occupational performance in
another way. For example, an agenda decision made by the administrator can be implemented
immediately without objections or advice from the rest of the staff. This sense of efficiency and
strict curriculum can result in individual high test scores in comparison to district and nationwide
scores. Authoritarian leadership may be beneficial but can also be potentially destructive if the
leader makes poor decisions without the need to consult with the rest of the team (Sagnak, 2017).
In addition, authoritarian leadership may be detrimental to the general spirit of the
community. An authoritarian administration often leads to an unethical leadership style that
hinders trusting relationships with teachers (Sagnak, 2017). A more distributive leadership
approach, on the other hand, builds on constructivism with a moral leadership platform and
democratic citizenship. Schools face many challenges; for example, bureaucratic state policies can
promote a rigidness within a teaching framework. However, administrators may consider meeting
all personnel involved to discuss new challenges and find solutions to resolve any role conflicts
from this situation. It is through these challenges, and this type of distributive leadership style, that
the school culture can sustain itself to perform at capacity. Hence, a distributed leadership style
leans toward a more guided servant leadership practice, where staff empowerment may influence
decisions on regulations, expectations, and resources. As Taylor (1992) pointed out, “horizons of
significance” requires reflection for dynamic relationships to develop (p. 3).
In summary, managerial practices that disrupt an employee’s desire to continue to work in
their profession because of the authoritarian style of those practices more than likely cause teachers
to want to leave their profession (Ballinger, Lehman, & Schoorman, 2010; Fleishman & Harris,
1998; Harris, Wheeler, & Kacmar, 2009). However, administrators with ethical transformational
leadership principles care for their teachers and strive to achieve moral authenticity within the
61
school culture, thus contributing to student achievement and professional growth and possibly
reducing teacher turnover. Jara (2016) wrote the “one-size fits all” solution ingrained in teacher
training may result in diminished outcomes after reporting a crisis and lead to a request for a
change in the profession.
In particular, the Urban School administration would benefit from the belief platform
suggested by McCleskey (2014), who set forth three leadership theories – situational,
transformational, and transactional – that built upon the century of leadership literature and
definitions. Burns (1978) defined the transformational leader as “one who raises the followers’
level of consciousness about the importance and value of desired outcomes and the methods of
reaching those outcomes” (p. 141). In effect, this administrative leadership platform engages
collaborative teams through a shared school-district vision/mission necessary for staff professional
development. In effect, problem-solving and building teacher self-efficacy through inspiration
suggest an increase in occupational performance and a reduction in teacher turnover. These
leadership practices value the ability to be sensitive to all parties of the organization during times
of 21st-century challenges; accordingly, to reason but not argue, to find a solution but not blame,
and consequently eliminating sources of stress that affect well-being [Urban School (pseudonym)
administration interview, Balboa, December 2018].
The research, as mentioned above, may suggest that a transformative wellness policy
provided by servant leadership in an ethical school culture may deter the teacher retention crisis
and minimize stress effects that hinder well-being. Such a policy would eliminate negligent
practices by an administration that create health hazards to teachers and affect their cognitive
abilities and performance. Smith and Ward (2012) determined that many factors, such as
environmental or motivational factors, may affect creative processes and domains in memory,
62
decision-making, and problem-solving. Dennison and Shenton (2018) suggest that school
administrations facing complex demands due to state accountability measures, in turn, create
hostile occupational demands for staff, leading to a diminishment in creative cognition systems.
The continuing concern for teacher stress in the 21st century requires further research so
that effective educational directives may be developed. Castro (2017) wrote about teacher retention
and attrition and explored district policymaking, including the prioritization of wellness programs
for human preservation (Saxena, 2016). Decades of research on teacher stress substantiate the
ineffective policies which bring about poor improvement outcomes for school districts, especially
regarding gaps in student achievement.
Despite teacher shortages, turnover, district costs, and stress factors that are evident in the
digital age of the 21st century, Klein (2007) wrote about the advantages of the “borderless world
of information technology” (p. 382). Technology organizations exert purposeful authoritarian
micromanagement and surveillance control on individuals through their marketing strategies.
However, according to German philosopher and social critic Herbert Marcuse (1966), these
technological advancements create more stress and a “surplus repression” – a consequence of the
social organization of scarcity and resources and a system organized around profit and
exploitation. Such systems influence occupational performance through the conformity of
behaviors within a hierarchical system of a labor force, such as top-down structures in educational
organizations.
The historical framework on teacher stress clearly defines occupational hazards from
sources that are detriments to well-being. Marcuse (1966) reminds us, at the societal level, a
different perspective to ponder:
63
From the slave revolts in the ancient world to the socialist revolution, the struggle of the
oppressed has ended in establishing a better system of domination; progress has taken place
through an improving chain of control… struggle might have been victorious-but the
moment passed. An element of self-defeat seems to be involved in this dynamic (regardless
of the validity of such reasons as the prematurity and inequality of forces). In this sense,
every revolution has also been a betrayed revolution. (pp. 90-91)
Recurrent existing scientific data may help to transform further research, which analyzes
stress effects on occupational performance in the 21st century. Detrimental stress factors cultivated
in authoritarian school districts affect teachers, students, and school culture, and possibly seeps
into the community, driving higher costs in top-down administrative levels. These results may
predict occupational stress health hazards for future generations. The scientific data may
positively change the ineffective health wellness policies that hold no regard for the preservation
of humanity. Dr. Shekhar Saxena (2016), a well-known Director of the World Health
Organization, described stress at the Neuroscience 2016 Convention as the health epidemic that
has exacerbated the global suicide rate.
Fink (2016) argues that overwhelming stress which detrimentally affects health, as
supported by the research data, has led to an increase in mortality rates. For this reason, a
multidisciplinary approach is needed when developing a transformational wellness policy, led by
servant leaders in an ethical, moral culture. This may lead to the successful implementation of a
wellness policy that utilizes conversation and empowerment, reduces stress, and increases teacher
performance and student achievement (Bardach, 2012).
Coping with the Stress
Cognitive Self-Efficacy Thinking with Mindfulness Professional Development
64
An extension to such a wellness policy may include training teachers in Mindfulness-Based
Stress Reduction (MBSR). This technique teaches an individual to view life in a more positive
way with energy, enthusiasm, composure and understanding. It enables them to cope more
effectively with stressful situations in which they find themselves. The Five Facet Mindfulness
Scale (FFMQ) includes specific steps: “observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging
of inner experience, and non-reactivity to inner experience” (Baer et al., 2008, p. 25). The use of
this questionnaire can improve perceptual awareness of stress, improve thinking skills in decision-
making, and deter overload. Researchers examined numerous studies on stress suppression in
healthy adults and reported detrimental effects on learning and memory (Schmidt-Hieber et al.,
2004; Simon et al., 2005). Therefore, an educational policy that encompasses mindfulness and
other training modules for staff that focuses on stress perception can be established and guided by
an expert coach, which in turn will reduce teacher stress and turnover.
Flook et al. (2013) performed a study researching the effectiveness of mindfulness
interventions exclusively set for teacher participants. It was reported that teacher turnover due to
chronic burnout is an educational challenge in the 21st century. In this study, results in a
mindfulness control group showed an increase in self-compassion and positive teaching behaviors,
both necessary for a reduction in burnout due to stress. In comparison, teachers who did not
receive any intervention reported lower self-efficacy and an increase in psychological symptoms.
However, longitudinal studies are needed in meditative research to discover the benefits of
mindfulness training on stress for inclusion and validation in educational policies.
Wellness policies may minimize compassion fatigue and burnout symptoms and increase
teachers’ attention in stressful learning environments before their perceptions of stress are distorted
(Tang et al., 2014; Thompson et al., 2014; Flook et al., 2013). In effect, such a policy may
65
influence occupational performance based on metric systems that balance outputs and outcomes
(Bardach, 2012). Training would include how to engage in self-regulation throughout the three
meditative states in mindfulness meditation: effortful action, reduced mind wandering, and
effortless presence. Tang et al. (2014) described more focused attention on the quiet mind and
reflection on one moment at a time.
On the contrary, Goleman and Davidson (2017), authors of Altered Traits, offer a different
perspective on meditative practices. These researchers demonstrated that besides the calm mental
states that meditation can produce, longer-lasting personality traits can occur. They argue that
short daily doses of mindfulness training will not get an individual to the highest level of lasting
positive change. Smart practices are needed and one should seek feedback from a teacher
specializing in this technique. In addition, an individual should embrace a broader view of
themselves. Both of these are missing in mindfulness training. Data from their lab point to new
methodologies to develop a broader array of mind-training methods. Teachers can collaborate
with trainers to achieve the maximum benefits possible, which will help them to deal with stressful
occurrences in their work environment and, in turn, increase performance and student
achievement.
Accordingly, a school organization and its human resources department can implement
their shared mission/vision by offering training programs for teachers to combat stress, which is a
prime example of servant leadership. Dr. W. Edwards Deming, a statistician who helped rebuild
the Japanese economy in the 1950s and, through his design, the American economy, reported that
work performance and productivity could be increased by changing attitudes and managerial
behaviors (Deming, 1981). This process may change an organization’s culture with a committed,
loyal staff that profoundly shapes policies based on the community’s needs. In effect, effective
66
procedures and systems that are in place throughout the organization can positively influence
managerial/employee relationships and reduce destructive behaviors that hinder performance.
Most importantly, effective policies may cultivate change and improve the mental health of
teachers in a school environment (Fixsen, Naoom, Blasé, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005; Weist et
al., 2014). School administrators who can admit problems exist in their system and are willing to
search for ways to solve them using a multidisciplinary approach would benefit all professionals
in the educational field.
Summary
The complexities of the digital age have increased in the 21st century, and accountability
standards have become more stringent; thus, an individual’s well-being is threatened by different
sources of stress in the learning environment. Although research has confirmed that cognitive
overload is attributed to various stress factors in the teaching profession that influence
performance, school administrators have been slow to implement wellness policies for teachers,
who are leaving the profession in astounding numbers. Previous research by Kyriacou and
Sutcliffe (1978) examined Dunham’s (1976) findings on 658 teachers with acute and chronic stress
effects. Additionally, scholarly literature suggests that stress is responsible for detrimental health
effects, creating an urgent need for wellness policies for teachers. These are practical insights that
should encourage policymakers to propose new policies to reduce stress for teachers and increase
teacher performance, thus decreasing teacher turnover.
However, until school administrators initiate such policies, teachers may have no
alternative but to expand their cognitive thinking skills and mindfulness to compete with the
increasing technological advances, borderless globalization, and challenging educational
requirements of the 21st century (Goswami, 2014). Policymakers need to implement policies based
67
on a perspective of moral reasoning for human welfare (Nucci, 2004), and teachers must be
proactive and adapt in order to overcome stress, described as the health epidemic of the 21st century
(Saxena, 2016). Policies based on a knowledge system for social justice must be established so
that stress does not negatively affect staff, students, and the community, and so that teachers will
be deterred from exiting the profession. According to President Barack Obama (2009), the
educational system must be transformed to meet the global demands of the 21st century, where
jobs are exported to different countries and pathways are being opened to alternatives besides a
traditional education. The present educational system is no longer sufficient, and there is an urgent
need to prepare the next generation for this rapidly changing economy (Stewart, 2017).
Authoritarian administrators supported by a system that exerts pressure to meet unrealistic
performance standards dismantle social networks and relationships within the school community
and create many stress factors that affect health (Reina et al., 2018). The abundant literature
indicates that teachers assume multiple roles in their profession, and the accompanying stress is
not addressed sufficiently by policymakers, thereby resulting in detrimental effects on their well-
being and causing overwhelming numbers of teachers to leave the profession. An effective way
to deal with these issues is to create systemic change within school administrations by
implementing transformational wellness policies for teachers and creating an ethical, moral culture
which can “humanize” moral dilemmas, with servant leadership setting examples and acting with
the right intentions (Rochford et al., 2016). School mental health policies are priorities that can
no longer be avoided so that teachers may be prepared to meet 21st-century global competitive
challenges in the United States.
The abundance of the literature suggests that teaching is a stressful profession and hinders
a teacher’s emotional and physical well-being (Selye, 1936; Dantzer, 2016; McEwen, 2016;
68
Wilson et al., 2011; Fink, 2016). Specifically, workload capacity, multitasking, low job control,
and inadequate leadership administration (Schyns & Schilling, 2013) all negatively impact a
teacher’s occupational performance (Prasad et al., 2016). As a result of such studies, educational
policies may contribute to the nationwide teacher shortage and retention crisis (Sancini et al., 2010;
Cooper & Marshall, 1976; Ferguson, 1973; Kristensen et al., 2005; Sutcher et al., 2016).
While the persistent crisis of teacher stress continues to exist in the 21st century, this body
of research may minimize stress factors and result in better staff performance. Also, it may
improve retention rates due to school districts implementing appropriate wellness policies to
reduce occupational stress, specifically educational policies that consider Abraham Maslow's self-
actualization or realization of one's own potential from his Third Force Psychology (1998). He
wrote: “What a man can be, he must be. This need we may call self-fulfillment, namely, the
tendency for him to become actually what he is potentially to become, everything he is capable of
becoming. . .” (p. 3).
Such policies can strengthen teacher self-efficacy with servant leadership practices
supported by well-being programs for optimal health (Kabat-Zinn, 2017).
This study reinforces the current educational research with a scientific understanding of
teachers’ and administrations’ perspectives on stress factors in an urban district and establish a
connection to detrimental outcomes on both teacher health and student achievement. This study
also demonstrates the critical need for the strategic implementation of well-being policies that aim
to reduce teacher stress, increase occupational performance, and improve teacher retention in
urban districts.
69
Chapter III: Methodology
Introduction
This action research qualitative study utilizes mixed methods based on the triangulation
method and analyzes the scores of three behavioral questionnaires, an interview, and an open
survey. Action research is an inquiry process that balances problem-solving actions with data-
driven collaborative analysis or research to understand underlying problem causes in order to make
future predictions about personal and organizational change (Reason & Bradbury, 2006). This
study reports differences between collected data from current and former teachers to determine to
what degree cognitive overload and occupational stress affect teacher performance, influence their
cognition, and result in teacher turnover. The researcher believes that by examining reliable data
from current and former teachers, potential risk factors can be identified that may affect
performance and teachers’ intentions to leave the profession.
The researcher’s plan included three questionnaires, an open survey, and an interview.
These instruments enabled the pursuit of these questions: 1) What are the levels of occupational
stress reported by the two groups of teachers? 2) What are the levels of occupational performance
reported by the two groups of teachers? 3) To what extent are the levels of occupational stress
related to the levels of occupational performance among the two groups of teachers? and 4) What
policies and procedures might be implemented by administrators to mitigate the possible effects
of occupational stress among teachers?
This knowledge-based chapter establishes the research methodology. Most importantly, it
can provide discrete categories for in-depth study and interpretation: (a) Research Design, (b)
Participants/Sample, (c) Data Collection, (d) Instrumentation, (e) Procedures, and (f) Data
Analysis. This chapter includes a summary.
70
Rationale for Research Design
The researcher designed an amalgam of both qualitative and quantitative methods to
incorporate a diverse use of three questionnaires, an open survey, and an interview to understand
better the findings on cognitive overload, occupational stress related to teachers’ performance, and
the effect of stress on teacher retention. Significantly, Modell (2009) cited this rationale to
integrate perspectives on emotions, as well as mental perspectives for empowering voices, to
further understand new perspectives associated with reality (Maxwell & Mittapalli, 2010).
Further, Buckley and Chiang (1976) suggest this research methodology as a problem-
solving map, and the combination of specific methods used to produce outcomes in a mixed-
methods approach supports an understanding of this complex educational issue to address
problematic social injustices (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011; Morse & Niehaus, 2009). This
integration between narrative and data was referred to by Creswell et al. (2011) as “embedded
inquiry” between the processes of collection and analysis, as examined by Fetters et al. (2013).
Therefore, the researcher proceeded with evidence on qualitative and quantitative evidence for the
integration of a mixed-methods inquiry to possibly generate specific goals throughout the design.
Numerous studies were examined to justify the embedded inquiry approach (Bryman, 2006:
Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011).
The embedded approach is used when one type of data is most critical to the researcher
(e.g., when the researcher is most interested in quantitative data, then qualitative data plays
a supportive role). This approach is used when different questions require different types
of data (qualitative and quantitative). (Terrell & Edmonds, 2017, p. 21)
According to Bazely (2004):
71
Mixed methods are inherently neither more nor less valid than specific approaches to
research. As with any research, validity stems more from the appropriateness,
thoroughness, and effectiveness with which those methods are applied and the care given
to thoughtful weighing of the evidence than from the application of a particular set of rules
or adherence to an established tradition. (as cited in W. Creswell, 2011)
Brooks and Normone (2015) noted previous studies on qualitative research that focused on
the social or political sciences during the mid-twentieth century. However, a new interdisciplinary
shift approach to educational leadership in social sciences and policy-making suggests the
researcher refine and clarify the problem for effective data collection and analysis today (Creswell,
2016). However, Ritchie et al. (2013) and others argue that many factors influence a qualitative
study because of its flexibility. For this reason, there are numerous approaches and alternatives
available which can be undertaken during the research process. Bloomberg and Volpe (2012)
suggest that researchers should be cognizant that a different approach may occur during the
analytical process.
According to Denzin and Lincoln (2011), “Qualitative research is difficult to define clearly.
It has not theory or paradigm that is distinctively its own… Nor does qualitative research have a
distinct set of methods or practices that are entirely its own” (p. 6).
Taking into consideration Action Research or Participatory Action Research (PAR) to
investigate these questions and to validate the context, as clearly defined by Parkin (2009), an
effective methodology for systemic change in functional working conditions was needed. For this
reason, Lingard et al. (2008) suggest the importance of participants in direct questioning as the
researcher reflects and evaluates events to build a better future from the present. Whitehead (2008,
2009) described them as “living theories” necessary for educational research for the benefit of
72
social change. More important, the researcher was interested in exploring the types of stress
factors experienced by teachers. It was crucial for everyone involved in this investigation (e.g.,
teachers, human resources department) to be fully engaged in this investigation for the continuity
of information that ensured meaningful results.
This qualitative research study was based on an action research design utilizing mixed
methods. A balance of quantitative and qualitative methods was used to structure valid
perspectives, findings, and opinions, as pointed out by Johnson et al. (2007). These diverse
methods can problem solve the issue of teacher stress using questionnaires, surveys, and
interviews, according to Buckley and Chiang (1976), who utilized the triangulation matrix design
(Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012). Some researchers argue that consistency throughout the research
process is important in producing validity (Morse et al., 2002). However, Patton (2002), Seale
(1999) and Seale (2007) suggest that the availability of choices in a mixed-method design, while
maintaining focus on the area of inquiry, may improve quality outcomes. The following
Triangulation Matrix/ Data Collection Plan illustrates how data was collected for this study.
Table 1
Triangulation Matrix (Data Collection Plan)
Research Questions Experience Enquire Examine

(Source 1) (Source 2) (Source 3)
1. What are the Field Notes Open Survey Human
levels of Resources
occupational Questionnaires: Department
stress reported by - Environmental representative
the two groups of Preference Inventory interview
teachers? (47 questions)
- Occupational Stress
Questions (8 questions)
- Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy
Scale (12 questions)
73
2. What are the Open Survey Questionnaires: Human
levels of -Environmental Resources
occupational Preference Inventory Department
performance (47 questions) representative
reported by the -Occupational Stress interview
two groups of Questions (8 questions)
teachers?
3. To what extent Interview Open Survey Human
are the levels of Human Resources Resources
occupational Department Questionnaire Department
stress related to representative -Environmental representative
the levels of Preference Inventory interview
occupational (47 questions)
performance
among the two
groups of
teachers?
4. What policies Open Survey Open Survey Human
and procedures Questionnaires: Resources
might be - Environmental Department
implemented by Preference Inventory representative
administrators to (47 questions) interview
mitigate the - Occupational Stress
possible effects Questions (8 questions)
of occupational - Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy
stress among Scale (12 questions)
teachers?
Research Questions and Assumptions
It was assumed that teachers experience cognitive overload and other stressors at work
regularly because their workload demands outweigh their biological capacity to cope. Therefore,
it was predicted that stress factors that contribute to cognitive overload (such as information load,
interpersonal load, change load, activity structure, and time structure) as measured by the
Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) influence a teacher’s ability to cope and perform
adequately.
74
teachers?
It was assumed that teacher experiences of cognitive overload may result in a lack of
motivation and commitment to their job and directly affect their performance in the classroom. It
was predicted that this overload may result in physical and psychological impairment to the
teachers, affect their occupational performance, and have an influence on teachers leaving the
profession.
It was assumed that teachers who experience very high cognitive overload at work are more
likely to leave their profession because extreme overload and stress may cause a lack of motivation
and commitment to their job. These stressors and extreme overload can be addressed by school
administrations making teacher safety and well-being a priority in their school districts and
offering teachers ways to cope with these stressors, thereby improving the teacher turnover rate in
their district.
It was assumed that teachers reporting stress factors that deter them from adequately
performing their roles would be in favor of administrators and leadership implementing programs
that will alleviate stress, initiating policies to make them feel more empowered so that their voices
are heard, and provide health benefits to treat symptoms of stress such as depression, anxiety,
burnout, and suicidal thoughts.
75
Methods of Data Collection
Participants
The participants in the sample study consisted of approximately 20 current teachers in the
Paterson Public School District that serves 25,000 students from 56 different schools, including
pre-kindergarten and kindergarten through 12th grade and who receive Special Education and
Bilingual/ESL services to accommodate the diversity of 40 languages in this district. The rationale
for this sample size was to allow for a margin of error and ensure validity and reliability. The
participants in the same study also consisted of 20 former teachers who were no longer working
as teachers, whether they retired early due to work-related stress or because they left the profession
entirely. Selected participants completed an open survey and an online questionnaire (comprised
of three separate questionnaires but combined on Survey Monkey). These instruments provided
demographic data, occupational stress levels, and cognitive performance levels from teachers in
an urban district.
In addition, an interview was conducted with an appointed staff member of the school
district’s Human Resources Department. The interview delved into the problem of teachers
leaving their profession due to work-related stress and included questions on teacher performance,
teacher stress, and the perceived effects of this stress on teacher retention. The interview with the
representative from the Human Resources Department was transcribed and kept confidential.
All current teachers were recruited from Urban Green School in Paterson, New Jersey.
Participants in the former teacher group are former employees at Urban Green School in Paterson,
New Jersey, who are either retired or no longer working in the teaching profession. For current
teachers, the researcher identified potential participants in her purposive sample by engaging in
76
meaningful, in-person contact and dialogue with her colleagues to understand their perceptions of
stress and work performance and to see whether they would be interested in participating in this
study by answering confidential questionnaires. The researcher had kept in touch with some of
these former employees who are no longer in the teaching profession. One of them was the point
person for a Retired Teachers Association and she agreed to allow me to email the members of her
organization (with their prior permission) to see if any of these former teachers would be interested
in participating in this study.
In order to identify potential participants, the researcher engaged in meaningful, in-person
dialogue with her colleagues during breaks in the workday (current teachers). If they indicated
interest, then the researcher obtained permission from them to send an email explaining the study
through either personally obtaining their email directly or, if they request the researcher to do so,
obtaining their work email through the online school directory. If they so desired, they could also
supply the researcher with their emails for the researcher to contact them. Permission to conduct
this research amongst my colleagues was granted by Dr. Annalesa Williams-Barker, Ed.D.,
Executive Director of the Department of Accountability, Paterson Public Schools, via
communication dated January 22, 2019.
Regarding former teachers, I had kept in touch with some former teachers from Urban
Green School, and one of these former teachers is head of a teachers’ retirement association. This
point person reached out to her membership and, with their permission, agreed to supply the
researcher with their email addresses so that personal emails may be sent explaining the study and
asking them if they wish to participate. Factors in the selection process included years of training
and teaching experience.
77
To identify an HR representative with whom the researcher would be performing a personal
interview, the researcher sent an email to the Human Resources Staff Recruiter, 90 Delaware
Avenue, Paterson, New Jersey, to ask for her assistance in identifying an HR representative whom
the researcher can interview. The researcher received an email from her on October 17, 2018,
indicating that she was willing to assist the researcher in this regard. When this HR representative
was identified, the researcher corresponded with him/her through his/her online school work email.
The participating Employee of Human Resources received the following information via
his or her work email:
“Thank you for participating in this research study. I will be asking you a few questions
regarding teacher performance and stress factors. Please answer every question truthfully and to
your best ability. This interview will be recorded with your permission but will be de-identified,
so your responses will be kept confidential. This interview is for research purposes only and will
not be shared with a third party. Your participation is voluntary, and you may stop your
participation without any penalty should you wish to terminate the study at any point.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to email me at
ybalboa@cse.edu.”
In order to study the stressors experienced by teachers that lead to teachers leaving their
profession, the researcher needed to include both current and former teachers who left their jobs
due to work-related stress. This type of recruitment sampling is referred to as purposeful, as cited
by Patton (1990), or as utilizing a purposive sampling (Merriam, 1998, 2009) or judgment
sampling (Gay, Mills, & Artisian, 2006). This sampling of participants who possess the correct
background and work history for data analysis possibly completes the investigation (Ritchie,
Lewis, Nicholls, & Ormston, 2013; Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012). As a result, to further explore
78
various perspectives for this study, it was essential that individuals of different groups who may
have experienced the same situations were included to emphasize standards of quality for research
design (Creswell, 2007). Therefore, both current and former teachers were included to ensure that
information was gleaned from participants with different demographics (Bloomberg & Volpe,
2012).
Procedure
This study utilized multiple approaches to collect information and data to answer the
research questions. To begin, participating teachers completed an open online survey and an online
questionnaire (comprised of three separate questionnaires) to address specific causes of work-
related stress and their sense of teacher job performance. Secondly, an interview was conducted
with an appointed staff member of the Human Resources Department to obtain an objective record
of teacher performances and previous efforts by the schools to reduce teacher stress. The
researcher did not report disaggregated results for any demographic subgroup of less than 10.
However, the researcher anticipated having more than sufficient participation in her study since
there had been much interest expressed by potential participants early on. Racial or ethnic
questions were not asked to protect the participants’ identities further. Sex and gender, as well as
the level of education, were not utilized in the analysis of the quantitative data. There was minimal
risk to all participants.
Online Open Survey
An open online survey and a combined questionnaire (consisting of the Environmental
Preference Inventory, Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale)
79
was filled out by 20 current teachers and 20 former teachers via Survey Monkey. As stated above,
the first group consisted of 20 current teachers who were employed and tenured, with at least four
years of teaching experience at the time of their participation and had completed graduate training.
The second group consisted of 20 former teachers who were no longer working as teachers at the
time of their participation. Collected data can easily show accurate and important information for
this study. Each question is clear, concise, and flexible with the intention to know more, which
requires extra time to analyze response rates and response biases (Jones et al., 2013). Participants
had the option to indicate their consent to participate via an electronic multiple-choice Yes or No
option at the start of the survey.
Participating teachers and former teachers were given an open online survey in which they
answered the following questions:
1. What are some stress factors that might affect your performance as a teacher?
2. What factors might influence or have influenced your decision to leave the teaching
profession?
3. How can these stress factors be addressed to prevent teachers from leaving their
profession?
These questions attempt to examine what current teachers and former teachers believe are the main
work-related stress factors that influence their performance and their decision (or indecision) to
leave the teaching profession.
Online Questionnaires
The researcher assessed a teacher population using online e-questionnaires to gather,
analyze, and interpret information with ease. There were three questionnaires, which are described
80
below: the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI), the Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and
the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES). Besides these advantages, a small teacher
population with established statistical validity provided authentic results on response rates. These
benefits were obtained through the planning of meaningful questions in a logical order. This design
was critical to analyze results for data interpretation of findings, as described by Jones et al. (2013).
The Internet Protocol function was turned off; therefore, it excluded first name, last name, email
address, IP address, and custom data so the participants cannot be personally identified. Each
survey participant was coded with a unique identification number. The Human Resources
employee who was interviewed was identified only by a pseudonym.
Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI)
The participants consisted of two groups. The first group consisted of 20 current teachers
who have been employed at least four years at the time of their participation and had completed
graduate training. The second group consisted of 20 former teachers who were no longer working
as teachers at the time of their participation. The Cognitive Overload Questionnaire subscale of
the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) determines the measurement of individual
capacities for tolerating information overload in occupational settings for five types of workload:
information load, interpersonal load, change load, activity structure, and time structure.
Information load measures if an individual is overloaded with work-related information,
interpersonal load assesses an individual’s experience of stress related to interpersonal
relationships at work, change load assesses an individual’s tolerance and experience for work-
related change, and activity structure measures an individual’s tolerance and experience to
complete work activities and meet expectations. Time structure is the subscale that assesses an
81
individual’s stress related to timelines and deadlines at work. The EPI consists of 47 Likert scale
questions and has been tested for validation and reliability (Haase, 2016).
The Occupational Stress Questionnaire
as teachers at the time of their participation. Sancini et al. (2010) found that stress from
occupational demands was a significant factor that negatively affected teacher performance. These
researchers examined different sources of stress reported by female kindergarten teachers on their
working conditions. Results suggested stressors at large such as repetitive work, continuous
demands on instructional time, workload with students, and the continuous interaction that their
job requires with children and their parents (homework assignments, report card night, and
discipline in the classroom). In effect, stressful working conditions identified by questionnaire
data can lead to the implementation of possible crisis prevention strategies that reduce harmful
stress before burnout occurs. The Occupational Stress Questionnaire measures the degree of
autonomy, decision-making independence, decision-making responsibility, issues of interaction,
and concerns about work effects on health.
Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES)
82
as teachers at the time of their participation. In Herman et al. (2018), the relationships between
elementary teachers’ self-efficacy, stress, burnout, and coping behaviors, as well as interventions
that would alleviate those factors for teachers, are examined. Results revealed that teachers’
adjustment patterns directly affected student outcomes and behaviors. Specifically, one instrument
called the Ohio Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) (short version) tested teachers’ self-
efficacy, instructional strategies, and classroom management (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001).
These profiles reported that 93% of teachers’ stress levels were high, supporting research that
teaching is a stressful occupation. In effect, high stress levels diminished well-being and
occupational performance (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009). Notably, Tschannen-Moran et al. (1998)
pointed out that teachers who participated in professional or continuing education coursework had
higher self-efficacy than teachers who remained complacent in their careers and did not partake in
such professional growth opportunities. The Work Performance Questionnaire subscale of the
short version of the TSES measures teacher’s efficacy in student engagement, instructional
strategies, and classroom management.
Interview with Human Resources Department Representative
A short, semi-structured one-to-one interview was conducted with a designated staff
member of the Human Resources Department of the Paterson Public School District. These
questions attempted to examine teachers’ work performance and stress factors that might have
contributed to their performance through a more objective point of view. This interview may not
have accurately reflected any personal experiences teachers might have had. However, it was
understood by the researcher that a person is always guarded in such meetings and formalities.
83
The interviewee was identified only by a pseudonym and was, at that time, an employee of
the Human Resources Department of the Paterson Public Schools. There were, at that time, at
least five employees in the HR Department. To avoid any risk of identification of the interviewee
after the study results are released, besides a pseudonym being used, any reference to gender, sex,
or personal demographics have not been disclosed. Identification is highly unlikely since the study
results have been generalized, and the interviewee has not been identified as a member of the HR
Department. Thousands of employees in the Paterson Public School District could have been
interviewed and contributed to the study results. Therefore, the researcher believes that the
identification of the interviewee herself is highly unlikely since her actual name, sex, and
demographics has not been disclosed as part of the study results.
The interview with the Human Resources employee was conducted by the researcher to
maintain confidentiality. It took place in a private office with only the interviewer and interviewee
present. The Human Resources employee was identified only by a pseudonym. The interviewee
did not provide any personal information. Alvarez Typing, an outside company, transcribed the
interview, and there are no personal identifiers in the transcript. The researcher stored the
interview transcript in a password-protected file on her personal computer. The digital recording
was locked in a cabinet belonging to the researcher, to be stored for a minimum of three years.
The interview data, based on the problem of teachers leaving their profession due to work-
related stress, included questions on teachers' performance, teachers' stress, and how stress affects
teacher turnover/retention.
According to Oakley (1998), an interview framework allows a researcher to record and
challenge practices and standards for the benefit of an effective interview on the content data. This
84
semi-structured interview consisted of the following open-ended questions for a more meaningful
interview (Jamshed, 2014):
1. What are some stress factors that you think might affect teacher performance?
2. What are some factors that you think might affect teachers leaving their jobs?
3. What are some measures schools have taken to help reduce stress for teachers?
4. Are these stress-reducing activities effective?
5. What are some activities you think would help teachers reduce stress and increase their
work performance?
6. Is there anything else you would like to share with me in regard to your experience
working in this diverse setting?
Analysis and Synthesis of Data
Fetters et al. (2013) pointed out the principles and practices of a mixed-method
investigation. In their article, Achieving Integration in Mixed Methods Designs – Principles and
Practices, they state:
Mixed methods research offers powerful tools for investigating complex processes and
systems in health and health care. Integration at the study design level occurs through three
basic mixed-method designs—exploratory sequential, explanatory sequential, and
convergent—and through four advanced frameworks—multistage, intervention, case
study, and participatory. Integration at the methods level occurs through four approaches.
In connecting, one database links to the other through sampling. With building, one
database informs the data collection approach of the other. When merging, the two
databases are brought together for analysis. With embedding, data collection and analysis
85
link at multiple points. Integration at the interpretation and reporting level occurs through
narrative, data transformation, and joint display. (p. 1)
Based on the quantitative data collection, Garza (2018) suggests that utilizing a factor
analysis approach using summaries from responses to questionnaires from key groups (current and
former teachers) statistically supports data credibility. Furthermore, the exploration of results
brings validity and reliability to qualitative coding in themes and trends throughout the study
(Castro, 2017). Similarly, Bloomberg and Volpe (2012) suggest following the outline found in
Figure 8.1 (p. 140) to examine data and taking subsequent steps in order to engage in a continuous
process prior to reporting and interpreting credible findings. In addition, they suggest that the use
of Table 7.4 (Template for Research Questions/Interview Questions Matrix) can gather meaningful
information.
The collection, classification, and distribution of information were analyzed using the
qualitative analysis software provided by Survey Monkey. However, Bloomberg and Volpe
(2012) argue that the data analysis from these programs may produce “data glut” (p.147) by
removing the emotional tone of the data. Similarly, researchers Guest, MacQueen, and Namey
(2012) agreed that data analysis referred to as “black box data” in research design methods lacked
transparency for valid and reliable data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Miles & Huberman, 1994).
Consequently, limiting a holistic broader perspective between data analysis and synthesis requires
a delicate balance of logic and continuity (Bloomberg and Volpe, 2012).
Researchers Coffrey and Atkinson (as cited in Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012) specifically
wrote:
86
Qualitative data, analyzed with close attention to detail, understood in terms of internal
patterns and forms, should be used to develop theoretical ideas about social processes and
cultural forms that have relevance beyond these data themselves. (p. 180)
Issues of Trustworthiness
Merriam and Granier (2019) stated the “trustworthiness in a qualitative study includes
reliability and validity guidelines,” as stated in Table 2.2, Strategies for Promoting Trustworthiness
and Rigor (p. 31). It supports continuity for the following strategies: triangulation, member
checks, reflexivity, audit trail, and meaningful descriptions. These safeguards ensured fair and safe
treatment for participants to support trustworthy findings.
Reliability and Validity
Gravetter and Forzano (2016) stated that research validity is dependent upon the accuracy
of the results and truthfulness of the design; in effect, the procedural measurements and their
variables that produce these results. Thus, it was the researcher’s goal to report important data
from valid external (general sample to larger sample size) and internal (explanations without
questioning) findings. In combination, according to research from Merriam and Granier (2019),
reliability can be determined by following the guidelines in their book, Assessing the Quality of
Qualitative Research. Each phase is determined through holistic questioning techniques to
determine trustworthiness in the design.
Ethical Considerations
87
The research process includes guidelines for responsibility, respect, safety, and fairness
towards both human and animal participants (Gravetter & Forzano, 2016). Historically, the first
Nuremberg Code guidelines protected human participants in studies; however, recently mandated
protection guidelines for research ethics from prior studies brought about the National Research
Act of 1974. Thereafter, the National Commission published the Belmont Report in 1979 as the
federal guidelines (Gillespie, 1999). Furthermore, the Institutional Review Board (IRB) is
responsible for the privacy, confidentiality, and protection of human participants in a study. The
board notes the risks and benefits to the participants, advises against discrimination, and
recommends that informed consent be obtained before reporting results in a research study.
Action research and ethics
Kurt Lewin (1946) reported that social and educational issues for structural change lead to
an authentic methodology approach defined as action research. Currently, Whitehead (2017)
proposes five stages necessary for influencing positive change in education by integrating with
social issues. Indeed, these educational influences such as “I am because we are” (Whitehead,
2011, p. 18) suggests the value of unity with global social change through conversations that
promote “living-global-citizenships” (p. 19) for the preservation of humanity. Thus, the Action
and Living Theory researchers’ role supports collaborative inquiry with global partnerships
(Whitehead, 2017). Similarly, Kemmis and McTaggart’s (2000) action research spiral (Figure 1.1)
represents the reflexivity required during processes of generating knowledge in action research.
Consistent with this, Elliot’s (1991) action research model (Figure 1.2) includes another
perspective with more dynamic features. Thus, the action research process is participatory and
requires ethical safeguards for participants.
88
Cheshire (as cited in Corti, Day, & Backhouse, 2000) stated that the ethical considerations
for the protection of research participants should include confidentiality, safety, and informed
consent while archiving data for the study. All the raw data has been stored in password-protected
files on the researcher’s personal computer. The digital recording has been stored in a locked
cabinet for a minimum of three years. The transcription of the HR representative interview has
been stored on the researcher’s personal computer in a password-protected file, and the company
(Alvarez Typing) conducting the transcription has erased it from their computer so that the
researcher is the only one with a copy of the transcription.
All online data, including the online consent form and paper consent form for the HR
employee, and digital recording were stored in a locked filing cabinet in the researcher’s home,
separate from all other study materials. Only the researcher has access to the password-protected
data files on her personal computer. In addition, the researcher is the only one that has a key to the
locked filing cabinet. Three years after completion of the study, the researcher will shred the
online survey results, online consent form, HR consent form, and the transcription using a cross-
shredder to ensure proper destruction of the documents and any legible information and will
destroy the digital recording. The researcher will also delete the computer files used to store the
response data.
This mixed-methods study conducted by the researcher provided confidential information
to protect from possible biases related to the researcher's position. The questionnaires were
developed by educational researchers with no affiliation to the researcher, so the questions given
to the participants were not biased to the situation at the school. These questionnaires consisted
of an Environmental Preference Inventory developed by a group of researchers in Educational and
Counseling Psychology at the University of Albany, New York; an Occupational Stress
89
Questionnaire developed and translated by a group of researchers at the University of Rome, Italy;
and a Teachers' Sense of Efficacy Scale (short form) developed by researchers at Ohio State
University and the College of William and Mary.
Chapter Summary
Cranton (as cited in Merriam & Greiner, 2019) specifically wrote on participants’
empowerment during the action research process:
Emancipatory knowledge is gained through a process of critically questioning ourselves
and the social systems within which we live. . . If we do not question current scientific and
social theories and accepted truths, we may never realize how we are constrained by their
inevitable distortions and errors. (p. 4)
The researcher’s aim to better understand the critical problem of teacher stress entailed
scientifically based inquiry to open discourse for changing school policy. Consequently, Lincoln,
Lynham, and Guba (2018) reported this as a unique approach to investigation. Further, Richardson
(2000) stated that the scope of a three-point triangulation matrix limits a view of the world. Despite
these perspectives, the researcher expanded her thinking to include interpretative views with
practitioners for social change. The triangulation strategy is considered the traditional, reliable,
and valid methodology approach, according to Merriam and Grenier (2019).
Most importantly, Patton (2015) reported that the “essence or essences to shared experience
puts aside the brackets or attitudes about the phenomenon” (p. 116), allowing the researcher to
investigate another dimension and ultimately to examine feelings into research design and
exploration (Merriam & Grenier, 2019). Taking this into consideration, Whitehead (2017) wrote
about “empathetic resonance” (p. 13), a bond that develops between researcher and practitioner
while striving for positive change in humanity based on an ethical foundation (Lingard, 2008).
90
Chapter IV: Results and Findings
Introduction
This chapter provides a mixed methodology analysis based on the triangulation method
and analyzes the scores from three behavioral questionnaires, an open survey, and an interview.
The three questionnaires consisted of the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI), the
Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES). These
three questionnaires were combined with an open survey on Survey Monkey and distributed to a
population of both current and former teachers, all of which were to be answered online. In
addition, a semi-structured, face-to-face interview was conducted by the researcher with an
employee of the Human Resources Department of the urban school setting to glean her
professional opinions on work issues related to employees, particularly her perceptions and
experiences with regard to teacher stress within the school district. These instruments and
interview sought to identify perceptions of both current and former teachers as to what degree
cognitive overload and occupational stress affected teacher performance, influenced teacher
cognition, and resulted in teacher turnover. This researcher believed by examining reliable data
from current and former teachers, potential risk factors could be identified that affect performance
and teachers’ intentions to leave the profession and reveal ways in which these risk factors can be
mitigated. Common themes from an urban elementary school were derived from this data.
The foregoing questionnaires, survey and interview pursued answers to the following
questions:
91
teachers?
Organization of Chapter IV
This chapter provides details regarding the methods, results, and findings aligned to the
four research questions driving this study. In addition, participant demographics, a description
of instrumentation, an explanation of the data-gathering process, and methods that were applied
to the triangulation matrix framework are delineated. The conclusion of this chapter contains an
explanation of the research findings as well as a narrative of the connectivity of themes within
the framework of results.
The responses were examined in an attempt to determine what current teachers and former
teachers believe are the main work-related stress factors that influence their performance and
their decision (or indecision) to leave the teaching profession. Teachers who scored higher in
three categories – cognitive overload, occupational stress, and work performance – gave insight
as to why they may choose to leave the profession. In addition, the similarity between the more
experienced teachers and former teachers may suggest that they may have been exposed to the
same work-related stress for an extended period of time. Therefore, the probability was higher
that the experienced teachers would leave the profession. However, if the current and former
teachers did not respond favorably, the district may study the effects of occupational stress and
how it is correlated with occupational performance. In turn, this study also attempted to guide
92
school administrators to implement programs and protocols to reduce the amount of stress
teachers endure and thereby increase teacher retention.
A previous review of the literature emphasized how important the integration of voices
and reflective reasoning are to understanding the relationship between teachers’ occupational
stressors and their performance in the classroom. That being the case, teacher retention may
increase.
Lastly, studying strengths and weaknesses of the educational system may lead to an
understanding of why many school teachers are not remaining in the profession, possibly due to
the effects of high levels of occupational stress linked to low levels of occupational performance.
In summary, analyzing all of the data collected from research participants should reveal stress
factors faced by both former and current teachers as well as ways in which school districts can
work with teachers to reduce stress and improve performance. Tables and diagrams are used to
facilitate writing through visual understanding. A summary of the emerging themes are discussed
as well.
Research Participants
The sample consisted of 41 participants, including teachers who were currently employed
at the school and formerly employed teachers who had left the teaching profession, whether they
retired early due to work-related stress or because they left the profession entirely. In addition,
one employee working in the Human Resources Department in an urban school district in New
Jersey was interviewed. This purposive sample of teachers (i.e., K-8 content, special and bilingual
education, world language, health, physical education, and reading specialist teachers) revealed
the knowledge and professional experience to provide the quantitative/qualitative data required
to address research questions 1, 2, and 3 and to generalize the conclusions to theory. The
93
employee from the Human Resources Department had the knowledge and professional
experience to provide qualitative data to address research question 4.
Data Sources
A mixed methods approach using qualitative and quantitative data was devised by the
researcher to structure valid perspectives, findings, and opinions, and to study the stressors
experienced by teachers that led to some teachers leaving their profession. The researcher
included a purposive sample consisting of teachers currently working in the profession and
former teachers who left their jobs due to work-related stress at one urban school, together with
information gathered during an interview with a Human Resources employee from the school
district. This purposive sample of participants, who possess the correct background and work
history for data analysis, did not provide information that was representative of the entire
population of school teachers in the United States, and therefore the conclusions of this research
study do not necessarily have external validity (i.e., the conclusions cannot be easily generalized
to the target population). A purposive sample did, however, provide information on occupational
stress and performance in this setting.
The criteria for participation was that the current and former teachers must be over 18
years of age at the time of their participation, would have taught for a minimum of four years,
and would have completed graduate training. Therefore, the data gleaned from the online survey
and questionnaires, delivered through the electronic platform, Survey Monkey, including their
perceptions of stress in the teaching environment and how it affects their work performance,
yielded a better understanding of what conditions currently exist in the school. Specifically, these
instruments provided demographic data, occupational stress levels, and cognitive performance
levels from teachers in an urban district. Finally, a summary of the data gathered provided a broad
94
spectrum of information from which specific programs and procedures can be implemented by
school administrators to lessen stress factors, increase teacher efficacy, and lessen teacher
turnover.
Data Collection
Invitations were sent out to approximately 100 educators representing current and retired
teachers from one urban school in New Jersey. A total of 41 responses were collected, with
complete responses from 28 current teachers and 13 retired teachers. Responses to the question
“Are you a former teacher (and no longer work as a teacher)?” were used to identify current versus
retired teachers (No - Current; Yes – Retired). One respondent was dropped from the analysis due
to answering no to the question, “Do you consent to participating in the teacher stress and
performance survey?” This teacher population with established statistical validity provided
authentic results on response rates.
Instrumentation
Cognitive Load Questionnaire - Environmental Preference Inventory
The first instrument utilized to gather information was an Environmental Preference
Inventory survey (EPI) developed by a group of researchers in Educational and Counseling
Psychology at the University of Albany. Haase et al. (2016) gathered data on the development
and validation of a revised measure of individual capacities for tolerating information overload
in occupational settings. This research led to an understanding of the connection between high
levels of stress and low levels of occupational performance in teachers.
The EPI survey utilized 47 items to measure the capacity of information that an individual
may tolerate for five types of workload: informational load, interpersonal load, change load,
95
activity structure, and time structure (questions 1 to 47 with a Likert Scale containing numerical
values 1 through 5). Specifically, the stress-related symptoms (Item #8, Yes = 1 and No = 0)
were attributed to the physiological state of the individual. Information load measured if an
individual is overloaded with work-related information, interpersonal load assessed an
individual’s experience of stress related to interpersonal relationships at work, change load
assessed an individual’s tolerance and experience for work-related change, and activity structure
measured an individual’s tolerance and experience to complete work activities and meet
expectations. Time structure was the subscale that assessed an individual’s stress related to
timelines and deadlines at work. Haase et al (2016) supported prior research by Edward Hall
(1959) on the concept of polychronicity, defined as the individual capacity to tolerate multiple
sources of information without any psychological distress. An original 25-item version measure
was established.
However, several studies from the research group found behaviors, such as visual and
motor multitasking, arousal levels, cultural differences, and processing speed, that supported the
reliability and validity increase of items. Specifically, Haase (2016) found that the Pavlovian
temperament system developed in 1951, based on the individual’s temperament and capacity of
the central nervous system to tolerate overload, correlates with behavior in the following
categories: Strength of Excitation (SE), Strength of Inhibition (SI), and Strength of Mobility
(MO).
Haase (2016) utilized equations from Table 3, pg. 135, to measure the EPI’s survey on
the five types of workload for the following items in each category: (1) Information Load
(questions 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 18, 21, 22, 25, 29, 31, 33, 40, 42, and 44); (2) Interpersonal Load
(questions 3, 13, 15, 16, 19, 24, 26, 41, and 46); (3) Change Load (questions 4, 6, 20, 27, 28, 30,
96
and 38; (4) Activity Structure (questions 1, 7, 14, 32, 34, 35, 36, 39, and 47); and (5) Time
Structure (questions 5, 12, 17, 23, 37, 43, and 45). The syntax for scoring the 47 items on the EPI
is found on Table 9, pg. 141.
Stress-related symptoms and EPI item mean ratings were obtained for each group (current
teachers and retired teachers) using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). For each response, if the
overall test for significance was significant at the 95% confidence level (p<0.05), the group
means were determined to be significantly different. One respondent was excluded from the
analysis because of missing data. If a respondent did not answer an EPI question used to calculate
an EPI score, the EPI score was not calculated for that respondent. Correlations were computed
between each EPI item and EPI score, except the item 44 (“I have no trouble at all carrying on
more than one activity at a time”). Using ANOVA, data entries were recorded to the following
numeric values: Stress related symptoms Item #8 (Yes = 1 and No = 0). To calculate the EPI
numerical scores for the questions, they were reversed from the original analysis results with
agreement in the scoring (Strongly Disagree = 5, Disagree = 4, Neutral = 3, Agree = 2, and
Strongly Agree = 1) (Haase, 2016, pg.134).
Below is a summary of the Content by Factor Loading of the original Scale of
Environmental Preference Inventory 47-Item (EPI) subscales (Information Load, Interpersonal
Load, Change, Activity Structure, and Time Structure.
Information Load
EPI Subscale Item EPI Question
Information 2 If I am going to work effectively, I must have peace and quiet.
Information 8 I can only deal with one person at a time.
Information 9 My efficiency really drops off if there is a lot going around me.
97
Information 10 [R] I am the kind of person who can easily do more than one thing at a
time.
Information 11 I usually arrange my room or office to provide lots of privacy.
Information 18 Things usually change too fast for me.
Information 21 The only way to get anything done is to make a tight schedule and
stick to it.
Information 22 I get uncomfortable if there are too many people around.
Information 25 Nowadays there is so much new information thrown at a person that
it is impossible to keep up with things.
Information 29 People who are late for appointments really upset me.
Information 31 When working on a project, I take one thing at a time.
Information 33 There is a place for everything and everything should be in its place.
Information 40 I am a private person.
Information 42 I prefer solitary activities with little interruption from other people.
Information 44 I have no trouble at all carrying on more than one activity at a time.
Interpersonal Load
Interpersonal 3 While talking with some people, they crowd me so closely that I can
hardly think.
Interpersonal 13 Some people insist on standing so close to me during a conversation
that I can hardly concentrate of what they are saying.
Interpersonal 15 People who can’t stick to a schedule are usually not very effective.
98
Interpersonal 16 When too much is going on at once, I really become disorganized.
Interpersonal 19 I can’t deal effectively with more than one person at a time.
Interpersonal 24 Smaller groups of people are easier for me to deal with than large
groups of people.
Interpersonal 26 Man was not made to handle the complexities of the modern world.
Interpersonal 41 I dislike large parties.
Interpersonal 46 I prefer the peace and quiet of country living.
Change Load
Change 4 [R] I enjoy doing things on the spur of the moment.
Change 6 Having an overfull schedule gets me down.
Change 20 I can’t think straight with too many people around.
Change 27 I don’t see how anyone can get anything done in a room full of other
people.
Change 28 Things happen so fast nowadays that I cannot keep up with
everything.
Change 30 I can only do one thing at a time.
Change 38 There are times when so much is happening at once that I just can’t
think.
Activity Structure
99
Activity 1 I prefer to finish one job before starting another.
Activity 7 Organization of time is the key to efficiency.
Activity 14 Crowds of people make me nervous.
Activity 32 Most people are just not capable of dealing with more than one
activity at a time.
Activity 34 I really get disorganized if too many things are going on at once.
Activity 35 Sometimes things are happening so fast that I can’t seem to
concentrate on anything.
Activity 36 Too much information at once confuses me.
Activity 39 [R] I have no difficulty in keeping several projects going at the same
time.
Activity 47 The ability to make plans and stick to them is essential to success.
Time Structure
Time 5 I prefer to finish one job before starting another.
Time 12 Organization of time is the key to efficiency.
Time 17 [R] Crowds of people make me nervous.
Time 23 Most people are just not capable of dealing with more than one
activity at a time.
Time 37 I really get disorganized if too many things are going on at once.
Time 43 [R] Sometimes things are happening so fast that I can’t seem to
100
Time 45 Too much information at once confuses me.
From “Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI)” by Haase et al. (2016), Development and
Validation of a Revised Measure of Individual Capacities for Tolerating Information Overload in
Occupational Settings, 24(1),134.
Occupational Stress Questionnaire
The Occupational Stress Questionnaire was developed and translated by a group of
researchers at the University of Rome. Sancini (2010) found that stress from occupational
demands was a significant factor that negatively affected teacher performance. In effect, stressful
working conditions identified by questionnaire data can lead to the implementation of possible
crisis prevention strategies that reduce harmful stress before burnout occurs. The eight items in
this instrument measured the degree of autonomy, decision-making independence, decision-
making responsibility, issues of interaction, and concerns about work on health status (questions
48 through 55 with a seven-point scale. Responses were recorded as follows: Not at All =1,
Seldom = 2, Sometimes = 3, Neutral = 4, Occasionally = 5, Very Frequently = 6, and Very Much
= 7.
As previously mentioned, the questionnaire was divided into the following structures:
perception of workload, independence and autonomy in performing work duties, and negative
features of work interfering with psychophysical well-being of an individual. Sancini’s (2010)
statistical analysis of the data utilized a comparison between groups for each single item and the
questionnaire total. Mean ratings were obtained for each group and response using Analysis of
Variance. For each item, if the overall test for significance was significant at the 95% confidence
101
level (p<0.05), the group means were determined to be significantly different. A factor analysis
with Varimax Rotation was performed on the Sancini (2010) questionnaire to determine the
structure and single factor scores between the two groups as noted in Table 2: Sum of the item
scores=i1+i2+i3+i4+i5+i6+i7+i8, Table 3: Factor analysis (pg. 119) and Table 4: Means and
standard deviation of factor scores (pg. 120).
The reliability of the questionnaire was established using Cronbach’s alpha of 0.50. The
results indicated female kindergarten teachers considered the interactions with parents and
students, autonomy in decision-making, and work demands as the main sources of stress. On the
other hand, the female kindergarten Visual Display Unit operators were specifically stressed due
to the working environment’s indoor setting, repetitive tasks, and lack of interpersonal
relationships.
Below is a summary of the content by factor loading of the original scale of the
Occupational Stress Questionnaire:
1 How much autonomy do you have with your current job?
2 How much independence of decisions does your current job allow you to have?
3 What kind of continuous effort during working hours does your current job require?
4 How much does your work require sudden decisions?
5 How much responsibility does your work require?
6 How much difficulty do you feel in social relationships because of your job?
7 How much do you feel satisfied by your current job?
8 How much does your job provoke negative effects on your health, according to you?
102
Occupational Stress Questionnaire” by Sancini et al. (2010), European Journal of Inflammation,
8(2), 119.
A factor analysis with varimax rotation was performed on the Occupational Stress
Questionnaire. The factor analysis extracted 3 factors and expressed 77% of the total variance.
Occupational stress single item, questionnaire total score, and factor score standard deviations
were calculated, and mean ratings were obtained for each group and response using ANOVA
approach. For each response, if the overall test for significance was significant at the 95%
confidence level (p<0.05), the group means were determined to be significantly different. If a
respondent did not answer an occupational stress question, the respondent was dropped from the
factor analysis and the occupational stress score was not calculated.
Work Performance Questionnaire - Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) Short Form
The Ohio Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (OSTES) (long form with 24 items and short
form with 12 items) was developed by researchers at Ohio State University and the College of
William and Mary. Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk-Hoy (2001) introduced a new tool to measure
teacher efficacy based on the model (1998). Specifically, they reported that teachers’ beliefs in
their capabilities or efficacy were related to student achievement and learning engagement by
their behaviors. Table 4 on page 800 demonstrated the data analysis results on the OSTES with
either the 24 items or 12 items and indicated a high reliability and validity of the three scales,
ranging from 0.95 to 0.98. Based on this high reliability, these three dimensions of teacher
efficacy represent measures for determining quality of teacher performance, even though teachers
perform a wider range of tasks.
103
The researchers utilized the OSTES work performance questionnaire subscale 12-item
short form to conduct a factor analysis with Varimax Rotation. This measure determined reliable
and valid results for these three structures: Teachers’ Sense of Teacher Efficacy: Efficacy in
Student Engagement (Items #2, #3, #4, #11), Efficacy in Instructional Strategies (Items #5, #9,
#10, #12), and Efficacy in Classroom Management (Items #1, #6, #7, #8) (Tschannan-Moran &
Woolfolk-Hoy, 2001). Based on their questionnaire results, it was reported that 93% of teachers
felt their stress levels were high, supporting research that teaching is a stressful profession, and
these levels were found to be highly correlated with teacher performance and student
performance.
Below is a summary of the Content by Factor Loadings for the Ohio State Teacher
Efficacy Scale (OSTES).
Factor 1: Efficacy for Instructional Strategies
Item # Content
1 To what extent can you use a variety of assessment strategies?
2 To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when students
are confused?
3 To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?
4 How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?
Factor 2: Efficacy for Classroom Management
Item # Content
9 How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in the classroom?
10 How much can you do to get children to follow classroom rules?
104
11 How much can you do to calm a student who is disruptive or noisy?
12 How well can you establish a classroom management system with each group of
students?
Factor 3: Efficacy for Student Engagement
Item # Content
17 How much can you do to get students to believe they can do well in schoolwork?
18 How much can you do to help your students value learning?
19 How much can you do to motivate students who show low interest in schoolwork?
20 How much can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?
From “Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES) by M. Tschannen-Moran & A.Woolfolk-Hoy
(2001), Teacher and Teacher Education, 17, 800.
Open Survey
The researcher developed an open survey which included three open-ended questions in
the questionnaire to determine stress factors, decision to leave the profession, and prevention
from leaving the educational field. They were as follows:
1. What are some stress factors that might affect your performance as a teacher?
2. What factors might influence or have influenced your decision to leave the
teaching profession?
3. How can these stress factors be addressed to prevent teachers from leaving their
profession?
105
Interview with Human Resource Department Representative
This researcher developed questions for a one-to-one interview with a Human Resource
Department representative. This short, semi-structured, one-to-one interview was used in this
research study and aligned with the four research questions. A request was made to the Human
Resources Department Chair and an employee from that department accepted the invitation to
participate. The interview was preceded by a reiteration of the research study, its purpose, and
assurance of confidentiality. A letter of informed consent was signed by the participant. A total
of six questions were asked as follows:
5. What are some activities you think would help teachers reduce stress and increase
their work performance?
6. Is there anything else you would like to share with me in regard to your experience
working in this diverse setting?
The interview lasted approximately 45 minutes. It was digitally recorded and a
professional transcription agency transcribed the oral interview and provided a certified written
transcript (Appendix ?). The researcher analyzed the six open-ended questions and found
meaningful themes and trends in the collected data.
Analysis of Data
Mixed-method quantitative and qualitative data from the questionnaires, open survey, and
semi-structured interview created a triangulation matrix that was used to develop hypotheses to
106
support the validity and reliability of data aligned with four research questions. This method was
undertaken to determine (1) occupational stress levels, (2) occupational performance levels, (3)
relationship between occupational stress levels and performance levels between current and
former teachers, and (4) educational policies and procedures (best practices). The researcher
analyzed data gathered from the three questionnaires (Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI),
Occupational Stress Questionnaire, Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) (short form), open
survey, and semi-structured, one-to-one interview.
The collection, classification, and distribution of data entries were analyzed using the
qualitative analysis software provided by Survey Monkey. Bloomberg and Volpe (2012) argued
that analyzing data from these programs may produce “data glut” (p. 147) by removing the
emotional tone of the data. Therefore, two statisticians, independent of this research, were
provided with background information and asked to review the statistical analysis provided by
Survey Monkey to determine mean ratings for each group (i.e., current and former teachers).
These responses were obtained by implementing the ANOVA approach to interpret significant
differences among the two specified groups of participants. For example, if cognitive overload
and occupational stress are significantly higher in veteran teachers, we can hypothesize that these
two stressors contribute to the reasons why these former teachers left the profession. In addition,
the researcher compiled all data to understand the emergent themes which arose from the
conceptual framework of the research study and to note the meaningful relationships and trends
between the two groups.
Categorical contingency tables and figures from the raw data were created to organize
and structure the variables per items from the surveys for a visual representation and to further
107
increase reliability and credibility of this research study. Participant responses were put into
categories that were aligned with the research questions.
To further address scoring accuracy, validity, and reliability of data, the researcher
categorized responses by using statistical methodology to obtain mean ratings for each group
(current and former teachers) and to determine the agreement of multiple scorers at the end of the
data analysis. A data summary provided to the researcher by the independent statisticians
supported issues of trustworthiness, ethical considerations, reliability, and validity for this study.
Findings and Results
The major findings of the study were aligned with each research question. Individual
findings were generated using the ANOVA approach to generate themes from the three
questionnaires (Environmental Preference Inventory, Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and
Ohio State Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale), open survey, and one-to-one interview. Finally,
a section on the summary of each finding with the relationship to each research question was
provided by the researcher.
The findings included the following:
Finding 1: While there was no significant difference in cognitive overload and
occupational stress reported by the two groups of teachers, there was a statistical distinction on
information load, social relationships, health, autonomy, and workload responsibilities that may
influence stress levels.
Finding 2: Teachers’ experiences of cognitive overload and other occupational stressors
such as workload demands may result in lack of well-being, motivation, and commitment to their
job, and affect their performance in the classroom and their desire to remain in the profession. A
deeper scientific analysis on workload stressors suggested that these stressors may result in the
108
physical and psychological impairment of teachers, which in turn affects their occupational
performance and may result in their decision to leave the profession.
Finding 3: Teachers expressed challenges from cognitive overload and workload
demands and this relationship is more likely to affect their performance which may lead to leaving
the profession from the influences of school administration in the lack of health benefits programs
or policies to improve well-being.
Finding 4: Providing appropriate administrative leadership policies and health benefit
programs within the district are needed to reduce workload and occupational stressors such as
depression, anxiety, burnout, and suicidal thoughts, and this will enhance teacher performance
and improve retention.
Research Question 1: What are the levels of occupational stress reported by the two
groups of teachers?
The data analysis generated for the first research question revealed the levels of
occupational stress reported by the current and former teachers, as these levels pertain to the
relationship to and effect upon occupational performance. Over time, research by Koruklu et al.
(2012) found that teachers deteriorated throughout their careers with physical symptoms such as
cardiovascular and neurological problems (Talmor, Reiter, & Feigin, 2005). They also suffered
from psychological symptoms such as rage, depression, confusion, anxiety, low self-esteem, and
substance abuse (Black, 2003; Naylor, 2001; Sari, 2004; Talmor et al, 2005). In an attempt to
minimize the growing trend of teacher shortage and increase teacher retention, researchers have
shifted attention to a neuroscientific data analysis approach to understand the factors of
occupational stress (Achu, 2012). This was dependent upon educational policies and
109
administrative practices to minimize workload, redesign administrative practices, and improve
teacher well-being.
Research Question 1, then, was constructed to focus on the levels of occupational stress
for current and retired teachers and to understand how this stress possibly influences their
occupational performance and decision to exit the profession.
occupational stress reported by the two groups of teachers, a statistical distinction on information
load, social relationships, health, autonomy, and workload responsibilities may influence stress
levels. This study found that the more experienced teachers and former teachers may have been
exposed to the same work-related stress for an extended period of time. Therefore, the probability
was higher for experienced teachers to leave the profession.
Survey results. Approximately 100 invitations to participate in the online questionnaire
were extended to current and former teachers from one urban school district which generated 41
complete responses. A total of one respondent was discarded from the analysis due to their failure
to consent properly at the beginning of the survey. Demographic items (e.g., age, education,
teaching experience, gender) were used to identify current and former teachers at the beginning
of the questionnaire. The responses were then analyzed based on factors that align with the four
research questions: Factor 1 - occupational stress levels by the two groups, Factor 2 -
occupational performance levels by the two groups, Factor 3 - relationship between the
occupational stress and occupational performance levels, and Factor 4 - policies and procedures
for administrators.
Based on a sample population of 41 respondents, the open-ended question #8 revealed a
total of 61% current and retired teachers reporting experiencing stress-related symptoms (68% of
110
28 current teachers versus 46% of 13 retired teachers). The EPI survey results suggested no
significant difference in stress-related symptoms between both groups for information load,
interpersonal load, change load, activity structure, or time structure. However, there was a
significant statistical difference in the levels of agreement on the EPI question #8 (P Value
0.0061) and #18 (P Value 0.0249). Table 1 provided a categorical contingency table used to
establish stress-related symptoms data scoring analysis. Clearly, the data analysis on the EPI
represented below on Table 1 generated the scoring trends on stress-related symptoms. Table 2
illustrated the scoring based on the categories of stress-related symptoms and Table 3 reported a
bar graph visual representation of the data.
Table 1
Factor 1, 2: Categorical Contingency Table
The Stress-Related Symptoms (Do you have any stress-related symptoms, e.g., depression,
anxiety, feeling, overwhelmed, fatigue, lack of sleep, lack of concentration?)
All Respondents Current Retired
Percentage Count Percentage Count Percentage Count
YES 61% 25 68% 19 46% 6
NO 39% 16 32% 9 54% 7
Note. This is a measure of the total and separated categories for the respondents (current and
retired teachers) who experience stress-related symptoms. A percentage of all respondents 61%
(Yes) and 39% (No).
111
Table 2
The Stress-Related Symptoms
All Respondents Current Retired
Stress-Related
Percentage Count Percentage Count Percentage Count
Symptom
Fatigue 32% 13 39% 11 15% 2
Anxiety 29% 12 32% 9 23% 3
Feeling overwhelmed 27% 11 29% 8 23% 3
Lack of sleep 20% 8 25% 7 8% 1
Lack of concentration 7% 3 7% 2 8% 1
Depression 5% 2 7% 2 0% 0
Frustration 5% 2 0% 0 15% 2
Irritability 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Mental disorganization 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Nervous breakdown 2% 1 0% 0 8% 1
Autoimmune 2% 1 0% 0 8% 1
Complacency 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Note. For all respondents, the highest Stress-Related Symptoms percentages reported were for
fatigue 32%, anxiety 29%, feeling overwhelmed 27%, and lack of sleep 20%.
112
Figure 1
Stress-Related Symptoms Chart
Stress Related Symptoms

45%
40%
35%
% Respondents
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Current Retired All Respondents
While current teachers reported a higher percentage (68%) of stress-related symptoms
than retired teachers (46%), the negative stress-related symptoms of fatigue (32%), anxiety
(29%), feeling overwhelmed (27%), and lack of sleep (20%) most hinder the cognitive demand
of both current and retired teachers.
From both groups, three teachers’ expressions of their stress symptoms were in alignment
with the survey data analysis. These were the occupational stress symptom challenges which
needed to be overcome in order to achieve quality teaching practice: (1) occupational stress, (2)
workload, and (3) teacher turnover.
Teacher 1 stated: “I felt as though I was going to have a nervous breakdown from stress.
Lack of support from administration, and sleep deprivation.”
Teacher 2 added: “I felt overwhelmed, experienced anxiety, and lack of concentration.”
Teacher 3 expressed: “When I taught, I felt anxious, overwhelmed, and frustrated often.”
113
Significantly, current teachers expressed their stress symptoms while teaching and retired
teachers recalled their stress symptoms during teaching. Stress symptoms such as fatigue,
anxiety, feeling overwhelmed, and lack of sleep were felt to specifically hinder a teacher’s
performance and, most of all, their well-being.
Table 3
The Five EPI Scores of the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI)
EPI Score Current (28) Retired (13) P-Value
Information Load 44 45 0.5570
Interpersonal Load 28 28 0.8290
Change Load 23 22 0.7313
Activity Structure 24 24 0.8410
Time Structure 18 19 0.6121
Note. The five types of workload categories. Current and retired teachers showed no significant
differences at the 95% confidence level.
Table 4
The 47 Items of the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI)
# Item Current Retired P-

(28) (13) Value
1 I prefer to finish one job before starting another. 2.0 2.2 0.5447
2 If I am going to work effectively, I must have peace and 2.4 2.5 0.6192
quiet.
3 While talking with some people, they crowd me so closely 3.1 2.7 0.2439
that I can hardly think.
4 I enjoy doing things on the spur of the moment. 2.8 2.9 0.7874
114
(28) (13) Value
5 It is important for me to have my meals at regular hours. 2.5 2.9 0.2192
6 Having an overfull schedule gets me down. 2.9 2.8 0.6542
7 Organization of time is the key to efficiency. 1.5 1.5 0.8241
8 I can only deal with one person at a time. 3.3 B 4.1 A 0.0061
9 My efficiency really drops off if there is a lot going 2.7 2.9 0.5386
around me.
10 I am the kind of person who can easily do more than one 2.6 2.3 0.4517
thing at a time.
11 I usually arrange my room or office to provide lots of 3.4 3.3 0.7002

privacy.
12 When I do a job, I take one piece at a time. 2.6 2.9 0.3046
13 Some people insist on standing so close to me during a 3.4 3.6 0.5852

conversation that I can hardly concentrate on what they
are saying.
14 Crowds of people make me nervous. 3.3 3.3 0.9539
15 People who can’t stick to a schedule are usually not very 2.9 3.2 0.3604
effective.
16 When too much is going on at once, I really become 2.9 3.0 0.8547
disorganized.
17 I like crowded, noisy places. 3.6 4.1 0.1821
18 Things usually change too fast for me. 3.5 A 2.9 B 0.0249
19 I can’t deal effectively with more than one person at a 3.6 3.6 0.9199
time.
20 I can’t think straight with too many people around. 3.4 3.5 0.6623
21 The only way to get anything done is to make a tight 3.5 3.5 0.9926
schedule and stick to it.
22 I get uncomfortable if there are too many people around. 3.4 3.7 0.3372
115
(28) (13) Value
23 Having too much going on at once makes me anxious. 2.8 2.8 0.7954
24 Smaller groups of people are easier for me to deal with 2.4 2.4 0.8857
than large groups of people.
25 Nowadays there is so much new information thrown at a 2.6 2.5 0.7422

person that it is impossible to keep up with things.
26 Man was not made to handle the complexities of the 3.5 3.1 0.1621
modern world.
27 I don’t see how anyone can get anything done in a room 3.5 3.5 0.8328
full of other people.
28 Things happen so fast nowadays that I cannot keep up 3.2 3.0 0.5544
with everything.
29 People who are late for appointments really upset me. 2.4 2.5 0.7703
30 I can only do one thing at a time. 3.5 3.5 0.9934
31 When working on a project, I take one thing at a time. 2.5 2.6 0.6510
32 Most people are just not capable of dealing with more 3.1 3.4 0.3302
than one activity at a time.
33 There is a place for everything and everything should be 2.1 2.5 0.2354
in its place.
34 I really get disorganized if too many things are going on 2.8 2.7 0.7329
at once.
35 Sometimes things are happening so fast that I can’t seem 3.0 2.8 0.7678
to concentrate on anything.
36 Too much information at once confuses me. 3.0 2.6 0.3826
37 I just can’t concentrate well unless I have complete peace 3.0 3.0 0.9232
and quiet.
38 There are times when so much is happening at once that I 2.7 2.6 0.7936
just can’t think.
116
(28) (13) Value
39 I have no difficulty in keeping several projects going at 3.0 2.9 0.5922

the same time.
40 I am a private person. 3.2 2.8 0.6605
41 I dislike large parties. 3.2 2.8 0.4361
42 I prefer solitary activities with little interruption from 3.4 3.2 0.5785
other people.
43 Being kept waiting for an appointment does not upset me. 4.0 3.9 0.7035
44 I have no trouble at all carrying on more than one activity 2.7 2.5 0.6634
at a time.
45 I like to go to bed at the same time every night. 2.9 3.1 0.6074
46 I prefer the peace and quiet of country living. 2.9 3.1 0.6425
47 The ability to make plans and stick to them is essential to 2.4 2.5 0.6041
success.
Note. The 47 items for the EPI (Environmental Preference Inventory), with significant differences
at the 95% confidence level.
Figure 1
Bar Graph Chart
117
Note. The bar graph reported the significant data differences between Current Teacher-Mean
rating 3.3 and Retired Teacher-Mean rating 4.1 for item #8: “I can only deal with one person at a
time.”
Figure 2
Bar Graph Chart
Note. The bar graph summarizes the data analysis from both groups. Current Teacher - Mean
rating 3.5 and Retired Teacher - Mean rating 2.9 for item #18: “Things usually change too fast
for me.”
Interestingly, the analysis uncovered statistical differences between both groups on EPI
items #8 and #18, indicating higher agreement among current teachers for “I can only deal with
one person at a time” and higher agreement among retired teachers for “Things usually change
too fast for me.” Although current and retired teachers rated these responses differently, this
suggested that all respondents shared a commonality that stress symptoms occur when work
demands increase and require cognition tolerance. Consequently, teachers’ cognitive demands
suggested workload hinders coping skills and the ability to do tasks effectively.
118
Table 5
Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI)
EPI Subscale Item # EPI Question

Information 2 If I am going to work effectively, I must have peace and quiet.
Information Interpersonal Change Activity Time

Load Load Load Structure Structure
0.56 0.17 0.22 0.29 0.48
Information 8 I can only deal with one person at a time.

0.57 0.37 0.39 0.44 0.49
Information 9 My efficiency really drops off if there is a lot going around me.

0.59 0.47 0.49 0.45 0.38
Information 10 [R] I am the kind of person who can easily do more than one thing at a
time.

-0.39 -0.39 -0.42 -0.51 -0.24
Information 11 I usually arrange my room or office to provide lots of privacy.

0.53 0.30 0.38 0.22 0.47
Information 18 Things usually change too fast for me.

0.43 0.49 0.35 0.42 0.43
Information 21 The only way to get anything done is to make a tight schedule and
stick to it.
0.60 0.46 0.43 0.43 0.39
Information 22 I get uncomfortable if there are too many people around.
0.70 0.69 0.55 0.61 0.66
119
Information 25 Nowadays there is so much new information thrown at a person that
it is impossible to keep up with things.
0.50 0.51 0.65 0.60 0.35
Information 29 People who are late for appointments really upset me.
0.59 0.40 0.40 0.37 0.40
Information 31 When working on a project, I take one thing at a time.
0.58 0.50 0.40 0.37 0.40
Information 33 There is a place for everything and everything should be in its place.
0.72 0.51 0.56 0.49 0.59
Information 40 I am a private person.
0.50 0.17 0.29 0.15 0.40
Information 42 I prefer solitary activities with little interruption from other people.
0.74 0.71 0.75 0.60 0.61
Information 44 I have no trouble at all carrying on more than one activity at a time.
-0.39 -0.42 -0.56 -0.48 -0.28
Interpersonal 3 While talking with some people, they crowd me so closely that I can
hardly think.
0.23 0.39 0.29 0.28 0.22
Interpersonal 13 Some people insist on standing so close to me during a conversation
that I can hardly concentrate on what they are saying.

0.63 0.68 0.50 0.52 0.59
Interpersonal 15 People who can’t stick to a schedule are usually not very effective.
0.36 0.41 0.23 0.36 0.33
120
Interpersonal 16 When too much is going on at once, I really become disorganized.
0.54 0.63 0.67 0.71 .39
Interpersonal 19 I can’t deal effectively with more than one person at a time.
0.29 0.52 0.36 0.37 0.25
Interpersonal 24 Smaller groups of people are easier for me to deal with than large
groups of people.
0.54 0.72 0.52 0.63 0.60
Interpersonal 26 Man was not made to handle the complexities of the modern world.
0.50 0.64 0.62 0.62 0.37
Interpersonal 41 I dislike large parties.
0.64 0.70 0.63 0.58 0.69
Interpersonal 46 I prefer the peace and quiet of country living.
0.53 0.57 0.43 0.38 0.52
Change 4 [R] I enjoy doing things on the spur of the moment.
-0.48 -0.37 -0.58 -0.37 -0.51
Change 6 Having an overfull schedule gets me down.

0.27 0.33 0.51 0.37 0.22
Change 20 I can’t think straight with too many people around.

0.56 0.65 0.76 0.56 0.42
Change 27 I don’t see how anyone can get anything done in a room full of other
people.
0.62 0.63 0.84 0.62 0.31
121
Change 28 Things happen so fast nowadays that I cannot keep up with
everything.
0.54 0.54 0.74 0.62 0.37
Change 30 I can only do one thing at a time.
0.57 0.51 0.70 0.53 0.43
Change 38 There are times when so much is happening at once that I just can’t
think.
0.63 0.66 0.74 0.72 0.54
Activity 1 I prefer to finish one job before starting another.
0.28 0.14 0.05 0.36 0.33
Activity 7 Organization of time is the key to efficiency.

-0.10 0.15 -0.10 0.08 0.10
Activity 14 Crowds of people make me nervous.

0.60 0.71 0.57 0.70 0.67
Activity 32 Most people are just not capable of dealing with more than one
activity at a time.

0.16 0.23 0.29 0.41 0.01
Activity 34 I really get disorganized if too many things are going on at once.

0.57 0.73 0.78 0.80 0.51
Activity 35 Sometimes things are happening so fast that I can’t seem to
0.63 0.78 0.77 0.85 0.54
122
Activity 36 Too much information at once confuses me.
0.57 0.63 0.71 0.78 0.50
Activity 39 [R] I have no difficulty in keeping several projects going at the same
time.
-0.51 -0.36 -0.51 -0.56 -0.44
Activity 47 The ability to make plans and stick to them is essential to success.
0.35 0.29 0.20 0.50 0.27
Time 5 It is important for me to have my meals at regular hours.
0.17 0.21 0.07 0.20 0.51
Time 12 When I do a job, I take one piece at a time.
0.62 0.46 0.35 0.44 0.78
Time 17 [R] I like crowded, noisy places.
-0.39 -0.37 -0.27 -0.41 -0.56
Time 23 Having too much going on at a once makes me anxious.
0.69 0.80 0.75 0.81 0.72
Time 37 I just can’t concentrate well unless I have complete peace and quiet.

0.63 0.30 0.52 0.43 0.68
Time 43 [R] Being kept waiting for an appointment does not upset me.

-0.56 -0.42 -0.34 -0.38 -0.61
Time 45 I like to go to bed at the same time every night.
0.53 0.53 0.26 0.32 0.57
123
Note. EPI = Environmental Preference Inventory. The EPI questions were correlated with and
grouped by the intended EPI Subscale. The figures in red indicate a stronger correlation with a
different subscale. The figures in blue indicate the correlation is the opposite direction of its
intended subscale.
In summary, Table 1 provided a categorical contingency table of the incidence of overall
stress- related symptoms. Table 2 summarized the incidence of specific stress-related symptoms.
Table 3 summarized the statistical differences between the two groups’ (current and former
teachers) scoring of the five EPI workload scores. Table 4 summarized the statistical differences
between the two groups’ (current and former teachers) ratings of the 47 EPI items. Figure 1 and
Figure 2 bar graphs presented the significant differences between current and retired teachers for
items #8 and #18.
As previously described, the analysis uncovered statistical differences between current
and retired teachers on EPI items #8 and #18 indicating higher agreement among current teachers
for “I can only deal with one person at a time” and higher agreement among retired teachers for
“Things usually change too fast for me.” There were no other significant differences between
the two groups for the other EPI questions. In addition, the second finding identified no
significant difference for information load, interpersonal load, change load, activity structure, and
time structure. Based on these two significant findings, it may suggest that both groups
experience workload demands which may minimize cognitive capabilities to achieve quality
teaching.
124
Occupational Stress Questionnaire
The Occupational Stress Questionnaire results generated no significant difference
between current and retired teachers for the individual items, total Occupational Stress Score, or
Occupational Stress Factor Scores.
The analysis uncovered no significant differences on these factors: work negative
features, perceived weight of work responsibility, and independence/autonomy in performing
work duties.
Means and standard deviations of the items and the total score of the questionnaire.
Table 1
Factor 1, 2, 3: Categorical Contingency Table
Current Retired
Item (13) Mean P-
Item (28) Mean
# Value
(SD) (SD)
1 How much autonomy do you have with your 4.93 (1.64) 4.50 (1.73) 0.4662
current job?
2 How much independence of decisions does your 4.89 (1.69) 4.75 (1.82) 0.8115
current job allow you to have?
3 What kind of continuous effort during working 5.96 (1.35) 5.50 (1.62) 0.3534
hours does your current job require?
4 How much does your work require sudden 5.68 (1.16) 5.33 (1.37) 0.4181
decisions?
5 How much responsibility does your work require? 6.64 (0.68) 6.50 (0.90) 0.5846
6 How much difficulty do you feel in social 3.18 (1.91) 3.17 (2.25) 0.9864
relationships because of your job?
7 How much do you feel satisfied by your current 5.68 (1.49) 5.50 (1.93) 0.7528
job?
8 How much does your job provoke negative effects 4.11 (1.59) 4.25 (1.66) 0.7989
on your health, according to you?
125
Sum of the item scores 40.85 39.50 0.4372
(4.35) (6.17)
Note. Above the 8 items reported means and standard deviations of both (Current and Retired
Teachers) groups.
SD= Standard Deviation
Table 2
Factor Analysis
Item Item Factor 1: Factor 2: Factor 3:

# Work Perceived Independence
Negative Weight of and
Features Work Autonomy in
Responsibility Performing
Work Duties
1 How much autonomy do you have with

-0.07 -0.12 0.90
your current job?
2 How much independence of decisions

-0.19 -0.07 0.89
does your current job allow you to have?
3 What kind of continuous effort during

working hours does your current job 0.07 0.84 -0.09
require?
4 How much does your work require

0.52 0.64 -0.04
sudden decisions?
5 How much responsibility does your

-0.10 0.88 -0.07
work require?
6 How much difficulty do you feel in

0.83 0.05 -0.01
social relationships because of your job?
7 How much do you feel satisfied by your

-0.75 0.11 0.45
current job?
126
8 How much does your job provoke
negative effects on your health, 0.88 0.13 -0.14
according to you?
Percentage of specific variance of

29% 24% 23%
factors
Note. Above the factor analysis extracted 3 factors and expressed 77% of the total variance Factor
loadings >+/-0.80 have the strongest association with the factor and are highlighted in bold. The
factors (Sancini, 2010) in the table above are named to describe the items that have the strongest
association with the factor: Factor 1: Work negative features; Factor 2: Perceived weight of work
responsibility; and Factor 3: Independence and autonomy in performing work duties.
Figure 1
Factor 1: Work Negative Features
Factor 1: Work negative features

1) How much autonomy do you have with your current… -0.07
2) How much independence of decisions does your… -0.19
3) What kind of continuous effort during working hours… 0.07
4) How much does your work require sudden decisions? 0.52
5) How much responsibility does your work require? -0.10
6) How much difficulty do you feel in social relationships… 0.83
7) How much do you feel satisfied by your current job? -0.75
8) How much does your job provoke negative effects on… 0.88
-1.00 -0.80 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Factor Loading
Note. Work Negative Features: “How much difficulty do you feel in social relationships because
of your job?” (factor loading = 0.83) and “How much does your job provoke negative effects on
your health, according to you?” (factor loading=0.88).
127
Figure 2
Factor 2: Perceived Weight of Work Responsibility
Factor 2: Perceived weight of work responsibility

1) How much autonomy do you have with your current… -0.12
2) How much independence of decisions does your… -0.07
3) What kind of continuous effort during working hours… 0.84
4) How much does your work require sudden decisions? 0.64
5) How much responsibility does your work require? 0.88
6) How much difficulty do you feel in social relationships… 0.05
7) How much do you feel satisfied by your current job? 0.11
8) How much does your job provoke negative effects on… 0.13
-1.00 -0.80 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Factor Loading
Figure 3
Factor 3: Independence and Autonomy in Performing Work
Factor 3: Independence and autonomy in performing work

duties
1) How much autonomy do you have with your current… 0.90
2) How much independence of decisions does your… 0.89
3) What kind of continuous effort during working hours… -0.09
4) How much does your work require sudden decisions? -0.04
5) How much responsibility does your work require? -0.07
6) How much difficulty do you feel in social relationships… -0.01
7) How much do you feel satisfied by your current job? 0.45
8) How much does your job provoke negative effects on… -0.14
-1.00 -0.80 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Factor Loading
128
Table 3
Means and Standard Deviations of Factor Scores
Factor Current (27) Retired (12) Mean P-Value

Mean (SD)
(SD)
Factor 1: Work negative features -0.02 (0.99) 0.03 (1.08) 0.8882
Factor 2: Perceived weight of work

0.10 (0.91) -0.22 (1.19) 0.3692
responsibility
Factor 3: Independence and

0.06 (1.03) -0.15 (0.97) 0.5516
autonomy in performing work duties
Note. N = 39 respondents. The Means and Standard Deviations for Factor 1: Work negative
features scores. Factor 2: Perceived weight of work responsibility. Factor 3: Independence and
autonomy in performing work duties.
SD=Standard Deviation
Table 4
Means and Standard Deviations of Factor Scores Chart
Means and Standard Deviations of Factor Scores

1.19
1.25 1.08
0.97
0.75 0.99 1.03

0.91
0.25 0.03 0.10 0.06
-0.25 -0.02
-0.22 -0.15
-0.75
-1.25
Factor 1: Work negative features Factor 2: Perceived weight of work Factor 3: Independence and
responsibility autonomy in performing work duties
Retired (Mean) Current (Mean) Current (SD) Retired (SD)
129
Note. Means and Standard Deviations of Factor Scores where the bars represent the Means and
the lines represent the Standard Deviations.
The survey results found no significant difference between current and retired teachers for
the individual items on the Occupational Stress Questionnaire, the Total Occupational Stress
Score, or the Occupational Stress Factor Scores. It suggested that both groups shared a
commonality of occupational stress. Based on a sample of 39 respondents, Table 1 reported the
means and standard deviations, Table 2 summarized the factor loadings, Figures 1, 2, 3 bar graphs
presented the distribution of the factor loadings for Factor 1 (Work Negative Features), Factor 2
(Perceived weight of work responsibility), and Factor 3 (Independence and autonomy in
performing work duties) identified data analysis. Table 4: Means and Deviations of Factor Scores
and Table 5 provides a table illustrating the scoring for the three factors.
Perceived weight of work responsibility
Finding 1 Summary
All in all, these findings generated data analysis from these two sources linked to research
question one which suggested that both groups (current and retired teachers) with a sample
population of 41 respondents shared a commonality. For example, the data for the identification
of stress symptoms accounted for 61% of all respondents, 68% current teachers (19) and 46%
retired teachers (6) as suggested in Table 1. Furthermore, the symptoms of fatigue, anxiety, and
feeling overwhelmed were the most reported stress symptoms in both groups. However, a higher
incidence of lack of sleep was observed for current teachers than for retired teachers. Based on
these stress symptoms, it suggested a negative influence on their well-being and performance.
The EPI questionnaire results reported no significant differences between the categories of
Information Load, Interpersonal Load, Change Load, Activity Structure, and Time Structure.
130
However, a statistical distinction between both groups expressed a stronger level of agreement
on Factor 1 where Item 8, “I can only deal with one person at a time” in Figure 1 and Item 18,
“Things usually change too fast for me” in Figure 2 indicated (see Table V) findings which
highlighted information load as significant in the analysis.
The Occupational Stress Questionnaire results generated no significant difference
between current and retired teachers for the individual items, total score, or stress factor scores.
Factor 1 included work negative features item (“How much difficulty do you feel in social
relationships because of your job?”) (0.83) and item “How much does your job provoke negative
effects on your health, according to you?” (0.88). Thus, these scores suggested stress levels
influence social relationships and well-being. Factor 3 contained independence and autonomy in
performing work duties of 0.90 for the question, “How much autonomy do you have with your
current job?” and “How much independence of decisions does your current job allow you to
have?” (0.89). Thus, these two items indicated that autonomy and decision-making influenced
the levels of stress which affect cognition and performance. Next, Factor 2, responses to
perceived weight of work responsibility questions (“What kind of continuous effort during
working hours does your current job require? (0.84)” and “How much responsibility does your
work require? (0.88)” suggested a distinction on the influence of occupational stress of teachers.
Factor 2 findings regarding perceived weight of work and responsibilities suggested the
workload and responsibilities influenced stress levels which impeded cognition and performance.
These analyses suggested that workload demands outweighed teachers’ physiological demands to
cope and stress factors that contribute to cognitive overload (information load, interpersonal load,
change load, activity structure, and time structure) greatly influenced teachers’ coping
mechanisms. Furthermore, the commonality from both groups (current and retired teachers)
131
identified stress symptoms in the open response, a statistical distinction on information load from
the EPI, and Occupational Performance Stress Questionnaire reported meaningful reliabilities on
social relationships, health, autonomy, and workload responsibilities that influenced stress levels.
Research Question 2: What are the levels of occupational performance reported by
the two groups of teachers?
The data analysis generated for the second research question revealed the levels of
occupational performance reported by the current and former teachers, as these levels pertained to
the effect of stressors on occupational performance. Research by Siegrist (1996) cited how
workload stressors affect an individual’s extrinsic and intrinsic capabilities over time and how
these stressors most likely influence job performance. Researchers such as Sancini et al. (2010)
reported higher occupational stress related to work demands and independence/autonomy due to
repetitiveness of tasks and isolation, which consequently affect mental and physical well-being
and learning environment. Additionally, research by Prasad et al. (2016) has consistently revealed
the negative impact of occupational workload stressors on teachers’ cognitive processes which
further contributed to decreased job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover (Avison, 2016).
Ultimately, Skinner et al. (2018) reported how a teacher’s job performance led to distress and
despair. Most importantly, low self-efficacy may be attributed to rising stress levels in educators,
particularly urban educators, which negatively affect their relationships, well-being, and teacher
and student performance (Shernoff, Mehta, Atkins, Torf, & Spencer, 2011).
Mitigation of these workload stressors, however, are dependent upon certain policies that,
based on scientific and educational research on occupational stress, can lead to the possible
adoption of programs to combat high teacher turnover and teacher shortage and improve well-
132
being. Such policies could minimize workload risk factors that may hinder cognition and directly
impact teacher turnover.
Research Question 2, then, was constructed to focus on the levels of performance for
current and retired teachers and to understand the effects of stress on these levels of performance,
with severe stressful circumstances leaving teachers no choice but to leave the profession.
such as workload demands resulted in lack of well-being, motivation, and commitment to their
job, and affected their performance in the classroom and their desire to remain in the profession.
A deeper scientific analysis on workload stressors suggested that these stressors resulted in the
physical and psychological impairment of teachers, which in turn affected their occupational
performance and may have resulted in their decision to leave the profession.
Survey results. A total of approximately 100 invitations to participate in the online
questionnaire was extended to current and former teachers from one urban school that generated
41 complete responses. A total of one respondent was discarded from the analysis. Demographic
items (e.g., age, education, teaching experience, gender) were used to identify current and former
teachers at the beginning of the questionnaire and responses were analyzed based on factors that
align with the four research questions. Factor 1 studied occupational stress levels expressed by the
two groups, Factor 2 represented occupational performance levels revealed by the two groups,
Factor 3 explored the relationship between occupational stress and occupational performance
levels, and Factor 4 studied possible policies and procedures which administrators could adopt to
mitigate the effects of these stressors.
The Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy survey was based on a population of 41 respondents. The
mean ratings were obtained for each group (current and retired teachers) and responses using
133
Analysis of Variance. Secondly, for each response, if the overall test for significance was
significant at the 95% confidence level, the group means were determined to be significantly
different. Factor Analysis with Varimax Rotation was performed on the Efficacy Questionnaire.
Respondents with missing data were excluded from the analysis. The scores were then calculated
by computing the unweighted means of the items that belong to the subscale groupings.
Based on the results, Table 3 summarized the mean Efficacy scores for current (28)
teachers on Efficacy in Student Engagement (M = 3.9), Efficacy in Instructional Strategies (M =
4.3), and Efficacy in Classroom Management (M = 4.1). Thirteen retired teachers reported
Efficacy in Student Engagement (M = 4.4), Efficacy in Instructional Strategies (M = 4.3), and
Efficacy in Classroom Management (M = 4.3). Table 2 summarized the factor loadings from the
factor analysis. Table 1 summarized the mean individual item scores reporting a higher level of
influence for the retired versus current teachers on Item #3, “How much can you do to get students
to believe they can do well in school work?” A higher level of influence was reported for retired
versus current teachers on Item #4. “How much can you do to help your students value learning?”
A higher level of influence was reported for retired versus current teachers on Item 11. “How much
can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?” However, there were no
significant statistical differences between current and retired teachers for student engagement,
instructional strategies or classroom management Efficacy scores.
134
Table 1
Items on the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Survey
Item Item Current Retired P-

# (28) (13) Value
1 How much can you do to control disruptive behavior in 3.8 4.2 0.1899
the classroom?
2 How much can you do to motivate students who show 3.9 4.2 0.1440
low interest in school work?
3 How much can you do to get students to believe they can 4.1 B 4.7 A 0.0108
do well in school work?
4 How much can you do to help your students value 4.0 B 4.6 A 0.0100
learning?
5 To what extent can you craft good questions for your 4.2 4.4 0.3607
students?
6 How much can you get children to follow classroom 4.4 4.5 0.3669
rules?
7 How much can you do to calm a student who is 3.9 4.0 0.5499
disruptive or noisy?
8 How well can you establish a classroom management 4.4 4.5 0.5472
system with each group of students?
9 How much can you use a variety of assessment 4.3 4.0 0.2140
strategies?
10 To what extent can you provide an alternative 4.5 4.5 0.6679

explanation or example when students are confused?
11 How much can you assist families in helping their 3.6 B 4.2 A 0.0256
children do well in school?
12 How well can you implement alternative strategies in 4.3 4.2 0.9068
your classroom?
Note. Mean ratings of the Efficacy items.
135
Table 2
Factor Analysis

# Student Instructional Classroom
Engagement Strategies Management
1 How much can you do to control 0.240 -0.087 0.758

disruptive behavior in the classroom?
2 How much can you do to motivate 0.694 0.035 0.451

students who show low interest in
school work?
3 How much can you do to get students to 0.892 0.149 0.091

believe they can do well in school work?
4 How much can you do to help your 0.865 0.053 0.080

students value learning?
5 To what extent can you craft good 0.568 0.612 -0.112

questions for your students?
6 How much can you get children to 0.525 0.237 0.550

follow classroom rules?
7 How much can you do to calm a student 0.119 0.285 0.583

who is disruptive or noisy?
8 How well can you establish a classroom 0.175 0.341 0.673

management system with each group of
students?
9 How much can you use a variety of -0.146 0.805 0.052

assessment strategies?
10 To what extent can you provide an 0.321 0.785 0.012

alternative explanation or example
when students are confused?
11 How much can you assist families in 0.217 0.153 -0.412

helping their children do well in school?
12 How well can you implement -.107 0.599 -0.229

alternative strategies in your classroom?
136
# Student Instructional Classroom
Engagement Strategies Management
Percentage of specific variance of 24% 19% 18%

factors
Note. Factor loadings of the items associated with the subscale groupings from the paper are in
bold for each of the factors. Efficacy in Student Engagement: Items 2, 3, 4, and 11. Efficacy in
Instructional Strategies: Items 5, 9, 10, and 12. Efficacy in Classroom Management: Items 1, 6,
7, and 8.
Table 3
Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scores – Means for Efficacy Scores
Efficacy Score Current (28) Retired (13)
Efficacy in Student Engagement 3.9 4.4
Efficacy in Instructional Strategies 4.3 4.3
Efficacy in Classroom Management 4.1 4.3
Note. Retired teachers reported higher Student Engagement (M=4.3) than current teachers (M =
3.9). Current teachers do not differ from retired teachers in Instructional strategies (M = 4.3).
Current and retired teachers do not differ meaningfully in Classroom Management (Current M =
4.1, Retired M = 4.3.
As mentioned above in Table 3, current and retired teachers expressed little to no difference
in their Efficacy Scores in Instructional Strategies (M = 4.3) and Classroom Management (Current
M = 4.1, Retired M = 4.3). This data suggested a commonality in scores between both groups.
The mean score for the factor of Efficacy in Student Engagement was higher for retired teachers
137
than current teachers. This data suggested a greater sense of Efficacy in Student Engagement for
retired teachers than current teachers.
Figure 1
Bar Graph
Item 3: How much can you do to get students to

believe they can do well in school work?
5.0 4.7 A
4.1 B
4.0 B
3.0
2.0
1.0
Current Retired
Note. Retired teacher mean ratings were higher (M = 4.7) versus current teacher (M = 4.1).
Figure 2
Bar Graph
Item 4: How much can you do to help your

5.0 4.6 A
4.0 B
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Current Retired
138
Note. Retired teacher mean ratings were higher (M = 4.6) versus current teacher (M = 4.0).
Figure 3
Bar Graph for Item #11
Item 11: How much can you assist families in helping their
children do well in school?
5
4.2 A
4 3.6 B
1
Current Retired
Note. Retired Teacher mean ratings were higher (M = 4.2) versus current teachers (M = 3.6).
Table 4
Efficacy Response Item Scores for items 3, 4 and 11
Efficacy Item Current (28) Retired (13) P-Value
3) How much can you do to get students

to believe they can do well in school 4.1 B 4.7 A 0.0108 **
work?
4) How much can you do to help your

4.0 B 4.6 A 0.0100 **
11) How much can you assist families in

3.6 B 4.2 A 0.0256 **
helping their children do well in school?
139
Figures 1, 2, and 3 are visual representations of the significant items in the Teacher Sense
of Efficacy survey. This data suggested that teachers’ confidences about their capabilities were
related to their behaviors in the classroom which affected their abilities to cope and, therefore,
suggested a hindrance in their performance outcomes in the classroom.
Finding 2 Summary
The evidence derived from the data sources linked to Research Question 2 suggested the
distinct performance levels affected by stress factors which impede teachers’ performance and
with the possibility of leaving the profession. Table 1 and Table 3 provided the results for the
mean scores. Findings suggested that there were no significant statistical differences between
current and retired teachers for student engagement, instructional strategies or classroom
management. Table 2 summarized the factor loadings from the factor analysis associated with the
subgrouping. Table 1 summarized the mean individual item scores reporting a higher level of
influence for the retired versus current teachers on Item #3, “How much can you do to get students
to believe they can do well in school work?” A higher level of influence was reported for retired
versus current teachers on Item #4, “How much can you do to help your students value learning?”
A higher level of influence was reported for retired versus current teachers on Item 11, “How much
can you assist families in helping their children do well in school?”
Furthermore, the data analysis with Finding 2 and Finding 1 reported no significant
statistical difference in their levels of stress and performance for both groups, except for the higher
item scores for retired teachers than the current teachers on Item #3, Item #4, and Item #11 in
Finding 2. Specifically, in comparison to Finding 1, the EPI results had no significant difference
between current and retired teachers for the EPI scores. However, a stronger level of agreement
was reported for the current teachers than the retired teachers for Item #8, “I can only deal with
140
one person at a time,” and for the retired teachers, Item #18, “Things usually change too fast for
me.” These results were found in the Information Load category; as information load increases,
the level of stress increases. This variation may influence teacher performance levels. Factor
analysis from the Occupational Survey extracted 3 factors: work negative features, independence
and autonomy in performing work, and perceived weight of work responsibility. No significant
differences in the factors were found between current and retired teachers.
Research Question 3: To what extent are the levels of occupational stress related to
the levels of occupational performance among the two groups of teachers?
The data generated for the third research question revealed the relationship between levels
of occupational stress and occupational performance by the current and former teachers;
specifically, the effects of stress on teacher efficacy and its impact on whether or not they decide
to leave the profession. Research by Skinner et al. (2018), citing figures from the 2016/2017
Labour Force Survey (LFS), reported a total of 526,000 cases of work-related stress or 1,610 per
100,000 employees. This data suggested mental disorders and high levels of stress in the teaching
profession are above average when compared to other professions (Smith, Brice, Collins,
Matthews, & McNamara, 2000; Travers & Cooper, 1996). Another study by Van Horn et al.
(2001) reported that 42% of female teachers in India experienced chronic stress effects from
different emotions that influenced their occupational performance. In effect, teachers experienced
constant pressure to meet targeted performance standards based on student outcomes, and Ball
(2003) argued that this put “the teacher’s soul” at risk (p. 216). Skinner et al. (2018) also reported
the feelings of another teacher who had taught for 28 years and had experienced distress and
despair from a performance review:
141
I don’t like to say I attempted suicide but I just attempted to get myself out of the situation
in a drastic way because it felt like the only way out at the time. It felt like there’s no help,
there’s nowhere to go, there’s no point. I’m useless. I’ll never achieve what they want me
to achieve. I must be a rubbish teacher. All that sort of thing. (p. 71)
Further research by Bandura (1997) detailed the concept of teacher self-efficacy,
effectiveness of teacher-student relationships, “social-cognitivism” which influences student
achievement, and the teaching profession (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007; Tschannen-Moran &
Woolfolk-Hoy, 2001). Additionally, Sahlberg (2012) described the Global Education Reform
Movement (GERM) as a measure of teacher performance. The pressure to meet evaluation criteria
within a managerial monitoring framework may hinder teachers’ self-efficacy and more than likely
causes emotional and physical disorders. In comparison, teachers with low self-efficacy
demonstrated higher stress levels, contingent upon those same factors (Betoret, 2006; Klassen &
Chiu, 2010; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007). Stress factors related to inadequate performance may
suggest dysfunctional results and diminishment in self-efficacy, student achievement, and job
satisfaction.
Research Question 3, then, was constructed to focus on the levels of stress and performance
for current and retired teachers to understand the effects of stress and its possible influence on their
occupational performance and decision to leave the profession.
Teachers expressed challenges from cognitive overload and workload demands which were
more likely to affect their performance and lead to their leaving the profession, in addition to the
failure of school administration to initiate health benefit programs or policies to improve well-
being and mitigate stress.
142
Open Survey Results. The open online survey and combined questionnaires (consisting
of the Environmental Preference Inventory, Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and Teachers’
Sense of Efficacy Scale) had a total of approximately 100 invitations to participate. It was extended
to current and former teacher from one urban school that generated 41 complete responses. One
respondent was discarded from the analysis. Demographic items (e.g., age, education, teaching
experience, gender) were used to identify current and former teachers at the beginning of the
questionnaire and then the responses were analyzed. The four factors were as follows: Factor 1,
occupational stress levels by the two groups; Factor 2, occupational performance levels by the two
groups; Factor 3, relationship between the occupational stress and occupational performance
levels; and Factor 4, policies and procedures for administrators.
The first question on the open survey was, “What are some stress factors that might affect
your performance as a teacher?” Responses are shown below in Table 1 which summarized the
percent incidence and counts of the reported stress factors for all 41 respondents (28 current
teachers and 13 retired teachers). The primary stress factors that influence performance are
physical and mental stress (22%), time management (20%), testing (20%), and paperwork (20%).
143
Table 1
Stress Factors
What are some stress factors

that might affect your All Respondents Current Retired
performance as a teacher? (n=41) (n=28) (n=13)
Category Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count
Physical/Mental 22% 9 25% 7 15% 2
Time Management 20% 8 21% 6 15% 2
Testing 20% 8 18% 5 23% 3
Paperwork 20% 8 25% 7 8% 1
Students 15% 6 21% 6 0% 0
Class size 15% 6 11% 3 23% 3
Expectations 12% 5 7% 2 23% 3
Administration 10% 4 7% 2 15% 2
Collaboration/Support 10% 4 11% 3 8% 1
Parents 10% 4 11% 3 8% 1
Resources 7% 3 11% 3 0% 0
Environment 7% 3 11% 3 0% 0
Curriculum 5% 2 0% 0 15% 2
Classroom Management 5% 2 4% 1 8% 1
Data Collection 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Grading 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Note. This table summarizes the percentages for all respondents n=41, current n=28, and retired
teachers n=13. Highest percentages for current and retired teachers combined were in the
categories of physical/mental (22%), time management (20%), testing (20%), and paperwork
(20%).
144
Figure 1
Stress Factor Bar Graph
Performance Stress Factors

Current and Retired Teachers Combined
30%
25%
20%
% Respondents
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. This chart summarizes the percentages in the different categories and provides a visual
representation of the stress factors in percentages for current and retired teachers combined when
answering the question, “What are some stress factors that might affect your performance as
teachers?” Lower percentages <10% for current and retired teachers combined included resources
(7%), environment (7%), curriculum (5%), classroom management (5%), data collection (2%),
and grading (2%).
Figure 2 below provides data with a visual representation for current teachers and their
statements. Figure 3 shows a visual representation for retired teachers and their statements.
145
Figure 2
Current Teachers Stress Factors

Current Teachers
30%
25%
% Respondents
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. Current Teachers (CTC) visual representation. See comments below.
Current Teachers (CTC) Statements
CTC1 stated: “Sometimes I believe there are too many things to do at once and not enough
time is dedicated to planning effective lessons for the students. There is a lot of paperwork.”
CTC2 expressed: “Getting students to target levels in all academic areas at the end of each
marking period creates lots of stress.”
CTC3 explained: “Paperwork; grading guidelines; the amount of class sections and
students in a classroom.”
CTC4 stated: “Never-ending paperwork, supervisors who are not trained in my field,
inefficient forms, not enough time to complete paperwork, technology not working correctly.”
146
CTC5 confirmed: “Physical and mental state continue to deteriorate due to demands of
job, student apathy, and school environment.”
CTC6 stated: “Disruptive students; some difficult parents, lack of resources, funding,
parking.”
CTC7 stated: “Lack of respect and choices. Plus, too many responsibilities with little
authority.”
CTC8 confirmed: “Fatigue, anxiety, lack of sleep, which can cause you to be in a different
emotional mood and how you interact with students.”
Figure 3.
Stress Factor for Retired Teachers

Retired Teachers
30%
% Respondents
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. Visual Representation of Retired Teachers. See comments below.
Retired Teachers (RTC)
RTC1 expressed: “Paperwork was stressful. Over testing of students. I’m retired now.
Stress free!”
RTC2 stated: “Unrealistic expectations put on students by district, overwhelming
paperwork, class size.”
147
RTC3 stated: “Overcrowded classrooms, students with little or no parental help, teaching
to a test, multiple needs of students; (i.e., bilingual, special education; no teaching assistant or
aide). Needing more time with students that need more help.”
RTC4 agreed: “Unreasonable curriculum standards for students. They are inappropriate,
developmentally ridiculous. Frustration of not being able to raise economically disadvantaged
children to meet unrealistic standards.”
RTC5 explained: “Unable to meet the needs of students that are in crisis.”
RTC6 stated: “Lack of collaboration with other teachers, rigid evaluation timelines and
standardized testing.”
RTC7 expressed: “Agitated and no patience.”
These written findings described stress factors for current and retired teachers. In general,
both groups expressed similar concerns for unrealistic expectations placed upon them, never-
ending and overwhelming paperwork, lack of resources, and the deterioration of their physical and
mental state due to job demands. Table 1 data on paperwork revealed 25% for current teachers,
and 8% for paperwork and 23% for testing among retired teachers.
Open survey question two was, “What factors might influence or have influenced your
decision to leave the teaching profession?” This researcher attempted to identify themes in the
responses and to determine if there was a difference between current and retired teachers in the
decision to leave factors. Responses were categorized and tabulated with the intent to identify
major themes unique to or shared between current and retired teachers. Table 2 provided data
regarding factors that might or have influenced teachers in their decision to exit the profession.
148
Table 2
Decision to Leave Factors
What factors might influence or

have influenced your decision to All Respondents Current Retired
leave the teaching profession? (n=41) (n=28) (n=13)
Workload 29% 12 21% 6 46% 6
Salary/Benefits 22% 9 25% 7 15% 2
Personal 22% 9 21% 6 23% 3
Curriculum 7% 3 4% 1 15% 2
Job Satisfaction 5% 2 7% 2 0% 0
Discipline 2% 1 0% 0 8% 1
Curriculum 2% 1 0% 0 8% 1
Parental support 2% 1 0% 0 8% 1
Note. This table summarizes the percentages for all respondents n=41, current n=28, and retired
teachers n=13. Highest percentages for current and retired teachers combined in the categories of
workload (29%), administration (27%) salary/benefits (22%), and personal (22%).
Table 2 and Figure 4 identified the primary factors which influenced both current and
retired teachers’ (n=41) decision to leave the teaching profession as workload 29%, followed by
administration 27% , salary/benefits 22%, and personal reasons 22%.
149
Figure 4

Current and Retired Teachers Combined
50%
45%
40%
% Respondents
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. Visual representation of current and retired teachers combined. Workload represented the
highest category, followed by administration, salary/benefit, and personal.
Figure 5
Decision to Leave - Current Teachers

Current Teachers
50%
45%
40%
% Respondents
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
150
Note. Visual Representation of current teachers (n=28). Highest percentages for administration
25%, salary/benefits (25%), workload 21%, and personal 21%. See comments below.
Current Teachers (CTC)
CTC1 stated: “Not feeling effective enough.”
CTC2 added: “Having to take work home.”
CTC3 expressed: “Funding.”
CTC4 stated: “Lack of pay to compensate for my education and experience.
CTC5 agreed: “Low salary.”
CTC6 stated: “Love for teaching goes away.”
CTC7 expressed: “Tiredness/Fatigue.”
CTC8 added: “Lack of teacher recognitions.”
CTC9 stated: “Skills that we are required to teach are not developmentally appropriate.”
CTC10 added: “The feeling of being challenged or not challenged enough. I have grown
to what I can be as an educator and don’t feel the personal satisfaction.”
CTC11 expressed: “Time for my family.”
CTC12 confirmed: “Little respect.”
151
Figure 6
Decision to Leave - Retired Teachers

Retired Teachers
50%
45%
40%
% Respondents
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. Visual representation of retired teachers (n=13). Highest percentages for workload 46%,
administration 31%, and personal 23%. See comments below.
Retired Teachers (RTC)
RTC1 stated: “Ridiculous amount of paperwork.”
RTC2 confirmed: “Too much documentation.”
RTC3 expressed: “Fear of lost benefits.”
RTC4 agreed: “Stressed out after 36 years.”
RTC5 stated: “Need to focus on my health and enjoy a slower less stressful life.”
RTC6 expressed: “Lacking parental support.”
When broken down, Figure 5showed the decision to leave factors for current teachers
(n=28) at 25% each for administration and salary/benefits and 21% each for workload/personal.
Figure 6 showed the decision to leave factors for retired teachers (n=13) at 46% for workload and
administration at 31%. Table 2 showed workload for both groups combined (n=41) as the primary
decision to leave factor at 29% which may indicate a correlation between stress and performance.
152
Teachers’ written comments supported the primary themes identified by the data analysis. It is
clear from the comments that teachers did not feel effective enough, didn’t want to have to take
work home, felt tiredness and fatigue, had to deal with extensive paperwork, and the need to focus
on their health. These were all cited as primary factors affecting the relationship between stress
and performance. Teachers’ comments suggested that workload demands influenced efficacy and
well-being because they diminished quality teaching.
Administration (27%), salary/benefits (22%), and personal reasons (22%) were also among
the most concerning factors associated with the decision to leave the profession for both groups
combined. Teachers expressed how little respect they were shown, how they were not
compensated monetarily for their education and experience, how they did not feel challenged
enough, and how they did not feel personal satisfaction as an educator. These comments suggested
that school administration should implement policies or programs which bring forth respect and
teacher recognition, allow for professional growth, and reduce work-related stress levels that
impede teaching performance.
Semi-Structured One-to-One Interview Results.
Responses from the Human Resource employee interview supported the surveys and open
survey findings to suggest that occupational stress levels may influence teacher performance and
their decision to leave the profession. The participant was assigned a pseudonym, District
employee (DEMP), and the interviewer was identified as INTW during the interview process in
order to preserve the confidentiality of the responses. Interview responses were compared to
results from the survey and questionnaire data collected and may suggest a relationship between
stress and performance influencing teachers’ decision to leave the profession.
153
The DEMP maintained a positive attitude throughout the semi-structured interview (six
questions) about teacher stress and performance and described quality programs available by the
District. The identification of emergent themes was identified and utilized for this study. The
qualitative analysis utilized two major themes across this research: (a) stress factors that affect
performance and (b) stress factors that affect teachers leaving their jobs. Themes unique to the
relationship between stress and performance emerged during the analysis.
Stress Factors that Affect Performance
The first question was, “What are some stress factors that you think might affect teacher
performance?” District Employee (DEMP) of the Human Resource Department shared:
“Let me start talking about the novice teachers. This is their first year teaching. They’ve
never been in the classroom. They’re coming straight from school. A lot of the times they may
have distress or, like, anxiety because they’ve never been into the position, but we have different
kinds of professional development and support to help them.”
Because teachers feel the pressure during their first year and their stress levels begin to
increase and accumulate, which can affect their well-being and performance, the DEMP was
concerned and empathized with novice teachers and suggested professional development courses
offered by the district. However, as more experienced teachers’ stress levels increase throughout
the years affecting health and performance, the DEMP continued:
“Some of the issues they may face is like social. It can be their surroundings, the
environment of the school, the demographic of the students. Sometimes they don’t know how to
interact with them. Personalities sometimes is an issue within a staff and their principals or maybe
they don’t feel that they have the right support. So, it depends, every building, every teacher has a
different situation.”
154
The DEMP suggested experienced teachers are faced with social issues or other stress
factors which may influence job performance and understood the point of view of the school
administration.
Stress Factors that Affect Teachers Leaving Their Jobs
Another question which the INTW proposed: “What are some factors that you think might
affect these teachers leaving their jobs?”
The DEMP replied:
“I created the teacher exit survey and as the teachers are leaving the district, I’m sending
them the survey just because I want to know what’s going on and how we can work on maybe
retaining a lot of these staff, because they’re great teachers. Well, what I realized is money is a
big factor. This district, because we are the City of [name redacted], like we’re underfunded. We
don’t have the money to keep a lot of these great teachers. They have the experience and they go
to other districts, and they offer them a salary that we can’t compete with. So, a lot of the times
that’s what it comes down to is money. The money issue. I haven’t seen much, you know, maybe
one or two, I’ve seen situations that they’re unhappy in the building, but that could have been
easily resolved because we’re such a large district – if you’re not happy in one building, we can
transfer. You submit a request, a transfer, or if you need more assistance, we have professional
development. We have a department solely to support these staff. So, we do our best for you not
to leave, but if there’s like a personality issue with that administrator, submit a transfer request and
we can always transfer you to another school.”
The DEMP stated that the district’s salary scale was lower compared to other districts and
understood how this stress factor might be attributed to teachers leaving the profession; however,
it was the district that set the scale. In agreement, educators confirmed low salaries/benefits as a
155
stress indicator that influenced their decision to leave the field. In addition, conflict issues with
other staff or administration may arise, and teachers are offered transfers or professional
development courses for solutions. These concerns were important for the DEMP and, for this
reason, confidential exit interviews were created and shared only with the assistant superintendent.
DEMP discussed the procedure:
“The only reason is: 1) it’s confidential, it’s anonymous, it doesn’t have any employee’s
name. It just asks you simple questions, how long you’ve been at the district, how long have you
been teaching, how long have you been thinking about leaving the district, why are you leaving?
And then I give different scenarios, would it change? If this would have been fixed, will you still
be with us?”
While the criteria for the confidentiality of the exit interview is restricted at the highest
level, DEMP stated no exit interview is permitted at the building level. INTW acknowledged the
importance of an exit interview.
Finding 3 Summary
The data generated by two questions in the open response survey and two questions from
the semi-structured interview suggested certain challenges between teachers’ stress levels and their
performance which may affect their cognition and efficacy to perform quality teaching. As
previously mentioned, survey data generated from Finding #1 reported no significant statistical
differences between both groups (current and retired teachers). However, results showed variations
in information load from the EPI where if affects stress levels in teachers. Specifically, Finding 1
(on the Occupational Stress Questionnaire) reported no significant statistical differences, but the
results for both groups (current and retired teachers) noted significant reliabilities for the work
negative features, independence and autonomy, and perceived weight of work responsibility
156
categories which all are stress factors that hinder teachers’ cognition, efficacy, and performance
from the increased levels.
Conversely, the data results from Finding 3 supported how both groups (current and retired
teachers) identified the stress factors and decision to leave themes. Results demonstrated workload
with the highest percentage of 29%, followed by administration at 27%, and salary and benefits at
22%. Educators’ comments expressed their feelings on unrealistic expectations on workload
demands, administration, low salaries/benefits, job satisfaction, loss of love for the profession, and
pressure to perform based on student outcomes. One-to-one interview provided data on stress
factors that affect performance and aligned with the survey. Based on the results examined, teacher
support for novice and experienced teachers included professional development offered by the
district, and first-year teachers had additional support. Other stress factors, such as, low salary/
benefits contributed to teachers leaving the profession. Exit interviews supported data on why
teachers leave the district or the profession, as an educator’s occupational stress levels relate to
their performance.
Research Question 4: What policies and procedures might be implemented by
administrators to mitigate the possible effects of occupational stress among teachers?
Researchers cited negative occupational behaviors due to dissatisfaction from
abusive and unfair leadership practices that possibly result in dysfunctional turnover instead of
inspiring and supporting teachers, ultimately leading to negative job productivity and performance
(Reina et al., 2018; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Bhattacharya, 2008; Campion, 1991; Holtom,
Mitchell, Lee, & Inderrieden, 2006; Tepper, 2000).
Furthermore, teachers possibly exit the profession due to stress from unfair
leadership practices that linger and become occupational hazards linked to functional deficiency
157
and achievement gaps. The correlation between occupational stress and turnover behaviors may
influence teacher retention (Gilboa, Shirom, Fried, & Cooper, 2008). Alternatively, leadership
styles with developmental mentoring relationships create loyalty and growth within the
organization because they minimize teachers’ decisions to exit the profession, influence them to
stay, and may optimize work performance (Waldman et al., 2015).
McCarthy et al. (2011) found that a culture affording preventative strategies for
teachers directly correlated with 158 high school teachers’ perceptions of occupational
satisfaction; however, this study reported no intentions to leave the profession. Approximately
46% of the teachers’ intentions to leave and 53% of the teachers’ intentions to transfer in past years
were significant in the continuum between attitudes and behaviors. Therefore, perceptions are
determining factors that suggest that careful monitoring and balancing of occupational demands
by the administration may deter teachers from leaving the teaching profession. McCarthy et al.
(2009) examined how the prevention of stress may dismiss it altogether.
Research Question 4 was constructed to focus on the policies and procedures that
are present or might be implemented by administrators and policy makers to mitigate the possible
effects of occupational stress among teachers that influence their decisions to leave the profession.
depression, anxiety, burnout, and suicidal thoughts, in a purposeful manner to enhance teacher
performance and improve retention.
Open Survey Results.
The open online survey and combined questionnaires (consisting of the Environmental
Preference Inventory, Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale),
158
and open survey had a total of approximately 100 invitations to participate. It was extended to
current and former teachers from one urban school that generated 41 complete responses. One
respondent was discarded from the analysis. Demographic items (e.g., age, education, teaching
experience, gender) were used to identify current and former teachers at the beginning of the
questionnaire and then the responses were analyzed. The four factors were as follows: Factor 1,
occupational stress levels by the two groups; Factor 2, occupational performance levels by the two
groups; Factor 3, relationship between the occupational stress and occupational performance
levels; and Factor 4, policies and procedures for administrators.
The third question on the open survey was, “How can these stress factors be
addressed to prevent teachers from leaving their profession?” Responses are shown below in Table
3. These responses were categorized and tabulated with the intent to identify major themes unique
to or shared between current and retired teachers. Table 3 summarized items that would prevent
teachers from leaving their profession. Findings suggested that, in total, the categories of
administration (15%), teacher control (15%), and support and restorative outlet (12%) were the
primary factors that needed to be addressed to prevent teachers from leaving the profession.
Furthermore, the issues related to administration were driven more by retired teachers (38%), while
the issue related to teacher control was driven more by current teachers (21%).
159
Table 3
Prevent from Leaving Factors
How can these stress factors be

addressed to prevent teachers All Respondents Current Retired
from leaving their profession? (n=41) (n=28) (n=13)
Teacher control 15% 6 21% 6 0% 0
Support 12% 5 14% 4 8% 1
Restorative outlet 12% 5 11% 3 15% 2
Student expectations & needs 10% 4 7% 2 15% 2
Innovative Solutions 7% 3 7% 2 8% 1
Politics/Standardized testing 7% 3 11% 3 0% 0
Workload 7% 3 7% 2 8% 1
Workshops 7% 3 4% 1 15% 2
Paperwork 5% 2 4% 1 8% 1
Class size 5% 2 7% 2 0% 0
Salary 5% 2 7% 2 0% 0
Collaboration 5% 2 4% 1 8% 1
Mental health 5% 2 4% 1 8% 1
Respect 5% 2 7% 2 0% 0
Curriculum 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Unsure 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Not letting them be teachers 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Schedule 2% 1 4% 1 0% 0
Note. Both groups (current and retired teachers), administration and teacher control of 15%;
support and restorative outlet of 12% (n=41).
Figure 1 below provided data in a visual representation that demonstrated the prevent from
leaving factors on current and retired teachers. Overall, the consensus among the teachers’ voices
prevent from leaving stress factors from item #3 were written and recorded based on the categories
for data analysis.
160
Figure 1
Prevent from Leaving Factors – Current and Retired Teachers

Current and Retired Teachers
45%
40%
% Respondents
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Current (n=28) Retired (n=13)
Note. Visual representation for current and retired teachers.
Figure 2 below provides data with a visual representation for current teachers and their
statements. Figure 3 shows a visual representation for retired teachers and their statements.
161
Figure 2
Prevent from Leaving Factors - Current Teachers

Current Teachers
45%
40%
% Respondents
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. Visual representation for current teachers, showing teacher control with the highest rating
of 21% (n=6).
Current Teacher (CTC) Statements
CTC1 added: “Listening to teachers about their concerns and addressing the group.”
CTC2 explained: “Reevaluate assessments and the frequency they are given.”
CTC3 stated: “Statewide salary scale for all teachers.”
CTC4 agreed: “Allow teachers to facilitate and teach instead of following a script in the
classroom.”
CTC5 expressed: “Talk about how you feel and share your strong feelings and get help if
needed.”
CTC6 stated: “A ‘time-out’ is needed to refresh and relax from the environment.”
162
Figure 3
Prevent from Leaving Factors - Retired Teachers

Retired Teachers
45%
40%
% Respondents
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Note. Visual representation of prevent from leaving factors of retired teachers, with Administration
receiving the highest rating of 38% (n=5).
Retired Teacher (RTC) Statements
RTC1 explained: “Mental health counselors should be present and available to staff when they
need help.”
RTC3 expressed: “Longer lunch period would allow time to digest food.”
RTC4 stated: “A full-time aide in the classroom to help those students in need.”
RTC5 expressed: “Parental classes held during the day and evening to teach parents how to help
their children with school work.”
These written findings show prevent from leaving stress factors for current and retired
teachers. In general, both groups expressed a similar concern with administration, teacher control,
163
support, and restorative outlet. When broken down in Figure 2, significant findings for current
teachers (n=28) showed the highest percentage for teacher control at 21%, support 14%, and
politics/standardized testing/restorative outlet 11%. Findings did show teachers’ written comments
regarding themes for further reliabilities in data analysis. Teachers felt that administrators needed
to listen more to teachers about their concerns, indicated that it was important to talk about your
feelings and emotions and get help if necessary, and felt that mental health counseling services
should be provided to staff as a preventative measure.
Table 3 data indicated that administration was a concern for 15% of all participants;
however, current teachers were more concerned with teacher control (21%). Also, Table 3 showed
that the category of restorative outlet was important for 12% of all participants. Teachers felt that
they needed timeouts to relax, longer lunch periods, a quiet place to think, and destressing activities
such as yoga or massage. Teachers also explained the need to reevaluate assessments and the
frequency in which they are given (which limits teacher control), and that teachers should be
allowed to teach instead of following pre-determined scripts in the classroom (which inhibits
teachers’ self-efficacy, well-being, and performance). These predictors are important for the
prevention of teachers leaving the profession. Administration policies are deemed more important
by retired than current teachers as an important preventative factor.
Teachers felt that a statewide salary scale for all teachers across all states was important
since it would provide fair salaries for all teachers. They also indicated that they needed full-time
aides in classroom to assist with children who needed more help and suggested that parental classes
be held during the day/evening to teach parents how to help their children with their schoolwork.
These were addressed as critical factors in helping teachers and improving retention.
164
Semi-Structured One-to-One Interview Results
Responses from the Human Resource employee interview supported the surveys and open
survey findings and suggested that occupational stress levels influenced teacher performance and
their decision to leave the profession. The participant was assigned a pseudonym, District
employee (DEMP), and the interviewer was identified as INTW during the interview process in
order to preserve the confidentiality of the responses. Interview responses were compared to results
from the survey and questionnaire data collected and may suggest a relationship between stress
and performance influencing teachers’ decisions to leave the profession.
The DEMP maintained a positive attitude throughout the semi-structured interview (six
questions) about teacher stress and performance and described quality programs available by the
district. The identification of emergent themes was identified and utilized for this study. The
qualitative analysis utilized four major themes across this research: (a) measures schools have
taken to help reduce stress, (b) the effectiveness of stress-reducing activities, (c) activities to reduce
stress, and (d) experience in diverse setting. Themes unique to the relationship between stress and
performance emerged during the analysis.
Measures Schools Have Taken to Help Reduce Stress
The third question was, “What are some measures schools have taken to help reduce stress
for teachers?” Regarding school environment, DEMP explained:
“We have hired a lot of former police officers, retired police officers, and now they’re our
permanent staff. There are supervisors for security. So, security, especially in our high schools,
we have over two or three police officers on site. So, we have the security department that we
165
outsource to, so security and safety is one of our main concerns. We want our children to be safe,
our parents and our staff as well.”
School environment was a priority for the safety of the staff and students, particularly in
an urban setting. Violence has escalated in our society and into the local communities which
require strict safety measures for saving lives.
When discussing other measures, DEMP continued to express improvement plans for work
performance and professional development aimed at providing support for teachers.
Effectiveness of Stress-Reducing Activities
The fourth question was, “Are these stress-reducing activities effective?” DEMP
explained with enthusiasm:
“I would say yes. Well, I would hope it is. A lot of the times… Let me go back to the first
question with the novice teachers – you know, once they get used to the classroom, they get used
to the students and just being in front of the classroom and they know they have support, those
stressors tend to go away.”
INTW continued with discussion:
“Do they have a mentor? Do they still have the mentor program?”
DEMP stated the district procedures:
“So if you’re into the provisional program, you need to be mentored for 30 weeks. So, you
do get a mentor for those 30 weeks, and there is such a thing called ‘Level II Mentoring,’ which is
not mandatory, but we do have it to offer. These are teachers that were coming from another
district and they were mentored at another district but they’re new to our district. But they still
have their provisional [cert] but we have Level II mentoring as well, just to make sure that we’re
all okay.
166
INTW followed with questioning: “What about the tenured teachers?”
DEMP replied: “We don’t have training for them. We have the training that I mentioned,
except their principals. They can always go to their principals. There’s a lot of department heads,
so it’s not only one administrator at the building level. There’s vice-principals, there’s department
heads, there’s principals, so you can always speak with them and reach out if you have any
uncertainty or you’re stressed about anything.”
INTW asked: “What about the well-being program? It is a new measure to help employees
maintain their health.”
DEMP nodded in response: “Yes, we have an incentive for all employees, a health
preventive care program where you can earn $250 a year. Also, if you go to the gym you can also
earn $20.00 a month when completing certain log-in times a month.” INTW acknowledged the
value of mental and physical health for all employees.
INTW continued with the conversation and asked: “What about the mindfulness
presentation from a William Paterson professor?”
DEMP expressed kindly: “I was not included in the attendance, but last year or the year
before, they gave free massages at the Central Office.”
Activities to Reduce Stress from DEMP’s Perspective
The fifth question was, “What are some activities you think would help teachers
reduce stress and increase their performance?”
DEMP responded: “Everybody has their prep time and then you also have your lunch
period. I feel that they should make the most with that time. If it’s prep time, a lot of the times,
you know, it’s something very simple. Taking the time, for example, five minutes to do a little
167
meditation a day or even do yoga in the teacher’s lounge would probably make a difference. Also,
they have these apps that might be helpful.”
DEMP strongly believed that maintaining good health was crucial. However, educators
utilize much of their prep time for lesson planning, collaborating with colleagues, and parent
conferences, which are demands for effective performance.
However, the INTW brought up the subject of demanding workloads, including excessive
paperwork, as important work-related stress factors that influence teachers’ well-being and job
performance.
DEMP responded on these issues: “We want to be supportive with their problems. In my
opinion, the best thing you can do is just meditate. Center yourself and release it to come back at
work.” She indicated that these are some activities to relieve stress for teachers. She added: “If
you’re sick, take a day and stay home. You know, I understand there’s a lot of people that they go
above and beyond, and we have the incentive here as well if they’ve got perfect attendance, but if
you’re sick and you’re not feeling well, take a day.” INTW stressed that teachers need to think
about the staff and children getting sick and DEMP agreed.
Experience in Diverse Setting
The sixth question was, “Is there anything else you would like to share with me in regard
to your experience working in this diverse setting?”
DEMP responded: “I’m an employee of the district for 16 years and do my best not to stress
out. I organize, schedule, and these time management skills are important to get tasks done. If a
person will incorporate that into their work ethics, it will be easier on them because then you’re
not stressing about, ‘Oh, where is this document? Where is this?’ Everything is organized.” INTW
acknowledged DEMP’s success.
168
Finding 4 Summary
The data generated by four questions in the open response survey and four questions from
the semi-structured interview suggested specific challenges regarding preventative measures to
ensure that teachers are retained in the district. These challenges may affect teachers’ well-being
and ultimately affect their job performance.
In total, the categories of administration and teacher control (15%) and support and
restorative outlet (12%) were the primary factors that need to be addressed to prevent teachers
from leaving the profession. Furthermore, the issues related to administration were driven more
by retired teachers (38%), while the issue related to teacher control was driven more by current
teachers (21%). Figure 2 findings for current teachers (n=28) showed concerns about teacher
control with the highest percentage of 21%, followed by support of 14%, and standardized
testing/restorative outlet of 11%. Figure 3 showed the data on the highest rating of 38% for
administration for the retired teachers. Moreover, this data revealed items to prevent teachers from
leaving their profession such as administration, teacher control, restorative outlet, support, and
standardized testing.
The semi-structured, one-to-one interview supported Finding #4, stressing the importance
of a well-being program and mentorship for novice teachers as well as professional development.
There were other preventative measures available for experienced teachers, and it was expressed
by many that a low salary scale might influence teachers’ decisions to leave the profession.
Additionally, the district has continued its efforts to research and find solutions to alleviate stress
for teachers which directly affects job performance. The data collected suggested that
administrators and policymakers need to consider teacher stress as an essential influence on teacher
169
work performance. These preventative measures can potentially help introduce de-stressing
activities that would increase teacher job performance and retention in an urban district.
Chapter Summary
The purpose of this mixed-method study was to investigate specific occupational stressors
and analyze the factors that can influence teachers' physical and mental well-being and turnover.
This body of knowledge examined the relationships between stressors affecting job performance
and teachers leaving the profession, and then analyzed the predictions based upon these factors.
This mixed-methods research study was a balance of quantitative and qualitative methods that
included a one-on-one interview, three behavioral questionnaires, and an open survey. Research
participants included current and former teachers, and a Human Resource employee. These
participants provided data for the four research findings extracted from the research questions.
Research Question 1 produced Finding 1, indicating that while there was no significant
difference in cognitive overload and occupational stress reported by the two groups of teachers,
there was statistical distinction on information load, social relationships, health, autonomy, and
workload responsibilities, all of which may influence stress levels. This study found that the more
experienced current teachers and former teachers may have been exposed to the same work-related
stress for an extended period of time. Therefore, the probability was higher for experienced
teachers to leave the profession. Research Question 2 yielded Finding 2, suggesting that teachers’
experiences of cognitive overload and other occupational stressors such as workload demands may
result in lack of well-being, motivation, and commitment to their job, and affect their performance
in the classroom and their desire to remain in the profession. A deeper scientific analysis on
workload stressors suggested that these stressors may result in the physical and psychological
170
impairment of teachers, which in turn affects their occupational performance and may result in
their decision to leave the profession.
Research Question 3 produced Finding 3, where teachers expressed challenges from
cognitive overload and workload demands and that this relationship is more likely to affect their
performance which may lead to leaving the profession due to the lack of support from school
administration and lack of health benefit programs or policies to improve teacher well-being.
Research Question 4 produced Finding 4, which suggested that providing appropriate
administrative leadership policies and health benefit programs within the district are needed to
reduce workload and occupational stressors such as depression, anxiety, burnout, and suicidal
thoughts, which will enhance teacher efficacy/performance and improve retention.
Chapter V will provide evidence on the four findings, including implications and
recommendations for further research on teacher stress and its effects on occupational performance
in an urban school district.
171
Chapter V: Findings, Discussion, and Recommendations
Introduction
Teacher stress continues to exist in the 21st century worldwide, leading to negative
consequences for teachers and disruptions in the educational system itself. These disruptions in
school cultural norms affect students and school personnel, resulting in outcomes of poor
performance for both teachers and students. Despite the overwhelming proof of teacher shortage,
the problems of chronic stress, burnout, and the decline of teacher-student relationships are often
neglected (Galand, Lecocq, & Philippot, 2007).
Schonfeld et al. (2017) remind us today that teachers experience higher occupational
stressors when compared to other professional groups, including high stakes testing, interpersonal
conflicts, accountability, balancing family with work obligations, and emotional conflicts with
parents, faculty, administration, and students. These stress factors affect teacher well-being, and
research demonstrates declined mental health and increased burnout (Johnson et al., 2005; Lambert
& McCarthy, 2006; Mazzola, Schonfield, & Spector, 2011; Nubling et al., 2011; Saleem & Shah,
2011; Simbula et al., 2012).
A teacher’s work performance diminishes swiftly as a result of stressful experiences in
their work environment. These constant demands affect their ability to function, creating a toxic
change in physical and emotional responses. As a result, productivity diminishes, and attention,
teamwork, and interpersonal relationships are hindered. The literature is replete with evidence
that health and job performance are harmed by occupational stress (Maume & Purcell, 2007).
Humboldt, Leal, Laneiro, and Tavares (2013) reported problems with “occupational stressors from
work relationships, inefficient leadership, overwhelming workload, time constraints, and the
pressure to perform” (p. 413). In addition, employees who have minimal free time, as well as time
172
constraints within which to achieve enhanced results, suffer a severe imbalance in occupational
and life responsibilities (Tayfur & Arslan, 2013; Callan, 2007; van der Lippe, 2007; Watts, 2009).
The purpose of this study is to investigate specific occupational stressors and analyze the
factors that can influence teachers' physical and mental well-being and turnover. This body of
knowledge examines the relationships between stressors affecting job performance and teachers
leaving the profession, then analyzing the predictions based on these factors.
The following four research questions drove this study:
teachers?
Organization of Chapter V
This mixed-methods study produced both quantitative and qualitative data from three
questionnaires, an open survey, and a semi-structured, one-to-one interview and created a
triangulation matrix that was used to develop hypotheses to support the validity and reliability of
data aligned with four research questions. This study reports the results of collected data from
current and former teacher groups to determine to what degree cognitive overload and occupational
stress affect teachers' performance, influence their cognition, and directly impact teacher turnover.
A comprehensive review of the literature in Chapter II and research design generated meaningful
173
data on the relationship between stress and performance levels, as well as educational policies
relating to the effects of teacher stress.
This research study examined levels of stress and performance, the relationship between
stress and performance, and administrative district polices. Chapter IV findings presented data
aligned with the four research questions of the study. The data analysis of the four findings in
Chapter IV will deliver the interpretation for Chapter V that guides the direction for future research
and its limitations. Chapter V will conclude with suggestions for supportive future research in the
field of neuroscience and education through the investigation of teacher stress, providing
recommendations for policy makers and administration, and ending with a reflection.
Interpretation of Findings
Data Sources
The researcher analyzed data for Findings 1-4 from three questionnaires (Environmental
Preference Inventory, Occupational Stress Questionnaire, and Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale
– Short Form), an open survey, and a semi-structured, one-to-one interview aligned with the four
research questions. A total of approximately 100 invitations to participate in the questionnaires
and open survey were extended to current and former teachers from one urban school district which
generated 41 complete responses. The participants consisted of 28 current teachers and 13 retired
teachers. One respondent was discarded from the analysis due to their failure to consent properly
at the beginning of the survey. The researcher analyzed the six open-ended questions and found
meaningful themes and trends in the collected data to align with the four research questions. In
addition, the researcher designed an amalgam of both qualitative and quantitative methods that
included five instruments and the responses derived from four research questions which
maintained conclusive validity.
174
As teacher stress continues to exist and rise, school districts are aware that teacher turnover
presents a troubling problem with enormous costs, and they are putting forth efforts to provide
educational policies and practices to improve teacher well-being, increase job performance, and
improve retention, thereby abiding with OSHA regulations to provide a safe learning environment
for all.
Research Question 1
What are the levels of occupational stress reported by the two groups of teachers?
As occupational stress for teachers continues to rise in the United States, the Common Core
of Data (2019) states that 3.1 million teachers at all grade levels instruct every single day while
dealing with school-related violence, parent-teacher conflicts, test anxiety, state-mandated
evaluations, unrealistic workload expectations, and low wages. This crisis is corroborated by
decades of research (Abel & Sewell, 1999; Borg, Riding, & Falzon, 1991; Greene, Beszterczey,
Katzenstein, Park, & Goring, 2002; Kelley & Berthelsen, 1995). Researchers have recently shifted
their attention towards a neuroscientific data analysis approach in order to understand the factors
of occupational stress. The detriments of stress and the consequences of burnout, termed as the
“Health Epidemic of the 21st Century" by the World Health Organization (Saxena, 2016),
indicates that teaching is a high-risk, stressful profession (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Simbula et
al., 2012). Research Question 1, therefore, was constructed to focus on the levels of occupational
stress for current and retired teachers to understand how this stress possibly influences their
occupational performance and decision to leave the profession.
To glean answers to Research Question 1 and support Finding 1, the Environmental
Preference Inventory (EPI) and Occupational Stress Questionnaire were aligned with Research
175
Question 1. This meaningful data provided the analysis for Finding 1 which interpreted the
occupational stress levels from both groups (current and retired teachers).
occupational stress reported by the two groups of teachers, there was a statistical distinction
regarding information load, social relationships, health, autonomy, and workload responsibilities
which influenced stress levels. This study found that the more experienced current teachers and
former teachers may have been exposed to the same work-related stress for an extended period of
time and, therefore, the probability is higher for experienced teachers to leave the profession.
The evidence obtained from Finding 1 found no statistical differences between both
groups; however, high reliabilities from these analyses suggest that workload demands outweigh
teachers’ physiological demands to cope, with stress factors contributing to cognitive overload
(information load, interpersonal load, change load, activity structure, and time structure) greatly
affecting the coping mechanism of teachers. Moreover, the commonality from both groups
identified stress symptoms in the open survey. Another statistical distinction from the
Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) was on information overload. In addition, the
Occupational Stress Questionnaire reported meaningful reliabilities on social relationships, health,
autonomy, and workload responsibilities that may influence stress levels. This data analysis
revealed that as workload responsibilities escalate, the effects on social relationships, health, and
autonomy rises and stress levels go up.
In urban communities, teachers do not last more than five years (Billingsley, 2008), one-
third higher than in suburban districts (United States Department of Education [USDE], 2016).
For this reason, the National Association of School Psychologists (2016) referred to retention as
the teachers' career service pathway for their profession. Specifically, The New Teacher Project
176
(TNTP) (2013) described teacher retention in urban districts as a crisis. Most importantly, the
TNTP reported that for every urban teacher who left the district, it could take that district’s Human
Resources Department 11 new hires before one teacher is found who would stay for five years in
the neighborhood. These reasons support the development of initiatives or policies by school
leadership to understand and rectify the effects of stress on teacher retention before 50% leave the
profession within five years in urban school districts.
For this reason, Finding 1 is in alignment with this research on occupational workload
stressors, compounded with technical demands from different intrinsic and extrinsic elements, all
of which most likely influence an individual's work performance. Consequently, employees cited
how stressors were more profound in the work environment as compared to everyday life stressors.
Therefore, there is further pressure to achieve adequate job performance (McCormick, 1997a and
1997b).
A significant conclusion that may be drawn from Finding 1 is that as the degree of cognitive
overload and occupational stress levels increase, the cognition and well-being of teachers is
negatively affected. School administrators understand that stressful circumstances lead to a
substantial decline in teacher retention rates every year, contributing to the crisis of teacher
shortages in urban districts (Aragon et al., 2014; Ingersoll, 2015; Ingersoll & Merrill, 2012).
Therefore, high-grade teacher performance is critical for a school system to succeed in preparing
students to compete in the global market. Negative stressors can directly affect job retention and
must be mitigated by school administrators. The effects of stress on performance levels leads to
Research Question 2 and its examination.
Research Question 2
What are the levels of occupational performance reported by the two groups of teachers?
177
Researchers Oliver and Venter (2003) and Bantwini (2010) reported that teachers’ occupational
demands influence psychological and physical well-being and thus hinder adequate work
performance in school settings. Failure by school district administrators to address sources of
teacher stress and its effects increases the numbers of teachers leaving the profession (Kyriacou,
2001). Skinner et al. (2018) reported how a teacher’s poor job performance due to stress can lead
to distress and despair. Most importantly, low self-efficacy may be attributed to rising stress levels
in educators, particularly urban educators, which negatively affect their relationships, well-being,
and teacher and student performance (Shernoff, Mehta, Atkins, Torf, & Spencer, 2011).
Specifically, researchers have examined a model to explain teachers’ perceptions of stressful
events and to determine the factors associated with these emotions and how appraisal may change
behaviors in work settings (Lazarus & Launier, 1978; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Hinton &
Rotheiler, 1998). These stressful responses from excessive occupational demands produced
teachers who ultimately left the profession.
This investigation prompts the development of measures to mitigate these workload
stressors. However, this is dependent upon certain education policies being implemented that,
based on scientific and educational research on occupational stress, can lead to the possible
adoption of programs to combat teacher turnover and teacher shortage, overall improving the well-
being of teachers. Such policies could minimize workload risk factors that hinder cognition and
directly impact turnover. Therefore, the sources of stress and how they affect occupational
performance levels (diminished self-efficacy and the probability of burnout and turnover) aligns
with Research Question 2. To support Finding 2, the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale was
utilized to glean responses on the levels of occupational performance and determine how these
perceived levels of efficacy may result in a teacher’s decision to leave the profession.
178
such as workload demands may result in lack of well-being, motivation, and commitment to their
job, and affect their performance in the classroom and their desire to remain in the profession. A
deeper scientific analysis on workload stressors suggests that these stressors may result in the
physical and psychological impairment of teachers, which in turn affects their occupational
performance and may result in their decision to leave the profession.
According to the Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale, there were higher levels of influence
on the subgroupings of student engagement for the retired teachers, which may suggest that work-
related stress affecting the performance of current teachers accumulates over time. Finding 2
gleaned data to support Research Question 2 and had 12 items in three subgroupings and focused
on work performance: (1) Efficacy in Student Engagement, (2) Efficacy in Instructional Strategies,
(3) Efficacy in Classroom Management. Finding 2 survey results are consistent with Finding1
results in that there were no statistical differences. However, Finding 1 had strong associations
with negative work features, independence and autonomy in performing work, and perceived
weight of work responsibility in both groups that correlate with the levels of work performance.
One main point in Finding 2 suggests higher influences in retired teachers than current teachers’
subgrouping of student engagement, which may suggest current teachers’ biological capacity to
provide student engagement throughout their career diminishes with time, and possibly predicts
that that teacher will leave the profession.
Finding 2 aligns with the research by Siegrist (1996) who cited how workload stressors
affect an individual’s extrinsic and intrinsic capabilities over time and how these stressors most
likely influence job performance. Finding 2 establishes the subgrouping “Teacher Efficacy of
Student Engagement” as an important factor for job performance. As stress factors affect well-
179
being, work performance level decreases, and some of these risk factors may be avoidable. The
relationship of stress to decreased work performance can be addressed by stakeholders by
implementing critical measures to reduce stress and thereby prevent teacher turnover and increase
teacher retention rates.
Research Question 3
To what extent are the levels of occupational stress related to the levels of occupational
performance among the two groups of teachers?
Chaplain (2008) cited research by Kyriacou and Sutcliffe (1978a, p.3) on stress reactions
and noted their model on the causes of stress. Kyriacou and Kunc (2007) examined detrimental
occupational health hazards. Consequently, studies on teacher stress and burnout led to an
investigation by Sass, Seal, and Martin (2010). Despite these studies, a lack of research on
reducing a teacher’s stress levels, which lead to exhaustion, chronic stress, burnout, and suicide,
continues to exist. More important, existing research from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) reported that acute and
posttraumatic stress disorders were classified in the 1980s as mental disorders. The diagnosis for
acute stress disorder included symptoms such as emotional detachment or lack of awareness.
Posttraumatic stress disorder was described by Myers (1915) as shellshock causing traumatic
flashback episodes or lack of feeling. According to Fink (2017), these repetitive symptoms may
contribute to an individual’s social, physical, and occupational dysfunction. He suggested that the
vast literature on human stress requires even further research.
Achu (2012) examined the relationship between work stress and job performance. Results
conclude that coping strategies to minimize work stress are difficult to enforce because of the trust
factor with leadership. In addition, Klassen and Chiu (2010) reported higher levels of stress
180
symptoms for female teachers age 40 and above and teachers less than age 30 (Phil & Manjula,
2012). Schools failed to address the job responsibilities and social needs of teachers, thus causing
burnout (Kaur, 2011). Hence, the correlations between burnout levels depended on gender, age,
relationships with new administrators, and new curriculum (Koruklu et al., 2012). For example,
teacher stress may increase from overwhelming assessments, influencing low self-efficacy,
satisfaction, motivation, and engagement in their profession (Gonzalez, 2015).
Over time, research by Koruklu et al. (2012) found that teachers deteriorate throughout
their careers with physical symptoms such as cardiovascular and neurological problems (Talmor,
Reiter, & Feigin, 2005). They also suffer from psychological symptoms such as rage, depression,
confusion, anxiety, low self-esteem, and substance abuse (Black, 2003; Naylor, 2001; Sari, 2004;
Talmor et al., 2005).
To glean data for Research Question 3 and support Finding 3, the Environmental
Preference Inventory (EPI), Occupational Stress Questionnaire, Teachers’ Sense of Self-Efficacy,
open survey, and a semi-structured, one-to-one interview were constructed and utilized. Finding 3
explains the challenges teachers encounter from cognitive overload and occupational stressors
affecting their performance. This relationship between stress and occupational performance is
dependent upon stakeholders addressing this issue and implementing critical measures to reduce
stress, thereby reducing teacher turnover and increasing teacher retention rates.
Finding 3: Teachers expressed challenges from cognitive overload and workload
demands, and this relationship is more likely to affect their performance, which may lead to them
leaving the profession due to the lack of administrators providing health benefit programs or
policies to improve well-being.
181
According to the Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI), Occupational Questionnaire,
Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale, open survey, and semi-structured, one-to-one interview,
teachers expressed their concerns about the relationship between stress and performance and
indicated that teacher turnover was due to the lack of administrative policies affording health
benefit programs to improve well-being. Finding 3 provided data to answer Research Question 3
and included two open survey questions and two interview questions that focused on the challenges
educators encounter in their profession and the relationship between occupational stress and
performance levels.
Specifically, the data results from Finding 3 support how both groups (current and retired
teachers) identified the stress factors and decision to leave themes. Results demonstrated workload
with the highest percentage of 29%, followed by administration of 27%, and salary and benefits
of 22%. Educators commented about unrealistic expectations on workload demands,
administration, low salaries/benefits, job satisfaction, loss of love for the profession, and pressure
to perform based on student outcomes.
A one-to-one interview provided data on stress factors that affect performance and
supported Finding 3, as the Human Resource employee expressed a positive attitude regarding the
school district’s efforts to improve teachers’ well-being. The results revealed that support for
novice and experienced teachers included professional development offered by the district, with
the first-year teachers receiving additional support. Other stress factors such as low salary/benefits
contributed to teachers leaving the profession. Exit interviews supported data on why teachers left
the district, or the profession entirely, and revealed how occupational stress levels influenced a
teacher’s performance.
182
Several conclusions may be drawn from Finding 3. Teachers experience constant pressure
to meet targeted performance standards based on student outcomes. Ball (2003) argues that this
puts “the teacher’s soul” at risk (p. 216). Stress factors related to inadequate performance may
suggest dysfunctional results and diminishment in self-efficacy, student achievement, and job
satisfaction. In comparison, teachers with low self-efficacy demonstrated higher stress levels,
contingent upon those same factors (Betoret, 2006; Klassen & Chiu, 2010; Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2007).
As previously mentioned, Finding 1 and Finding 2 had no statistical differences; however,
there were differences. Finding 1 reported both groups (current and retired teachers) with 62%
stress symptoms, with significant responses dealing with information overload, social
relationships, health, autonomy, and workload responsibilities that may influence stress levels.
Finding 2 reported a higher level of influence in student engagement, and Finding 3 revealed
notable work negative features such as independence, autonomy, and perceived weight of work
responsibility categories, which are all stress factors that hinder teachers’ cognition, efficacy, and
performance. Results demonstrated workload with the highest reason to leave percentage of 29%,
followed by administration at 27% and salary benefits at 22% for both groups combined.
District leadership that acknowledges this relationship and implements policies that reduce
stress to improve well-being and performance will likely see an outcome of reduced teacher
turnover and increased teacher retention rates. This is addressed in Research Question 4.
Research Question 4
What policies and procedures might be implemented by administrators to mitigate the possible
effects of occupational stress among teachers?
183
Teachers possibly exit the profession due to stress from unfair leadership practices that
linger and become occupational hazards linked to functional deficiency and achievement gaps.
The correlation between occupational stress and turnover behaviors may influence teacher
retention (Gilboa, Shirom, Fried, & Cooper, 2008). Alternatively, leadership styles with
developmental mentoring relationships create loyalty and growth within the organization because
they minimize teachers’ decisions to exit the profession, influence them to stay, and may optimize
work performance (Waldman et al., 2015). Research Question 4 was constructed to focus on the
policies and procedures that are present or might be implemented by administrators and policy
makers to mitigate the possible effects of occupational stress among teachers that influence their
decisions to leave the profession.
To gather data for Research Question 4 and support Finding 4, the Environmental
Preference Inventory (EPI), Occupational Stress Questionnaire, Teachers’ Sense of Self-Efficacy
Scale, open survey, and semi-structured, one-to-one interview were utilized. Finding 4 suggests
that providing appropriate administrative leadership policies and health benefit programs within
the district are needed to reduce workload and occupational stressors such as depression, anxiety,
burnout, and suicidal thoughts, which will enhance teacher performance and improve retention.
depression, anxiety, burnout, and suicidal thoughts, and this will enhance teacher performance and
improve retention.
School management practices in the workplace may determine teacher performance.
According to Kyriacou and Chien (2004), educational management styles can be a source of
teacher stress (as cited in McKinney-Thompson, 2015). Previous meta-analyses suggest negative
184
consequences resulted from authoritarian styles, lack of fair delegation, and lack of adequate
communication. This micromanagement induced daily stressors for teachers, such as loss of job
control and failure to cope.
Significantly, Nias (1989) explored social promotion for teacher appreciation and
recognition utilizing horizontal level promotion for meaningful engagement; for instance,
leadership collaboration with staff on designing innovative programs for differentiated populations
suggests fundamental factors for a motivated, productive workforce. Horizontal promotion may
be a problem-solving approach for teachers to remain in the profession, despite the challenges
reported, and may resolve sources of turnover behaviors. Furthermore, Jung (2010) examined the
possibility of shaping and redirecting behaviors to increase work performance from a collaborative
standpoint and thereby minimize the high cost to school districts (Antonakis, Avolio, &
Sivasubramaniam, 2003; Moynihan, Pandey, & Wright, 2012). Based on data obtained from the
three surveys, open survey (four questions), and semi-structured, one-to-one interview (four
questions), themes emerged from the analysis of the responses: (1) administration and teacher
control (15%) and support and restorative outlet (12%) as measures to prevent teachers from
leaving the profession, (2) measures schools have taken to help reduce stress, (3) the effectiveness
of stress-reducing activities, (4) activities to reduce stress, and (5) experience in a diverse setting.
Survey results for Finding 4, which included four questions from the open survey and four
questions from the semi-structured one-to-one interview, were aligned with Research Question 3
and Finding 3. Participants in both groups from the open survey expressed a similar concern with
administration, teacher control, support, and restorative outlet. Table 3 on page ___ (for Finding
4) shows the most frequently reported factors that need to be addressed to prevent current teachers
185
from leaving the profession: teacher control 21%, support 14%, and standardized
testing/restorative outlet 11%.
Based on the data gleaned from the semi-structured, one-to-one interview, the themes that
emerged and supported Finding #4 were as follows:
1. The data stressed the importance of a well-being program and mentorship for
novice teachers as well as professional development.
2. There were other preventative measures available for experienced teachers, and it
was expressed by many that a low salary scale might influence teachers’ decisions
to leave the profession.
3. Additionally, the district continues its efforts to research and find solutions to
alleviate stress for teachers which directly affects job performance. The data
collected suggests that administrators and policymakers need to consider teacher
stress as an essential influencer on teacher work performance. These preventative
measures can potentially help introduce de-stressing activities that would increase
teacher job performance and retention in an urban district.
The main conclusion that may be drawn from Finding 4 is that leadership styles with
developmental mentoring relationships create loyalty and growth within the organization because
they minimize teachers’ decisions to exit the profession, influence them to stay, and may optimize
work performance, as found by Waldman et al., 2015. Furthermore, social networks and decision-
making empowerment may reduce stress effects for teachers (Ahghar, 2008; Barrera et al., 2007).
Consistent with Findings 1, 2, and 3, providing appropriate administrative leadership
policies and health benefit programs within the district are needed to reduce workload and
186
occupational stressors such as depression, anxiety, burnout, and suicidal thoughts, and this will
enhance teacher performance and improve retention.
Limitations of Study
Study limitations described by Buckley and Chiang (1976) indicate this research
methodology as a problem-solving map, and the combination of specific methods used to produce
outcomes in a mixed-methods approach supports an understanding of this complex educational
issue to address problematic social injustices (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011; Morse & Niehaus,
2009). This research study was limited by the following factors: (1) Both groups (current and
retired teachers) examination on the 42 items of the Career Preference Inventory (CPI) was limited
to certain occupations for information processing load; (2) researcher subjectivity and potential
bias was a concern; (3) participants knew the researcher and their responses might be influenced
by their relationship; and (4) while stress symptoms in the open response question were limited, a
more in-depth analysis could be performed to reveal the participants’ perceptions of occupational
stress. The researcher has taught both regular and Bilingual/ESL education for over 15 years and
also tutored students and parents after school on her own accord.
Recommendations for Future Research
This research study focused on levels of stress and performance, the stress and performance
relationship, and administrative district polices. Findings from this study are in alignment with the
literature to support the themes of the study: (1) cognitive load and occupational stress levels for
current and retired teachers to understand how this stress possibly influences their occupational
performance and decision to leave the profession; (2) workload demands may result in lack of
well-being, motivation, and commitment to their job, and affect their performance levels; (3)
cognitive overload and workload demands are more likely to affect their occupational
187
performance, and (4) appropriate administrative leadership policies and health benefit programs
within the district are needed to reduce workload and occupational stressors.
The culmination of the findings have resulted in the following recommendations from this
research:
(1) This new literature may contribute to a reduction of occupational stressors for teachers
by addressing the correlation of findings between both former and current teachers,
and ultimately benefit their health and well-being. These research findings may
improve the continuity of their job performance and prevent educators from leaving
the profession, thus decreasing turnover and improving retention. This scientific data
may help to transform further research, which analyzes stress effects on occupational
performance in the 21st century. These recommendations are practical and capable of
providing supportive policies within the district for teachers to cope with stress.
District-Building Level
Vision and Goals (Benchmarks and Accountability)
• Lifelong Research Center (Online)
• Collaborative University Partnerships with different schools
• Professional Development (Redesign - Novice and Tenured Teachers)
(2) A well-being program with wellness policies may minimize compassion fatigue and
burnout symptoms and increase teachers’ attention in stressful learning environments before their
perceptions of stress are distorted (Tang et al., 2014; Thompson et al., 2014; Flook et al., 2013).
In effect, such a policy may influence occupational performance based on metric systems that
balance outputs and outcomes (Bardach, 2012). Training would include how to engage in self-
regulation throughout the three meditative states in mindfulness meditation: effortful action,
188
reduced mind wandering, and effortless presence. Tang et al. (2014) described more focused
attention on the quiet mind and reflection on one moment at a time.
The following recommendations are practical and can provide a foundation for policies
within the district to mitigate stress encountered by teachers on a daily basis and ultimately
increase morale and reduce turnover.
• A comprehensive wellness program for social, emotional, and physical health (Novice and
Tenure Teachers)
• Social and Emotional School Safety Plan of the Environment (OSHA-Approved Plans for
Right to Know Job Hazards)
• Mindfulness Meditation Program (Novice and Tenured Teachers)
• Stress Management /Self-Care Plan (Novice and Tenured Teachers)
• Restorative Outlet Retreats (Mental Health /Online-Social Distancing)
• Team-Building Retreats (Self-Efficacy and Cognitive Function)
(3) Administrators with ethical transformational leadership principles care for their
teachers and strive to achieve moral authenticity within the school culture, thus contributing to
student achievement and professional growth and possibly reducing teacher turnover. Burns
(1978) defined the transformational leader as “one who raises the followers’ level of consciousness
about the importance and value of desired outcomes and the methods of reaching those outcomes”
(p. 141).
The following recommendations can be implemented by school administration in order to
empower teachers and give them a voice in their daily classroom activities and procedures, and
ultimately giving teachers the feeling that the district is supporting their professional development.
District/ Building Level
189
Visions and Goals (Benchmarks and Accountability)
• Servant Leader Teams (decentralize relationships between administrators, teachers, and
safety plan.
• Teacher Job Responsibilities (Minimize Workload Factor)
• Lifelong Research Center (Online)
• Collaborative University Partnerships with different schools
• Redesign of Teacher Salary Scale
Summary and Conclusion
This study seeks to examine, based on the literature, significant occupational stressors that
hinder teachers' work performance and create cognitive overload, resulting in susceptibility to
long-term stress disorders. In effect, these occupational stressors affect neuronal functioning in
brain regions that mediate cognitive processes and emotional regulation, impacting an individual's
well-being. Thus, teacher stress refers to the strain or distress that alters their state of equilibrium,
contributing to anxiety, tension, and adverse outcomes. Research demonstrates detrimental effects
on an adult brain from repetitive chronic stress, which impairs memory and cognitive processes.
These consequences threaten the well-being of an individual (Calvo & Garcia, 2016). Most
importantly, the findings support the significance of school policies that focus on a productive,
healthy environment in which its staff contributes to their professional development and
performance, thus positively influencing their health, behavior, and decision to stay in the
profession.
Specifically, wellness policies would reduce turnover costs for the human resource hiring
process and, most importantly, the losses due to damaged relationships in organizations, as cited
by Boushey and Glynn (2012) and Cascio (2015), and affect its continuity as a whole (Allen,
190
Bryant, & Vardaman, 2010; Eckardt, Skaggs, & Youndt 2014); Heavey, Holweday, & Hausknecht,
2013; Holtom, Mitchell, Lee, & Eberly, 2008). An effective way to deal with these issues is to
create systemic change within school administrations by implementing transformational wellness
policies for teachers and creating an ethical, moral culture which can “humanize” moral dilemmas,
with servant leadership setting examples and acting with the right intentions (Rochford et al.,
2016). Servant leader policymakers should engage in transformational practices through active
communication and empathy to alleviate stress factors within the working environment from
physiological, physical, and behavioral perspectives, which will ultimately influence teacher
performance and retention. An educational policy that encompasses mindfulness and other
training modules for staff that focuses on stress perception can be established and guided by an
expert coach, which in turn will reduce teacher stress and turnover.
Reflection
During my Doctoral research and recommendations from colleagues, I reflected on the
countless hours of readings, interviews, CSE classes, class discussions, workshops, and reached
this conclusion: workload is significant and occupational stress has reached critical proportions in
the teaching profession. My realization led me to further my education and explore an MS in
Neuroscience and Education at Teachers College, Columbia University in New York City, which
led to an understanding of the value of educational scientific research.
Furthermore, as a Bilingual/ESL teacher, my interest in improving our own school culture
at Urban Green School with the cooperation of administration and staff gave me the opportunity
to navigate my Doctoral research. This constructivist platform allowed for conversations, risks,
team-building, and new perspectives on the education profession. For example, within this
framework, a positive school culture in a supportive servant leadership style can monitor
191
regulations, expectations, and resource constraints to allow for the reciprocity of relationships to
develop and grow.
Most importantly, this recurrent existing scientific data may help to transform further
research, which analyzes stress effects on occupational performance in the 21st century.
Detrimental stress factors cultivated in authoritarian school districts affect teachers, students, and
school culture, and possibly seeps into the community, driving higher costs in top-down
administrative levels. These results may predict occupational stress health hazards for future
generations. The scientific data may positively change the ineffective health and wellness policies
that hold no regard for the preservation of humanity. Dr. Shekhar Saxena (2016), a well-known
Director of the World Health Organization, described stress at the Neuroscience 2016 Convention
as the health epidemic that has exacerbated the global suicide rate.
Fink (2016) argues that overwhelming stress which detrimentally affects health, as
supported by the research data, has led to an increase in mortality rates. For this reason, a
multidisciplinary approach is needed when developing a transformational wellness policy, led by
servant leaders in an ethical, moral culture. This may lead to the successful implementation of a
wellness policy that utilizes conversation and empowerment, reduces stress, and increases teacher
performance and student achievement (Bardach, 2012).
The abundant literature indicates that teachers assume multiple roles in their profession,
and the accompanying stress is not addressed sufficiently by policymakers, thereby resulting in
detrimental effects on their well-being and causing overwhelming numbers of teachers to leave the
profession. An effective way to deal with these issues is to create systemic change within school
administrations by implementing transformational wellness policies for teachers and creating an
ethical, moral culture which can “humanize” moral dilemmas, with servant leadership setting
192
examples and acting with the right intentions (Rochford et al., 2016). School mental health policies
are priorities that can no longer be avoided so that teachers may be prepared to meet 21st-century
global competitive challenges in the United States.
However, until school administrators initiate such policies, teachers may have no
alternative but to expand their cognitive thinking skills and mindfulness to compete with the
increasing technological advances, borderless globalization, and challenging educational
requirements of the 21st century (Goswami, 2014). As previously mentioned, decades of literature
addressing teacher stress may suggest a lack of careful examination or imbalance within the
complex educational system. Each subsystem within the main system overlaps and the teacher
stress crisis can no longer be ignored. A new scientific, evidence-based, research perspective
educational design would provide research based upon meaningful thought, negative feedback,
and foresight to anticipate new problems and solutions. Consequently, systemic change can happen
which allows for the development of viable solutions before problems develop or escalate into a
crisis. This allowance empowers teachers to have more of a say in determining their own fates
rather than being guided by an authoritarian administration.
Teachers cannot rely solely on compassion and morality while teaching. Teachers must
engage themselves as servant leaders to be knowledgeable, impart that knowledge to their students
in a sustainable way, and try to be as self-sufficient as possible despite lack of support from school
administrators. Teachers approach their profession as a design, a simple yet complex design that
decentralizes information leading to a collective mind, while yearning to preserve their selfless
identities as they teach future generations. Gandhi stated, “If you give me a fish, I eat for a day: if
you teach me to fish, I eat for a lifetime.”
193
Almighty Drive who, through the ages,
Have kept men trying to master Nature by understanding,
Give me faith-for that is what I need most now.
This is a rare and solemn moment in my life:
I stumbled across what seems to be
A new path into the unknown.
A road that promises to lead me closer to You:
The law behind the unknown.
I think I have the instinctive feeling,
And patiently, through the years, I have acquired the kind of knowledge
Needed to explore Your laws.
But my faith was weakened by this apprenticeship.
No longer can it steer me steadily towards my goal.
For I have come to distrust faith and overvalue proof.
So, let reverence for the unfailing power of all Your known laws
Be the source of my faith in the worth of discovering the next commandment.
Sometimes I feel lonesome, uncertain on my new trail,
For where I go no one has been before
194
And there is no one with whom to share the things I see-or think I see.
Still, to succeed, I must convince others to follow me and help;
For I also need their faith in me to reinforce my own
Which has so little evidence to lean on now,
For now is the beginning.
A long and hazardous course lies between me and my goal,
How could I travel alone?
How could I force this fog of half-understanding,
That confuses my sense of direction?
The other shore is not in sight-alas, there may be none:
Yet I-like all those who, before me,
Have succumbed to the lure of the vast unknown
Must take this risk in exchange
For each chance to experience the thrill of discovery.
And that thrill I need, or my mind will perish,
For - thanks to You - it was not built to stand
The stale security of well-charted shore waters.
I cannot know whether You listen,
195
But I do know that I must pray:
Almighty Drive who, through the ages,
Have kept men trying to master Nature by understanding.
Give me faith now-for that is what I need most.
Hans Selye
Selye, H. (1964). From dream to discovery: On being a scientist. Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill
(The Stress of My Life, Second Edition, pp. 230-231)
"Sisyphus" by Faye George
To create is likewise to give a shape to one's fate — Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus
Cool freshets spilling from stone to stone,
pools deep as thought,
the immense beyond of ocean,
a warm couch of sand . . .
All that the bright world holds,
holds back.
This stone is my wife.
My hands have given it a waist.
It has given me this calloused flesh,
196
this chalky horn upon my palm,
mark of a working man.
I work alone,
shaping my curse,
honing it: a tool for raising stone.
Fitting it for what lets me live this death
with purpose; there was a time
I would not have thought it could be so.
I loved the red suns, the blue mists of Earth,
the long green reach of trees,
her creatures feral and quick,
the tribes in their camps.
I wanted light and life and Earth.
That passion earned me this,
this gift, a stone.
A stone, yes, but I have made it mine.
They thought that it would crush me.
For a time I thought it had: mind and body
wed to rock, pushing that weight to the summit
day after day, eating the dust of the path
197
till the spit of your mouth is clay in your throat.
And never an end to it — the mindless task.
With every lumbering turn, the stone grew.
Fed on desire and regret, the stone grew.
In that night's sky with no light above
the cold moon of my grasp,
I set my will, embracing all of this —
I set my will and said, Now do your worst!
And knew I'd gone beyond myself:
It was enough.
George, F. (2008). Marchenhaft. JoMA Archives. Earthwind Editions.
https://endicottstudio.typepad.com/poetrylist/sisyphus-by-faye-george.html
198
APPENDICES
199
APPENDIX A
INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH STUDY
FOR CURRENT AND FORMER TEACHERS
Dear Prospective Participant:
I am currently pursuing my doctoral degree in educational leadership at the College of Saint

Elizabeth, in Morristown, New Jersey. Part of my degree requirements is to complete an action
research doctoral dissertation. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of teacher
stress on their work performance. As an educator, I have firsthand knowledge of the stress which
teachers can encounter in the workplace and how that stress can manifest itself negatively on one’s
health and well-being and affect decisions whether or not to stay or leave the teaching profession.
Therefore, this action research study will explore and broaden the base of understanding of the
effects of stress on teacher work performance and determine how school administrators may
implement policies and procedures in order to mitigate the effects of such stress.
To gather this data, I will administer a confidential survey to my colleagues, including both
currently employed and formerly employed teachers. In addition, participants will answer three
questionnaires. Permission for this study has been granted by the Department of Accountability.
Please note that participation in this study is strictly voluntary, non-evaluative, and your name and
any identifiable information will not be used in reporting the results of this study. Also, participants
may withdraw consent from this action research study at any time without penalty. Participants
can also refuse to answer any questions.
If you agree to participate, I will send you a link to the survey. At the beginning of the survey,
you will note a consent form which must be electronically signed by you by clicking on either
“yes” or “no.” Please read it thoroughly. If all is satisfactory to you, then I would ask you to
complete the survey/questionnaire and submit electronically. Should you have any questions or
concerns, please feel free to email me at ybalboa@cse.edu or ybalboa@paterson.k12.nj.us. I can
also be reached at 973-321-0090 (ext. 20929).
Thank you.
Yvette Balboa
Researcher,
College of St. Elizabeth
200
APPENDIX B
INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH STUDY
FOR HUMAN RESOURCES EMPLOYEE
Dear Prospective Participant,
As you may or may not be aware, I am currently pursuing my doctoral degree in educational
leadership at the College of Saint Elizabeth located in Morristown, New Jersey. Part of my degree
requirements is to complete an action research doctoral dissertation. The purpose of this study is
to investigate the effects of teacher stress on their work performance. As an educator, I have
firsthand knowledge of the stress which teachers can encounter in the workplace and how that
stress can manifest itself negatively on one’s health and well-being and affect decisions whether
or not to stay or leave the teaching profession. Therefore, this action research study will explore
and broaden the base of understanding of the effects of stress on teacher work performance and
determine how school administrators may implement policies and procedures in order to mitigate
the effects of such stress.
To gather this data, I will personally administer a confidential interview with you since you are an
employee of the Human Resources Department of the Paterson Public School, which oversees the
school where I work (Charles J. Riley #9 School in Paterson, New Jersey). Please note that
participation in this study is strictly voluntary, non-evaluative, and your name and any identifiable
information will not be used in reporting the results of this study. A pseudonym will be used to
identify your responses. Also, you may withdraw consent from this action research study at any
time without penalty. You can also refuse to answer any questions.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to email me at ybalboa@cse.edu or
ybalboa@paterson.k12.nj.us. I can also be reached at 973-321-0090 (ext. 20929).
Thank you.
Yvette Balboa
Researcher,
College of St. Elizabeth
201
APPENDIX C
QUESTIONS FOR
HUMAN RESOURCES EMPLOYEE
Hello, and thank you for agreeing to meet with me today to discuss your experiences working in
the educational field in the Human Resources Department of the Paterson Public School District.
The purpose of this interview is to broaden the base of understanding of teacher perceptions,
teacher attitudes, teacher challenges, and stressful situations teachers may encounter in their
profession.
I will ask you questions about your perceptions, attitudes, and experiences while working in an
educational environment and assisting teachers with their many challenges. There is no right or
wrong answer, so please feel free to share all of your thoughts. During our discussion, we can use
first names. However, no names or personally identifiable information will be included in reporting
these findings. Please refrain from using last names during our conversation to further protect
confidentiality. Your participation is voluntary and you can withdraw from the interview at any
time.
The session will be digitally recorded so that it can be transcribed. This digital recording will be
transcribed by a confidential transcription service, Alvarez Typing. Once transcription is complete,
the digital recording and the transcribed interview session will be locked in a filing cabinet in the
researcher’s home for at least three years and the key to the filing cabinet will only be accessible
to the researcher.
May I record the session?
Do you have any questions? May we begin?
The proposed questions to be asked of you will include:
5. What are some activities you think would help teachers reduce stress and increase their work
performance?
6. Is there anything else you would like to share with me in regard to your experience working in
this diverse setting?
202
APPENDIX D
PERMISSION TO USE ENVIRONMENTAL PREFERENCE INVENTORY
203
APPENDIX E
PERMISSION TO USE THE TEACHER SENSE OF EFFICACY

SCALE
204
APPENDIX F
PERMISSION TO USE THE OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

QUESTIONNAIRE
205
APPENDIX G
Agreement Between the Researcher and Transcriber (Alvarez Typing)

CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT
Date: 10/20/18
Transcriptionist: Alvarez Typing
Client: Yvette Balboa
This Confidentiality Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into by and between Client and Alvarez
Typing as of the above date in connection with discussions between the parties with respect to
Alvarez Typing performing transcription services for Client (“Services”). Whereas Client intends
to provide Alvarez Typing with certain confidential and proprietary information regarding Client
and/or its business for transcription purposes and Alvarez Typing intends to maintain the
confidentiality of such information, now, therefore, in consideration of the disclosure of such
information, and other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:
1. The parties acknowledge that related to any Services provided by Alvarez Typing to Client,
Client may make available to Alvarez Typing certain information and materials: (i) in writing, by
email, by audio tape or other tangible electronic storage medium clearly marked and identified by
Client as “Confidential” or “Proprietary” or (ii) that, by the nature of the information and
circumstances surrounding their disclosure ought to, in good faith, be treated as proprietary and/or
confidential (hereafter referred to as “Confidential Information”). Excluded from Confidential
Information are: (i) information which is known to Alvarez Typing prior to entering into this
Agreement, (ii) information which becomes known to Alvarez Typing from a third party who is
not subject to a confidentiality agreement with Client, (iii) information which is required to be
disclosed as a matter of law, and (iv) information which is generally known to the public.
2. Alvarez Typing acknowledges that all Confidential Information furnished to it is considered

proprietary and is a matter of strict confidentiality. Alvarez Typing further acknowledges that the
unauthorized use or disclosure of any Confidential Information may cause irreparable harm to
Client. Accordingly, Alvarez Typing agrees that Client will be entitled to seek equitable relief
including injunctive relief and specific performance, in addition to all other remedies available at
law or in equity for any breach of this Agreement. In the event of any dispute under this Agreement,
each party and its managers’, officers’, directors’, executives’, owners’, members’, shareholders’,
employees’, affiliates’, agents’, advisors’, representatives’, and, in the case of Alvarez Typing, its
transcriptionists, (“Representatives”) monetary liability to the other party and its Representatives
for all claims related to this Agreement will be limited to direct and proven damages. Neither party
(nor its Representatives) will be liable for or entitled to any indirect, incidental, reliance, special,
punitive, exemplary or consequential damages arising out of its performance or non-performance
under this Agreement, whether or not they had been advised of the possibility of such damages. In
the event of any dispute related to this Agreement, each party (and its Representatives) shall pay
its own attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs.
206
3. Alvarez Typing agrees that, except to its Representatives to the extent necessary to permit them
to assist in the performance of the Services, it will not distribute, disclose or convey to third parties
any of Client’s Confidential Information without Client’s prior written consent. All
transcriptionists working with Alvarez Typing are subject to and must pass criminal background
checks before starting work with Alvarez Typing. Confidential Information shall not be
distributed, disclosed or conveyed to any Representative unless such Representative is advised of
this Agreement and agrees to be subject to the terms hereof or a similar agreement.
4. Alvarez Typing agrees that all Confidential Information received from Client shall at all times
remain the sole property of Client and upon completion of the Services shall be either: (i) returned
to Client, if Client has made such prior written request, or (ii) deleted from Alvarez Typing’s files
such destruction certified to the client. Notwithstanding the immediately preceding sentence,
Alvarez Typing may (but shall not be obligated to) retain one copy of Confidential Information in
its files for legal or regulatory requirements only (subject to the confidentiality requirements
hereof). No rights or licenses, express or implied, are granted by Client to Alvarez Typing under
any patents, copyrights, trademarks, service marks, or trade secrets owned by Client as a result of,
or related to, this Agreement.
5. This Agreement is effective upon the date first written above. This Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect for three (3) years from the above date.
6. This Agreement is binding on the parties and their successors and assigns, and its provisions
may only be waived by written agreement of the parties.
7. This is a binding agreement that contains all of the agreements and understandings of the parties
and any amendments to this Agreement must be in writing. This Agreement and any claim related
directly or indirectly to this Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of New Jersey (without giving regard to the conflicts of law provisions thereof).
No such claim shall be commenced, prosecuted or continued in any forum other than the courts of
the State of New Jersey or in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, and
each of the parties hereby submits to the jurisdiction of such courts. Each of the parties hereby
waives on behalf of itself and its Representatives, successors and assigns any and all right to argue
that the choice of forum provision is or has become unreasonable in any legal proceeding.
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts by facsimile.
READ, AGREED AND ACCEPTED:
By: s/Yvette Balboa
Alvarez Typing
By: _s/Irene Alvarez______________ Its: Owner
207
APPENDIX H
CITI CERTIFICATION FOR YVETTE BALBOA, RESEARCHER
208
APPENDIX I
IRB APPROVAL LETTER
The College of Saint Elizabeth Institutional Review Board https://www.cse.edu/irb/
December 16, 2019
Dear Yvette Balboa,
The CSE IRB has reviewed your revised IRB application received December 10, 2019, for the
study, " Teacher Stress: Effects on Occupational Performance." The IRB has granted full
approval of your study.
Please note that your research must be conducted according to the revised application you
submitted to the CSE IRB on December 10, 2019. If changes to the approved proposal occur, you
may be required to submit a revised proposal for approval by the CSE IRB before implementation.
If an unexpected situation or adverse event happens during your investigation, please notify the
CSE IRB as soon as possible. Once notified, we may ask you for additional information or action,
depending on the nature of the event.
Thank you for your submission, and best of luck with your research. If you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards,
Michele Yurecko, Ph.D.

Director of Institutional Research and Academic Assessment
CSE IRB, Chair
209
REFERENCES
Abel, M., & Sewell, J. (1999). Stress and burnout in rural and urban secondary teachers. Journal
of Educational Research, 92(5), 287-293.
Abbott v. Burke (1981). The history of Abbott v. Burke. Retrieved from Education Law Center
website: https://edlawcenter.org/litigation/abbott-v-burke/abbott-history.html
Achu, C. (2012). The relationship between work stress and performance in a public sector
service organization. School of Management Sciences, Varanasi, New Delhi, India.
Ahghar, G. (2008). The role of school organizational climate in occupational stress among
secondary school teachers in Tehran. International Journal of Occupational Medicine
and Environmental Health, 21(4), 319-329.
Akhlaq, M., Amjad, B. M., Mehmood, K., Hassan, S., & Malik, S. (2010). An evaluation of the
effects of stress on the job performance of secondary school teachers. Journal of Law and
Psychology, 1, 2078-2083.
Allen, D., Bryant, P., & Vardaman, J. (2010, May). Retaining talent: Replacing misconceptions
with evidence-based strategies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 48-64
Alliance for Excellent Education (2014, July 17). Teacher attrition costs United States up to $2.2
billion annually, says new alliance report. Press Release. Retrieved from Alliance for
Excellent Education website: http://all4ed.org/press/teacher-attrition-costs-united-states-
up-to-2-2-billion-annually-says-new-alliance-report/
American Federation of Teachers (2017). 2017 Educator Quality of Work Life Survey.
Retrieved from American Federation of Teachers website: https://www.aft.org/2017-
educator-quality-life-survey
210
American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. (2018, November 29). The American Foundation
for Suicide Prevention: Suicide rate is up 3.7 percent according to most recent Center for
Disease Control and Prevention data (Year 2017). Retrieved from https://afsp.org
American Institute of Stress (2017). Stress effects. Retrieved from The American Institute of
Stress website: https://www.stress.org/stress-effects.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association, DSM-5 Task Force. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders: DSM-5 (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric
Publishing.
American Psychological Association (2008, October 7). Stress in America. Retrieved from
www.apa.org
American Psychological Association (2017). Stress in America: The state of our nation.
Retrieved from American Psychological Association website:
https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2017/state-nation.pdf
American Psychological Association (2018). Stress effects on the body. Retrieved from
American Psychological Association website: www.apa.org/helpcenter/stress-body.aspx
Anderson, J. R. (2015). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York, NY: Worth
Publishers.
Andersson, G., Hagman, J., Talianzadeh, R., Svedberg, A., & Larsen, H. (2002). Effect of
cognitive load on postural control. Brain Research Bulletin, 58(1), 135-139.
Andreychik, M. (2019, January 15). Feeling your joy helps me to bear feeling your pain:
Examining associations betweeen empathy for others' positive versus negative emotions
211
and burnout. Personality and Individual Differences, 137, 147-156. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.08028
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An
examination of the nine-factor full range leadership theory using the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 261-295. doi: 10.1016/S1048-
9843(03)00030-4.
Aragon, A., Culpepper, S. A., McKee, M. W., & Perkins, M. (2014). Understanding profiles of
preservice teachers with different levels of commitment to teaching in urban districts.
Sage, 49(5), 543-573.
Armor, D., Conry-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., . . . Zellman, G.
(1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading program in selected Los Angeles
minority schools. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and student
achievement. New York, NY: Longman.
Atkins, M., Gracyk, P., Frazier, S., & Adil, J. (2003). Toward a new model for school-based
mental health: Accessible, effective, and sustainable services in urban communities.
School Psychology Review, 32, 503-514.
Atkins, M. S., Graczyk, P. A., Frazier, S. L., & Abdul-Adil, J. (2003). Toward a new model for
promoting urban children's mental health: Accessible, effective, and sustainable school-
based mental health services. School Psychology Review, 32(4), 503-514.
Austin, V., Shah, S., & Muncer, S. (2005). Teacher stress and coping strategies used to reduce
stress. Occupational Therapy International, 12(2), 63-80.
212
Avey, J., Wernsing, T., & Palanski, M. (2012). Exploring the process of ethical leadership: The
mediating role of employee voice and psychological ownership. Journal of Business
Ethics, 107, 21-34.
Avison, W. (2016). Environmental factors. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress: Concepts, cognition,
emotion, and behavior (pp. 87-93). London, UK: Academic Press.
Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 49A, 5-28.
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., & &...William, J.
(2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and
nonmeditating samples. Assessment, 15, 329-342.
Bailey, B. (2000). The impact of mandated change on teachers. In N. Bascia & A. Hargreaves
(Eds.), The sharp edge of educational change: Teaching, leading, and the realities of
reform (pp. 112-128). New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.
Bainbridge, W. L., & Lasley, T. J. (2002). Demographics, diversity, and K-12 accountability:
The challenge of closing the achievement gap. Education and Urban Society, 34, 422-
437.
Bajorek, Z., Gulliford, J., & Taskila, T. (2014, August). The Work Foundation. Retrieved from
the Education Support Partnership website:
https://www.educationsupportpartnership.org.uk/sites/default/files/resources/healthy_teac
hers_higher_marks_report_0.pdf
Baker, L., & Moore, K. (2015). Teacher stress in rural and remote regions. In K. A. Moore, S.
Howard & P. Buchwald (Eds.), Stress and anxiety: Applications to schools, well-being,
coping and internet use (pp. 7-17). Berlin, Germany: Logos Publishers.
213
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309-328.
Ball, S. (2003). The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy,
18, 215-228. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043065.
Ballinger, G., Lehman, D., & Schoorman, D. (2010). Leader-member exchange and turnover
before and after succession events. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 113, 25-36.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.
Bantwini, B. (2010). How teachers perceive the new curriculum reform: Lessons from a school
district in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. International Journal of Educational
Development, 30(1), 83-90.
Bardach, E. (2012). A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path to more effective
problem solving. Los Angeles, CA: CQ Press.
Barling, J. (1996). The prediction, experience, and consequences of workplace violence. In G.R.
VandenBos, & E. Q. Bulatao (Eds.), Violence on the job: Identifying risks and developing
solutions (pp. 29-49). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Barnes, G., Crowe, E., & Schaefer, B. (2007). The cost of teacher turnover in five school
districts: A pilot study. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED497176
Barnett, S., & Ceci, S. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far
transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612-637.
214
Barrera, M., D'Agostino, N.M., Schneiderman, G., Tallett, S., Spencer, L., & Jovcevska, V.
(2007). Patterns of parental bereavement following the loss of a child and related factors.
Omega - Journal of Death and Dying, 55(2), 145-167.
Bazely, P. (2004). Issues in mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches to research. In R.
Buber, J. Gadner, & L. Richards (Eds.), Applying qualitative methods to marketing
management research (pp. 141-156). UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
BBC News (2013, May 1). Helen Mann inquest: Head teacher suicide verdict. BBC News.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London, England: Sage.
Bergeron, D., Shipp, A.J., Rosen, B., & Furst, S. A. (2013). Organizational citizenship behavior
and career outcomes: The cost of being a good citizen. Journal of Management, 39, 958-
984.
Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs
supporting educational change. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation (ERIC Document
No. ED159 289).
Beshai, S., McAlpine, L., Weare, K., & Kuyken, W. (2016). A non-randomised feasibility trial
assessing the efficacy of a mindfulness-based intervention for teachers to reduce stress
and improve well-being. Mindfulness, 7(1), 198-208.
Bhattacharya, S. (2008, March 9). Why people quit. Business Today. Retrieved from
http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/why-people-quit/1/1542.html
Biggs, A. (2011). An options pricing method for calculating the market price of public sector
pension liabilities. Public Budgeting and Finance, 31(3), 94-118.
215
Binns, K., & Markow, D. (1999). Metropolitan Life survey of the American teacher: Violence in
America's public schools five years later. New York, NY: Metropolitan Life Insurance
Company.
Black, S. (2003). Stressed out in the classroom. American School Board Journal, 190(10), 36-38.
Bloom, B.S. (Ed.), Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956).
Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY:
David McKay.
Bloomberg, L., & Volpe, M. (2012). Completing your qualitative dissertation. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Bluedorn, A. C. (2001). Time and organizational culture. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. M.
Wilderom, & M. F. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of organizational culture and climate.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Bolino, M.C., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, J. B., & Suazo, M.M. (2010). Citizenship under
pressure: What's a "good soldier" to do? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 835-
855.
Borg, M., & Riding, R. (1991). Toward a model for the determinants of occupational stress
among school teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 6, 355-373.
Borg, M., G., Riding, R. J., & Falzon, J.M. (1991). Stress in teaching: A study of occupational
stress and its determinants, job satisfaction and career commitment among primary
school teachers. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental
Educational Psychology, 11(1), 59-75.
216
Boushey, H., & Glynn, S. (2012, November). There are significant business costs to replacing
employees. Retrieved from Center for American Progress website:
https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/CostofTurnover.pdf
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The influence of
school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research
Journal, 48(2), 303-333.
Boyne, G. A., James, O., John, P., & Petrovsky, N. (2011). Top management turnover and
organizational performance: A test of a contingency model. Public Administration
Review, 71(4), 572-581.
Breaux, A., & Wong, H. (2003). New teacher induction: How to train, support, and retain new
teachers. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications.
Broadbent, D. (1958). Perception and communication. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Brooks, J. S., & Normore, A. H. (2015). Qualitative research and educational leadership:
Essential dynamics to consider when designing and conducting studies. International
Journal of Educational Management, 29(7), 798-806.
Brown, L. A., & Roloff, E. (2011). Extra-role time, burnout, and commitment: The power of
promises kept. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 74, 450-474.
Brulé, G., & Morgan, R. (2018). Working with stress: Can we turn distress into eustress?
Journal of Neuropsychology and Stress Management, 3, 1-3.
Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?
Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97-113.
Buckert M., Schwieren, C., Kudielka, B. M., & Fiebach, C. J. (2014). Acute stress affects risk
taking but not ambiguity aversion. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8(82), 1-11.
217
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First, break all the rules. New York, NY: Simon &
Schuster.
Buckley, J., & Chiang, H. (1976). Research methodology & business decisions. Canada:
National Association of Accountants.
Bunge, S. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2006). A brain-based account of the development of rule use in
childhood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 118-121.
Burchielli, R., & Bartram, T. (2006). Like an iceberg floating alone: A case study of teacher
stress at a Victorian primary school. Australian Journal of Education, 50(3), 312-327.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016). Job openings and labor turnover survey highlights. Retrieved
from Bureau of Labor Statistics website:
http://www.bls.gov/web/jolts/jlt_labstatgraphs.pdf
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Calderhead, J. (2001). International experiences of teaching reform. In V. Richardson (Ed.),
Handbook of research on teaching (4th Ed.) (pp. 777-800). Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association.
Callan, S. (2007). Implications of family-friendly policies for organizational culture: Findings
from two case studies. Work, Employment and Society, 21, 673-691.
Calvo, M.G., & Gutierrez-Garcia, A. (2016). Cognition and stress. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress:
Concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior (Handbook of stress series, Volume 1) (pp.
139-144). London, England: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-
800951-2.00016-9
Camacho, D. (2017, August). Applying a cognitive-behavioral model to conceptualize burnout
and coping for teachers in urban schools. Chicago, IL: ProQuest.
218
Camacho, D., Vera, E., Scardamalia, K., & Phalen, P. L. (2018). What are urban teachers
thinking and feeling? Psychology in the Schools, 55(9), 1133-1150.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22176
Campion, M. A. (1991). Meaning and measurement of turnover: Comparison of alternative
measures and recommendations for research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 199-
212.
Cannon, W. B. (1932). The wisdom of the body. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Cappella, E., Frazier, S., Atkins, M., Schoenwald, S., & Glisson, C. (2008). Enhancing schools'
capacity to support children in poverty: An ecological model of school-based mental
health services. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 35, 395-409.
Carlyle, D., & Woods, P. (2004a). Essay Review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 537-
541.
Carlyle, D., & Woods, P. (2004b). The emotions of teacher stress. Stoke, UK: Trentham Books.
Carton, A., & Fruchart, E. (2014). Sources of stress, coping strategies, emotional experience:
Effects of the level of experience in primary school teachers in France. Educational
Review, 66(2), 245-262.
Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017, August). Teacher turnover: Why it matters
and what we can do about it. Retrieved from Learning Policy Institute website:
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-
Cascio, W. F. (2015). Managing human resources: Productivity, quality of work life, profits
(10th ed.). Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
Castro, A., Quinn, D. J., Fuller, E., & Barnes, M. (2018, January 4). University Council for
Educational Administration: Policy Brief 2018-1: Addressing the importance and scale
219
of the U.S. teacher shortage. Quality leadership matters. University Council for
Educational Administration, Policy Brief Series, (1), 1.
Castro, S. (2017, December). Improving novice teacher retention in an urban school district.
Dissertation. Morristown, NJ, US: Educational Leadership Program of the College of
Saint Elizabeth.
Centers for Disease Control (2018). CDC: These jobs have highest suicide rates in the United
States. Retrieved from Fox News website: https://fox6now.com/2018/11/15/cdc-these-
jobs-have-highest-suicide-rates-in-the-united-states/
Centre for the Studies on Human Stress (CSHS) (2017). Stressors. Retrieved from Centre for the
Studies of Human Stress website: https://humanstress.ca/stress/what-is-stress/stressors/
Chan, D. W. (2002). Stress, self-efficacy, social support, and psychological distress among
prospective Chinese teachers in Hong Kong. Educational Psychology, 22(5), 557-569.
Chang, M. L. (2009). An appraisal perspective of teacher burnout: Examining the emotional
work of teachers. Educational Psychology Review, 21(3), 193-218.
Chaplain, R. (2008). Stress and psychological distress among trainee secondary teachers in
England. Educational Psychology, 28(2), 195-209. doi: 10.1080/01443410701491858.
Cheshire, L. (2009, October). Archiving qualitative data: Prospects and challenges. Retrieved
from citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
Coles, R. (2000). The moral life of children. New York, NY: Atlantic Monthly Press.
Cooper, C. L., & Marshall, J. (1976). Occupational sources of stress: A review of the literature
relating to coronary heart disease and mental ill health. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 49(1), 11-28.
220
Corti, L., Day, A., & Backhouse, G. (2000). Confidentiality and informed consent: Issues for
consideration in the preservation of and provision of access to qualitative data archives.
Qualitative Social Research, 1(3), 1-16.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2016). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J., Klassen, A., Plano Clark, V., & Smith, K. W. (2011). Best practices for mixed
methods research in the health sciences. Health Research Educational Trust, 27.
Czeh, B., & Fuchs, E. (2016). Remodeling of neural networks by stress. In G. Fink, Stress:
Concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior: Handbook of stress (Vol. 1, pp. 117-124).
London, UK: Elsevier.
Daniels, J., Bradley, M., & Hays, M. (2007). The impact of school violence on school personnel:
Implications for psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38(6):
652-659.
Dantzer, R. (2016). Behavior overview. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress: Concepts, cognition, emotion,
and behavior: Handbook of stress (pp. 57-63). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Day, C., & Hong, J. (2016). Influences on the capacities for emotional resilience of teachers in
schools serving disadvantaged urban communities: Challenges of living on the edge.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 115-125.
Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (2016). Shaping school culture (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
221
Deming, W. E. (1981). Improvement of quality and productivity through action by management.
National Productivity Review, 1(1), 12-22.
Dennison, W., & Shenton, K. (2018). Challenges in educational management: Principles into
practice (1st ed.). London: Routledge.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, N. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Department of Education (GOV.UK) (2019, June 27). Statistics: School workforce. Retrieved
from GOV.UK website: https://www.gov.uk
Detert, J., & Burris, E. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open?
Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869-884.
Dewey, J. (1985). The collected works of John Dewey, Vol. 7; 1932, Ethics. Carbondale, IL:
Southern Illinois University Press.
Dinham, S., & Scott, C. (1996). Teacher satisfaction, motivation and health: Phase one of the
teacher 2000 project. New York, NY: American Educational Research Association.
Dlamini, C.S., Mammen, K. J., & Okeke, C. I. O. (2014). An investigation of work-related stress
among high school teachers in the Hhohho region of Swaziland. Mediterranean Journal
of Social Sciences, 5(15), 575-586. Retrieved from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271104988_An_Investigation_of_Work-
Related_Stress_among_High_School_Teachers_in_the_Hhohho_Region_of_Swaziland
Doménech-Betoret, F. (2009). Self-efficacy, school resources, job stressors and burnout among
Spanish primary and secondary school teachers: A structural equation approach.
Educational Psychology, 29, 45-68, DOI: 10.1080/01443410802459234.
Driscoll, M. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
222
Dunham, J. (1976). Stress situations and responses. Stress in Schools. Hemel Hempstead, UK:
NAS/UWT.
Eckardt, R., Skaggs, B., & Youndt, M. (2014). Turnover and knowledge loss: An examination of
the differential impact of production manager and worker turnover in service and
manufacturing firms. Journal of Management Studies, 51, 1025-1057.
Elliot, D., Hamburg, B., & Williams, K. (1998). Violence in the American schools. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Esler, M. (2017, March). Mental stress and human cardiovascular disease. Neuroscience &
Biobehavioral Reviews, 74(B), 269-276.
Evans, D. W. (2011). District annual report: 2011-2012 - Paterson Public Schools. Retrieved
from http://www.paterson.k12.nj.us/departments/superintendent/reports/2013-14-
Paterson%20Annual%20Report%20PPT%20FINAL2.pdf
Everly, G. S., & Lating, J. M. (2012). A clinical guide to the treatment of the human stress
response. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag
Fantuzzo, J., Perlman, S., Sproul, F., Minney, A., Perry, M. A., & Li, F. (2012). Making visible
teacher reports of their teaching experiences. The early childhood teacher experiences
scale. Psychology in the Schools, 49(2), 194-205.
Ferguson, D. (1973). A study of occupational stress and health. Ergonomics, 16(5), 649-664.
Feng, L. (2014). Teacher placement, mobility, and occupational choices after teaching.
Education Economics, 22(1), 24-47.
223
Fernet, C., Lavigne, G. L., Vallerrand, R. J., & Austin, S. (2014). Fired up with passion:
Investigating how job autonomy and passion predict burnout at career start in teachers.
Work and Stress, 28(3), 270-288.
Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods
designs - principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6 Pt 2), 2134-2156.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12117. Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4097839/
Feuerhahn, N., Stamov- Roßnagel, C., Wolfram, M., Bellingrath, S., & Kudielka, B. M. (2013).
Emotional exhaustion and cognitive performance in apparently healthy teachers: A
longitudinal multi-source study. Stress and Health, 29(4), 297-306.
Fink, D. G. (2016, November 12). Medical Doctor, Director of Medical Research; Professor in
the Centre for Neuroscience, University of Melbourne, Australia; Professorial Research
Fellow of the Mental Health Research Institute of Victoria. (Y. Balboa, Interviewer) San
Diego, CA.
Fink, G. (2016). Stress, definitions, mechanisms, and effects outlined: Lessons from anxiety. In
G. Fink (Ed.), Stress: Concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior (pp. 3-11). Parkville,
Victoria, Australia: Academic Press Elsevier.
Fink, G. (2017). Neuroscience and biobehavioral psychology. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress: Concepts,
definition and history (pp. 1-9). Melbourne, Australia: Elsevier.
Finlay-Jones, R. (1986). Factors in the teaching environment associated with severe
psychological distress among school teachers. Australian and New Zealand Journal of
Psychiatry, 20, 304-313.
224
Fisch, S. (2000). A capacity model of children's comprehension of educational content on
television. Media Psychology, 2, 63-91.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blasé, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005).
Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South
Florida, Lous de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute.
Fleck, S. (2009, May). International comparisons of hours worked: An assessment of the
statistics. Monthly Labor Review, 132(5), 3-31.
Fleishman, E. A., & Harris, E. F. (1998). Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee
grievances and turnover: Some post hoc reflections. Personal Psychology, 51, 825-834.
Flook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., Bonus, K., & Davidson, R. J. (2013). Mindfulness for
teachers: A pilot study to assess effects on stress, burnout, and teaching efficacy. Mind,
Brain, and Education, 7(3), 182-195.
Frein, S. T., Jones, S. L., & Gerow, J. E. (2013). When it comes to Facebook there may be more
to bad memory than just multitasking. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2179-2182.
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.031.
Fritzsche, B., & Parrish, T. (2005). Theories and research on job satisfaction. In E. R. Brown &
R.Lent (Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work
(pp. 180-202). New York, NY: Wiley.
Gaikhorst, L., Beishuizen, J. J., Zijlstra, B.J.H., & Volman, M.L.L. (2015). Contribution of a
professional development programme to the quality and retention of teachers in an urban
environment. European Journal of Teacher Education , 38(1), 41-57.
Galand, B., Lecocq, C., & Philippot, P. (2007). School violence and teacher professional
disengagement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 465-477.
225
Galinsky, E., Bond, J. T., Kim, S. S., Backon, L., Brownfield, E., & Sakai, K. (2005). Overwork
in America: When the way we work becomes too much. New York, NY: Families and
Work Institute.
Ganster, D., & Rosen, C. (2013). Work stress and employee health. Journal of Management,
39(5), 1085-1122.
Garza, J. (2018). Interview on statistics research with Balboa. Garza Consulting.
jeff.garza@the-gc.com
Gay, L.R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2006). Educational research: Competencies for analysis
and application (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Gazzaniga, M.S., Ivry, R. B., & Mangun, G. R. (2014). Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of
the mind (4th ed.). New York, NY: Norton.
George, F. (2008). Marchenhaft. JoMA Archives. Earthwind Editions.
https://endicottstudio.typepad.com/poetrylist/sisyphus-by-faye-george.html
Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, H. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes
toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education,
13, 451-458.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76, 569-582.
Gick, M., & Holyoak, K. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive
Gilboa, S., Shirom, A., Fried, Y., & Cooper, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of work demand
stressors and job performance: Examining main and moderating effects. Personnel
Psychology, 61(2), 227-271.
226
Gillespie, J. F. (1999). The why, what, how and when of effective faculty use of Institutional
Review Boards. In G. Chastain, & R. E. Landrum (Eds.), Protecting human subjects (pp.
157-177). Washington DC: APA.
Glazer, J. (2018, August). Learning from those who no longer teach: Viewing teacher attrition
through a resistance lens. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 62-71.
Gold, Y., & Bachelor, P. (2001). Signs of burnout are evident for practice teachers during the
teacher training period. Education, 108(4), 546-555.
Goleman, D., & Davidson, R. J. (2017). Altered traits. London: Penguin Group.
Gonzalez, A. (2015, May). The effects of high stakes testing on reported teacher stress and
teacher self-efficacy. Retrieved from http//www.proquest.com
Good, T., & Brophy, J. (2003). Looking in classrooms (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gopher, D., Armony, L., & Greenspan, Y. (2000). Switching tasks and attention policies.
Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 129, 229-308.
Goswami, U. (2014). The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (2nd
ed.). Malden, MA: John Wiley and Sons.
Gravetter, F., & Forzano, L. (2016). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Stamford,
CT: Centage Learning.
Greenberg, M. T., Brown, J. L., & Abenavoli, R. M. (2016). Teacher stress and health: Effects
on teachers, students, and schools. Pennsylvania State University, PA: Edna Bennett
Pierce Prevention Research Center.
Greene, R., Beszterczey, S., Katzenstein, T., Park, K., & Goring, J. (2002). Are students with
ADHD more stressful to teach? Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Disorders, 2, 79-
90.
227
Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness. New York, NY: Paulist Press.
Grey, J. D., Milner, T. A., & McEwen, B. S. (2013). Dynamic plasticity: The role of
glucocorticoids, brain-derived neurotrophic factor and other trophic factors.
Neuroscience, 239, 214-227.
Griffith, D. (2017, September 20). Fordham Institute advancing education excellence. Retrieved
from Teacher Absenteeism in Charter and Traditional Public Schools:
www.edexcellence.net
Griffith, J., Steptoe, A., & Cropley, M. (1999). An investigation of coping strategies associated
with job stress in teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 517-531.
Grissom, J. (2011). Can good principals keep teachers in disadvantaged schools? Linking
principal effectiveness to teacher satisfaction and turnover in hard-to-staff environments.
Teachers College Record, 113(11), 2552-2585.
Guest, G., MacQueen, K., & Namey, E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Guskey, R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of
instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 63-69.
Guthrie, J., & Schuermann, P. (2011). Leading schools to success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Haase, R. F., Ferreira, J. A., Fernandes, R. I., Santos, E. J. R., & Jome, L. M. (2016).
Development and validation of a revised measure of individual capacities for tolerating
information overload in occupational settings. Journal of Career Assessment, 24(1), 130-
144.
Hall, E. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
228
Harden, R. M. (1999). Stress, pressure and burnout in teachers: Is the swan exhausted? Medical
teacher, Journal of Allied Health; Medical Education, 21(3), 245-247.
Harris, K. J., Wheeler, A. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (2009). Leader-member exchange and
empowerment: Direct and interactive effects on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and
performance. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 371-382.
Haydon, T., Stevens, D., & Leko, M. (2018). Teacher stress: Sources, effects, and protective
factors. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 31(2), 99-107.
Haynes, M. (2014, July). On the path to equity: Improving the effectiveness of beginning
teachers. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from
https://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/path-to-equity/
Heavey, A., Holwerda, J., & Hausknecht, J. (2013). Causes and consequences of collective
turnover: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 412-453.
Hemp, P. (2009). Death by information overload. Retrieved from Harvard Business Review
website: https://hbr.org/2009/09/death-by-information-overload
Herman, K.C., Hickmon-Rosa, J., & Reinke, W. M. (2018). Empirically derived profiles of
teacher stress, burnout, self-efficacy, and coping and associated student outcomes.
Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 20(2), 90-100.
Hinton, J. W., & Rotheiler, E. (1998). The psychophysiology of stress in teachers. In J. Dunham
& V. Varham (Eds.), Stress in teachers: Past, present, and future (pp. 95-119). London,
England: Whurr Publishers.
Holtom, B., Mitchell, T., Lee, T., & Eberly, M. (2008). Turnover & retention research: A glance
at the past, a closer review of the present, and a venture into the future. The Academy of
Management Annals, 2, 231-274.
229
Holtom, B., Mitchell, T., Lee, T., & Inderrieden, E. J. (2006). Shocks as causes of turnover:
What they are and how organizations can manage them. Human Resource Management
Journal, 44, 337-352.
Hudson, B. (2004). A comparative investigation of stress and coping among a sample of K-8
educators. (Doctoral dissertation). Loyola University, Chicago, Illinois.
Hudson, P. (2004). Mentoring for effective primary science teaching. Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Humboldt, S., Leal, I., Laneiro, T., & Tavares, P. (2013). Examining occupational stress, sources
of stress and stress management strategies through the eyes of management consultants:
A multiple correspondence analysis for latent constructs. Stress & Health: Journal of the
International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 29, 410-420.
Hunter, R. G., McEwen, B. S., & Pfaff, D. W. (2013). Environmental stress and transposon
transcription in the mammalian brain. Mobile Genetic Elements, 3(2), e24555. Retrieved
from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3681740/
Hunter, R., Murakami, G., Dewell, S. E., Seligsohn, M., Baker, Miriam E.R., Datson, N., . . .
Pfaff, D.W. (2012). Acute stress and hippocampal histone H3 lysine 9 trimethylation, a
retrotransposon silencing response. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of
the United States of America, 109(43), 17657-17662. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1215810109.
Hunting, D., Reilly, T., Whitsett, A., Briggs, S., Garcia, J., Hart, B., & Spyra, E. (2017). Finding
and keeping educators for Arizona's classrooms. Phoenix, AZ: Morrison Institute.
Retrieved from
https://morrisoninstitute.asu.edu/sites/default/files/content/products/AZ%20TEACHERS
%20REPORT%202017_0.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-31,622
230
Ingersoll, R. (2012). Beginning teacher induction: What the data tell us. Phi Delta Kappan, 93,
47-51.
Ingersoll, R. (2013, May). Why schools have difficulty staffing their classrooms with qualified
teachers? United Federation of Teachers Fact Finding Hearing, New York, NY.
Ingersoll, R. (2015). What do the national data tell us about minority teacher shortages? The
State of Teacher Diversity in American Education. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker
Institute. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/541
Ingersoll, R. (2018, Oct. 23). Richard Ingersoll updates landmark Penn GSE study of the
American teaching force, now covering 3 decades. Retrieved from PR Newswire
Association LLC website: http://www.prnewswire.com
Ingersoll, R. M. (2012). Seven trends: The transformation of the teaching force. Retrieved from
Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania website:
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1261&context=gse_pubs
Ingersoll, R. M. (2019). Recruitment, employment, retention and the minority teacher shortage.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(37), 1-39.
Ingersoll, R., Merrill, L., & May, H. (2012). Retaining teachers: How preparation matters.
Educational Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.gse.upenn.edu/pdf/rmi/EL-
May2012.pdf
Ingersoll, R., Merrill, L., & Stuckey, D. (2014). Seven trends: The transformation of the teaching
force, updated April 2014. Working paper. CPRE Report #RR-80). Philadelphia, PA:
Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved
from http://www.cpre.org/sites/default/files/workingpapers/1506_7trendsapril2014.pdf
231
Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2009). The mathematics and science teacher shortage: Fact and myth.
Retrieved from Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Research Reports:
https://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/51, doi: 10.12698/cpre.2009.rr62
Ingersoll, R., & Perda, D. (2014). How high is teacher turnover and is it a problem? Consortium
for Policy Research in Education. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.
Insel, T. (2015, May 15). Post by former NIMH director Thomas Insel: Mental Health
Awareness Month: By the numbers. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Mental Health.
Jackson, M. (2008). Distracted: The erosion of attention and the coming dark age. Amherst, NY:
Prometheus Books.
Jackson, E. (2014, May 11). The top 8 reasons your best people are about to quit - and how you
can keep them. Retrieved from Forbes website:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2014/05/11/the-top-8-reasons-your-best-
people-are-about-to-quit-and-how-you-can-keep-them/#66431a05c45b
Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method - interviewing and observation. Journal of
Basic and Clinical Pharmacy, 5(4), 87-88.
Jara, E. (2016). A call for a system of change. Journal of Thought, 18-19.
Jennings, P., & Greenberg, M. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional
competence in relation to child and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational
Research, 79, 491-525.
Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed
methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 112-133.
232
Johnson, S., Cooper, C., Cartwright, S., Donald, I., Taylor, P., & Millet, C. (2005). The
experience of work-related stress across occupations. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
20(2), 178-187.
Johnston, R., & Black, N. (2016). Demands of teaching taking its toll on public school teachers.
The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education & Human
Development, Center on Education Policy.
Jones, T., Baxter, M., & Khanduja, V. (2013). A quick guide to survey research. Annals of the
Royal College of Surgeons of England, 95, 5-7.
Jones, B. (2016). Enduring in an impossible occupation: Perfectionism and commitment to
teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(5), 437-446.
Jung, C.S. (2010). Predicting organizational actual turnover rates in the U.S. Federal
Government. International Public Management Journal, 13(3):297-317.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2017). Guided mindfulness meditation. Retrieved from Practices with Jon Kabat-
Zinn: https://www.mindfulnesscds.com/pages/about-the-series
Kajitani, S., McKenzie, C., & Sakata, K. (2016). Use it too much and lose it? The University of
Melbourne, Faculty of Business and Economics. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne
Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research.
Katz, D. A., Greenberg, M. T., Klein, L. C., & Jennings, P. A. (2016). Associations between
salivary α-amylase, cortisol, and self-report indicators of health and wellbeing among
educators. Teacher and Teacher Education, 54, 98-106.
Kaur, S. (2011). Comparative study of occupational stress among teachers of private and
government schools in relation to their age, gender and teaching experience.
International Journal of Educational Planning & Administration, 1(2), 151-160.
233
Keefe, J. (2018). Pennsylvania's teachers are undercompensated-and new pension legislation
will cut their compensation even more. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
Kelchtermans, G. (2009a). Who I am in how I teach the message: Self-understanding,
vulnerability and reflection. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 257-
272.
Kelchtermans, G. (2009b). Career stories as a gateway to understanding teacher development. In
M. Bayer, U. Brinkkjaer, H. Plauberg, & S. Rolls (Eds.), Teachers' career trajectories
and work lives (pp. 29-47). Dordretcht, Netherlands: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-
2358-2
Kelchtermans, G. (2017). Should I stay or should I go? Unpacking teacher attrition/retention as
an educational issue. Teachers and Teaching Theory Practice, 23(8), 961-977.
Kelly, A. L., & Berthelsen, D. C. (1995). Preschool teachers' experience of stress. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 11(4), 345-357.
Kenyon, G. (2016, July 18). Is full-time work bad for our brains? Retrieved from BBC NEWS:
http://www.bbc.com
Kersaint, G., Lewis, J., Potter, R., & Meisels, G. (2007). Why teachers leave: Factors that
influence retention and resignation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 775-794.
Kim, J. J., & Diamond, D. M. (2002). The stressed hippocampus, synaptic plasticity and lost
memories. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3, 453-462.
Kinman, G., & Jones, F. (2005). Lay representations of workplace stress: What do people really
mean when they say they are stressed? Work and Stress, 101-120.
234
Klassen, R., & Chiu, M. (2010). Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher
gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3),
741-756.
Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine. Toronto, Canada: Vintage Canada.
Koedel, C., & Xiang, P. B. (2017). Pension enhancements and the retention of public employees.
ILR Review, 70(2), 519-551.
Kokkinen, L., Kouvonen, A., Koskinen, A., Varje, P., & Väänänen, A. (2014). Differences in
hospitalizations between employment industries, Finland 1976 to 2010. Annals of
Epidemiology, 24, 598-605.
König, C. J., Bühner, M., & Mürling, G. (2005). Working memory, fluid intelligence and
attention are predictors of multitasking performance but polychronicity and extraversion
are not. Human Performance, 18, 243-266.
Koruklu, N., Feyzioglu, B., Ozenoglu-Kiremit, H., & Aladag, E. (2012). Teachers' burnout
levels in terms of some variables. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(3), 1823-
1831. Retrieved from ERIC: http//eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ10000898.pdf
Koshy, E., Koshy, V., & Waterman, H. (2011). Action research in healthcare. London: Sage
Publications.
Kotovsky, K., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1985). Why are some problems hard? Evidence
from Tower of Hanoi. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 248-294.
Kristensen, T. S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. B. (2005). The Copenhagen
Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work and Stress, 19, 192-
207. doi: 10.1080/02678370500297720.
235
Kutcher, S., Wei, Y., & Weist, M. D. (2015). School mental health. Cambridge, England, United
Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Kyriacou, C. (2001). Teacher stress: Directions for future research. Educational Review, 53, 27-
35.
Kyriacou, C., & Chien, P. (2004). Teacher stress in Taiwanese primary schools. Journal of
Educational Enquiry, 5(2), 86-104.
Kyriacou, C., & Sutcliffe, J. (1978). A model of teacher stress. Educational Studies, 4, 1-6.
Kyriacou, C., & Kunc, R. (2007). Beginning teachers' expectation of teaching. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 23(8), 1246-1257.
Lambert, R., & McCarthy, C. (2006). Understanding teacher stress in an age of accountability.
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Lang, A. (2001). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. The Journal of
Communication, ---, 46-70.
Lavigne, A. (2014). Exploring the intended and unintended consequences of high-stakes teacher
evaluation on schools, teachers, and students. Teachers College Record, 116, 1-29.
Lazarus, R. (2000). Toward better research on stress and coping. American Psychologist, 55,
665-673.
Lazarus, R. (2006). Emotions and interpersonal relationships: Toward a person-centered
conceptualization of emotions and coping. Journal of Personality, 74, 9-46.
Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, NY: Springer.
Lazarus, R., & Launier, R. (1978). Stress-related transactions between person and environment.
Perspectives in Interactional Psychology, 287, 327.
236
Lee, C. B. (2010). Generating synergy between conceptual change and knowledge building.
Human Development, 53, 134-152.
Lee, F. J., & Taatgen, N. A. (2012). Multi-tasking as skill acquisition. Proceedings of the
Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 572-577).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lee, J., Lin, L., & Robertson, T. (2012). The impact of media multitasking on learning.
Learning, Media and Technology, 37(1), 94-104.
Lee, S., Tsang, A., & Kwok, K. (2007). Stress and mental disorders in a representative sample of
teachers during education reform in Hong Kong. Journal of Psychology in Chinese
Societies, 8(2), 159-178.
Lee, S., & Hong, J. (2011). Does family-friendly policy matter? Testing its impact on turnover
and performance. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 870-879.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34-46.
Lhospital, A., & Gregory, A. (2009a). What qualitative research has taught us about intervention
teams. Psychology in the Schools, 46(10), 1098-1112.
Lhospital, A. S., & Gregory, A. (2009b). Changes in teacher stress through participation in pre-
referral intervention teams. Psychology in the Schools, 46(10), 1098-1112.
Lin, L. (2013, January-March). Multiple dimensions of multitasking phenomenon. International
Journal of Technology and Human Interaction, 9(1), 37-49.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, Y., Lynham, S., & Guba, E. (2018). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and
emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 108-150). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
237
Lingard, L., Alber, M., & Levinson, W. (2008). Grounded theory, mixed methods, and action
research. British American Journal, 337, 459.
Loeb, S., Darling-Hammond, L., & Luczak, J. (2009). How teaching conditions predict teacher
turnover in California schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44-70.
Logan, G. (2002). Parallel and serial processing. In H. Pashler & J. Wixted (Eds.) Steven's
handbook of experimental psychology: Vol. 4. Methodology in experimental psychology
(pp. 271-300). New York, NY: John Wiley.
Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Manchester, UK:
Manchester University Press.
Malik, N. A., Björkqvist, K., & Österman, K. (2017). Factors associated with occupational stress
among university teachers in Pakistan and Finland. Journal of Educational, Health and
Community Psychology, 6(2), 1-14.
Manoli, D. S., & Weber, A. (2011). Nonparametric evidence on the effects of financial incentives
on retirement decisions. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.
Marcuse, H. (1966). Eros and civilization. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Maslach, C. (1982a). Burnout: The cost of caring. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Maslach, C. (1982b). Understanding burnout: Definitional issues in analyzing a complex
phenomenon. In W.S. Paine (Ed.), Job stress and burnout (pp. 29-40). Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Maslow, A. (1999). Toward a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
238
Maume, D., & Purcell, D. (2007). The "over-paced" American: Recent trends in the
intensification of work. Research in the Sociology of Work, 17, 251-283.
Maxwell, J. A., & Mittapalli, K. (2010). Realism as a stance for mixed methods research. In A.
Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and
behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 145-167). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When
presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93(1), 187-198.
Mayo Clinic (2018). Stress management. Retrieved from https://www.mayclinic.org/healthy-
lifestyle/stress-managment/in-depth/stress-managment/art-20044151?pg=2.
Mazzola, J., Schonfield, I., & Spector, P. (2011). What qualitative research has taught us about
occupational stress. Stress and Health, 27(2), 93-110.
McCarthy, C. J., Lambert, R. G., Crowe, E. W., & McCarthy, C. J. (2011). Coping, stress, and
job satisfaction as predictors of advanced placement statistics teachers' intention to leave
the field. SAGE Publications, 94(4), 306-326.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636511403262
McCarthy, C. J., Lambert, R. G., O'Donnell, M., & Melendres, L. T. (2009). Relationship of
elementary teachers' experience, perceived demands, and coping resources to burnout
symptoms. Elementary School Journal, 109, 1-19.
McCarty, R. (2016). The fight-or-flight response: A cornerstone of stress research. In G. Fink
(Ed.), Stress: Concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior (pp. 33-37). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
239
McCleskey, J. (2014). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership
development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117-130.
McCleskey, J., & Billingsley, B. (2008). How does the quality and stabilty of the teaching force
influence the research-to-practice gap? A perspective on the teacher shortage in special
education. Remedial and Special Education, 29(5), 293-305.
McCormick, J. (1997a). Occupational stress of teachers: Biographical differences in a large
school system. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(1), 18-38.
McCormick, J. (1997b). An attribution model of teachers' occupational stress and job satisfaction
in a large educational system. Work and Stress, 11(1), 17-32.
McDevitt, J. (2011, June 16). Teacher suicide rate rises by 80 per cent. Retrieved from
https://www.channel4.com/news/teachers-suicide-rates-double-in-a-year
McEwen, B. (2000). Definition and concepts of stress. In G. Fink (Ed.), Encyclopedia of stress
(Vol. 3, pp. 508-515). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
McEwen, B. (2016). Central role of the brain in stress and adaptation: Allostasis, biological
embedding, and cumulative change. In G. Fink Ed.), Stress: Concepts, cognition,
emotion, and behavior (pp. 39-52). London, UK: Academic Press.
McKinney-Thompson, C. (2015). Teacher stress and burnout and principals' leadership styles:
A relational study. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
http://acumen.lib.ua.edu/content/u0015/0000001/0001949/u0015_0000001_0001949.pdf
McLean, L., & Connor, C. M. (2015). Depressive symptoms in third-grade teachers: Relations
to classroom quality and student achievement. Child Development, 86(3), 945-954. doi:
10.1111/cdev.12344.
240
McTaggart, R., & Kemmis, S. (2000). Participatory action research. Handbook of Qualitative
Research, 567-605.
Medeiros, A. M., Assunçāo, A. A., & Barreto, S. M. (2012). Absenteeism due to voice disorders
in female teachers: A public health problem. International
Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 85, 853-864.
Meier, K. J., & Hicklin, A. (2008). Employee turnover and organizational performance: Testing
a hypothesis from classical public administration. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 18(4), 573-590.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in education. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S., & Grenier, R. (2019). Qualitative research practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Merriam-Webster (2020, January 1). Stress. Retrieved from Merriam-Webster website:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stress
Merriam-Webster (2020, January 1). Urban. Retrieved from Merriam-Webster website:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/urban
Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes
and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3-
65. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.1.3.
241
Meyer, D. E. & Kieras, D. E. (1997b). A computational theory of executive control processes
and human multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-
period phenomena. Psychological Review, 104, 749-791.
Mihaly, K., Dubowitz, T., Richardson, A., & Gonzalez, G. (2018). Health, well-being, and
education in an urban school district. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus-or-minus two: Some limits on our capacity
for processing information. Psychological Review, 101, 343-352.
Mitchell, T., & Lee, T. (2001). The unfolding model of voluntary turnover and job
embeddedness: Foundations for a comprehensive theory of attachment. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 23, 189-246.
Modell, S. (2009). In defense of triangulation: A critical realist approach to mixed methods
research in management accounting. Management Accounting Research, 20, 208-221.
Montgomery, C., & Rupp, A. A. (2005). A meta-analysis for exploring the diverse causes and
effects of stress in teachers. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(3), 458-486.
Morse, J., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for
establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 1-19.
Morse, J. M., & Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed methods design: Principles and procedures. Walnut
Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
242
Morton, J. B., & Munakata, Y. (2002a). Active versus latent representations: A neural network
model of perseveration, dissociation, and decalage. Developmental Psychobiology, 40,
255-265.
Moynihan, D. P., Pandey, S. K., & Wright, B. E. (2012). Setting the table: How transformational
leadership fosters performance information use. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 22(1), 143-164.
Munakata, Y., Snyder, H. R., & Chatham, C. H. (2012). Developing cognitive control: Three key
transitions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(2), 71-77.
Munnell, A. H. (2012). State and local pensions: What now? Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution.
Munt, V. (2004). The awful truth: A microhistory of teacher stress at Westwood High. British
Journal of Sociology of Education , 25(5), 577-591.
Myers, C. S. (1915). A contribution to the study of shell shock. Lancet, 1, 316-320.
National Association of School Psychologists (2016). Teacher retention. Retrieved from
National Association of School Psychologists website: http://www.nasponline.org
National Center for Education Statistics (1990). Digest of Education Statistics - 1990. Retrieved
from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs91/91660.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics (2019, January 16). Documentation to the 2016-17
Common Core of Data (CCD) Universe Files (2019-052). Retrieved from National
Center for Education Statistics website: https://nces.ed.gov. NCES Publication 2019052.
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (1996). Report. New York, NY:
Teachers College, Columbia University.
243
National Education Union (2018, April 1). NEU survey shows workload causing 80% of
teachers to consider leaving the profession. Retrieved from National Education Union
website: https://neu.org.uk/search-press-releases
National Education Association. (2016). Partnership for 21st century skills. Retrieved from
http://www.nea.org/home/34888.htm
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) (2016). Stress. Retrieved from National Institute of
Mental Health website: https://www.nimh.hih.gov>health>publications>stress
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (2014, June 6). Stress at work.
Retrieved from National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health website:
http://cdc.gov/niosh/topics/stress
Naylor, C. (2001). Teacher workload and stress: An international perspective on human costs
and systemic failure. British Columbia, Canada: BCTF Research Report.
Neuman, K. S., Fox, C., Harding, D. J., Mehta, J., & Roth, W. (2004). Rampage: The social
roots of school shootings. New York, NY: Basic Books.
New York University (NYU). (2015, December 2). Teacher education reinvented. Keeping the
teachers: The problem of high turnover in urban schools. Retrieved from
https://teachereducation.steinhardt.nyu.edu/high-teacher-turnover
Nguyen, H. (2017, September 18). Americans want life skills like budgeting and cooking added
to standarized testing. Retrieved from YouGovUS website: www.YouGovUS
Nias, J. (1989). Primary teachers talking. A study of teaching as work. London, England:
Routledge.
Nidditch, P. H. (Ed.) (1975). John Locke: An essay concerning human understanding. Oxford,
UK: Oxford University Press.
244
Niles, S. G., & Anderson Jr., W. P. (1993). Career development and adjustment: The relation
between concerns and stress. Journal of Employment Counseling, 30, 79-87.
Nims, D. R. (2000). Violence in our schools: A national crisis. In D. S. Sandhu, & C. B. Aspy
(Eds.), Violence in American schools: A practical guide for counselors (pp. 3-20).
Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Novy-Marx, R., & Rauh, J. (2009). The liabilities and risks of state-sponsored pension plans.
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(4), 191-210.
Novy-Marx, R., & Rauh, J. (2011). Public pension promises: How big are they and what are
they worth? Journal of Finance, 66(4), 1207-1245.
Novy-Marx, R., & Rauh, J. (2014). Revenue demands of public employee pension promises.
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6(1), 193-229.
Nubling, M., Vomstein, M., Haug, A., Nubling, T., & Adiwidjaja, A. (2011). European-wide
survey on teachers' work-related stress: Assessment, comparison and evaluation of the
impact of psychosocial hazards on teachers at their workplace. Retrieved from
http://etuce.homesteac.com/Publications2011/Final_Report_on_the_survey_on WRS-
2011-eng.pdf
Nucci, L. (2004). Reflections on the moral self construct. In D. K. Lapsley, & D. Narvaez (Eds.),
Moral development, self, and identity (pp. 111-132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Oakley, A. (1998). Gender, methodology and people's ways of knowing: Some problems with
feminism and the paradigm debate in social science. Sociology, 32, 707-31.
245
Okeke, C.I.O., & Dlamini, S. C. (2013). An empirical study of stressors that impinge on teachers
in secondary school in Swaziland. South African Journal of Education, 33(1), 32-43.
Okeke, C.I.O., Adu, E.O., Drake, M.L., & Duku, N.S. (2014). Correlating demographic variables
with occupational stress and coping strategies of pre-school educators: A literature
review. Journal of Psychology, 5(2), 143-154.
Oliver, M., & Venter, D. (2003). The extent and causes of stress in teachers in the George
region. South African Journal of Education, 23.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2009). Education at a glance 2009:
OECD Indicators. Retrieved from:
https://www.scribd.com/document/147351957/OCDE-EducationataGlance
Osipow, S. H. (1998). Occupational Stress Inventory manual (professional version). Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Ouellette, R.R., Frazier, S.L., Shernoff, E.S., Cappella, E., Mehta, T.G., Mariñez-Lora, A., . . .
Atkins, M. (2018). Teacher job stress and satisfaction in urban schools: Disentangling
individual-, classroom, and organizational-level influences. Behavior Therapy, 49(4):
494-508. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2017.11.011
Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. (1993, December). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An
approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors: The
Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 35(4), 737-743.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001872089303500412
Pabst, S., Brand, M., & Wolf, O. T. (2013). Stress and decision making: A few minutes make all
the difference. Behavioural Brain Research, 250, 39-45.
246
Papay, J.P., & Johnson, S.M. (2012). Is PAR a good investment? Understanding the costs and
benefits of teacher peer assistance and review programs. Educational Policy, 26(5), 696-
729.
Parkin, P. (2009). Managing change in healthcare using action research. London: Plagrave.
Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference on simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological
Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
Paterson Public School District (2015). Annual Report: 2014-2015 - Paterson Public Schools.
Retrieved from www.paterson.k12.nj.us/reports/annual-reports
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Payne, M., & Furnham, A. (1987). Dimensions of occupational stress in West Indian secondary
school teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 57(2), 141-150.
Pfeffer, J. (2018). Dying for a paycheck. New York: Harper Business.
Phil, M., & Manjula, C. (2012). A study on personality factors causing stress among school
teachers. Language in India, 12(2). Retrieved from
http://languageinindia.com/feb2012/manjulaezhilmphilfinal.pdf
Pitts, D., Marvel, J., & Fernandez, S. (2011). So hard to say goodbye? Turnover intention among
U.S. federal employees. Public Administration Review, 71(5), 751-760. doi:
10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02414.x
247
Polychroniou, C. J. (2016, November 14). Trump in the White House: An interview with Noam
Chomsky. Retrieved from Truthout website: www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/38360-
trump-in-the-white-house-an-interview-with-noam-chomsky
Prasad, K., Vaidya, R., & Kumar, V. (2016). Teacher's performance as a function of
occupational stress and coping with reference to CBSE affiliated school teachers in and
around Hyderabad: A multinomial regressional approach. Psychology, 7, 1700-1718. doi:
10.4236/psych.2016.713160.
Radenbach, C., Reiter, A.M.F., Engert, V., Sjoerds, Z., Villringer, A., Heinze, H-J., . . . &
Schlagenhauf, F. (2015). The interaction of acute and chronic stress impairs model-based
behavioral control. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 53, 268-280. doi:
10.1016/j.psyneuen.2014.12.017
Raggl, A., & Troman, G. (2008, November). Turning to teaching: Gender and career choice.
British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29, 581-595.
Ramon y Cajal, S. (1913). Degeneration and regeneration of the nervous system. London,
England: Oxford University Press.
Ramos, G. (2018, May). Overlooked cost behind teacher retention: Does student discipline push
educators out of the classroom? Northern Arizona University, ProQuest Dissertations
Publishing. Retrieved from:
https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/2054002765.html?FMT=ABS
Ravichandran, R., & Rajendran, R. (2007). Perceived sources of stress among the teachers.
Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 33, 133-136.
Ravitch, D. (2013). On how to save public education [Web blog post]. Retrieved from Larry
Miller's Blog (October 5, 2013): https://millermps.wordpress.com/2013/10/page/2/.
248
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2006). The handbook of action research: Concise paperback
edition. London, UK: Sage.
Reina, C.S., Rogers, K.M., Peterson, S.J., Byron, J., & Hom, P.W. (2018, February 1). Quitting
the boss? The role of manager influence tactics and employee emotional engagement in
voluntary turnover. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 25(1), 5-18.
Rentner, D. S., Kober, N., & Frizzell, M. (2016, May 5). Listen to us: Teacher views and voices.
Retrieved from Centre on Education Policy:
https://www.cepc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=1456
Reul, J.M., Sutanto, W., van Eekelen, J.A., Rothuizen, J., & de Kloet, E.R. (1990). Central action
of adrenal steroids during stress and adaptation. Advances in Experimental Medicine and
Biology, 274, 243-256.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the
literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698-714.
Rich, S. (2016). A brief examination of the effects of occupational stress on creativity and
innovation. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 19(2), 107-121.
Richards, J. (2012). Teacher stress and coping strategies: A national snapshot. The Educational
Forum, 76(3), 299-316.
Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2 media in the lives of 8- to
18-year olds. Menlo Park, CA : Kaiser Family Foundation.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., McNaughton Nicholls, C., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research
practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Rochford, K., Jack, A., Boyatzis, R., & French, S. (2016). Ethical leadership as a balance
between opposing neutral. Journal of Business Ethics, 755-770.
249
Rogers, K. A., & Kelloway, E. K. (1997, January). Violence at work: Personal and
organizational outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2(1), 63-71.
Rogers, R.D., & Monsell, S. (1995). The costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive
tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(2), 207-231.
Ronfeldt, M., Farmer, S.O., McQueen, K., & Grissom, J.A. (2015). Teacher collaboration in
instructional teams and student achievement. American Educational Research, 52(3),
475-514. https:/doi.org/10.3102/0002831315585562
Ross, J. (1998). The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. In J. Brophy (Ed.),
Advances in research on teaching (Vol. 7, pp. 49-73). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Rothschild, B. (2006). Help for the helper: The psychophysiology of compassion fatigue and
vicarious trauma. New York: W. W. Norton.
Rumschlag, K. (2017). Teacher burnout: A quantitative analysis of emotional exhaustion,
personal accomplishment, and depersonalization. International Management Review,
13(1).
Ryan, K., & Dunn-Jensen, L. (2016). Stretched thin: Stress, in-role, and extra-role behavior of
educators. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress, concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior (pp. 445-
450). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Sagnak, M. (2017). Ethical leadership and teachers' voice behavior: The mediating roles of
ethical culture and psychological safety. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(4),
1101-1117.
Sahlberg, P. (2012). Global educational reform movement is here! Retrieved from
https://pasisahlberg.com/global-educational-reform-movement-is-here/
250
Saleem, A., & Shah, A. (2011). Self-efficacy as a stress-coping mechanism among teachers: A
critical literature review. African Journal of Business Mangement, 5(35), 13435-13441.
Sancini, A., Tomei, F., Schifano, M.P., Di Giorgio, V., Caciari, T., Fiaschetti, M., & Tomei, G.
(2010). Stress characteristics in different work conditions: Is it possible to identify
specificity of risk factors by the questionnaire method? European Journal of
Inflammation, 8(2), 117-123.
Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Stress and cognition. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive
neurosciences (pp. 1031-1042). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sari, H. (2004). An analysis of burnout and job satisfaction among Turkish special school
headteachers and teachers, and the factors affecting their burnout and job satisfaction.
Educational Studies, 30(3), 291-306.
Sass, D., Seal, A., & Martin, N. (2011). Predicting teacher retention using stress and support
variables. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 200-215.
Saxena, D. S. (2016, November 12). Director Department of Mental Health and Substance
Abuse. (Y. Balboa, Interviewer) San Diego, California, USA.
Scandura, J. M. (1971). Deterministic theorizing in structural learning: Three levels of
empiricism. Journal of Structural Learning, 3(1), 21-53.
Schmidt-Hieber, C., Jonas, P., & Bischofberger, J. (2004). Enhanced synaptic plasticity in newly
generated granule cells of the adult hippocampus. Nature, 429, 184-187.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information
processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84(1), 1-66.
Retrieved from APA PsycNet website: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1977-20305-001
251
Schonfeld, I. S. (2001). Stress in first-year women teachers: The context of social support and
coping. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 127, 7547-8756.
Schonfeld, I. S., Bianchi, R., & Luehring-Jones, P. (2017). Consequences of job stress for the
mental health of teachers. In T. M. McIntyre, S. E. McIntyre, & D. J. Francis (Eds.),
Educator stress: An occupational health perspective (aligning perspectives on health,
safety and well-being). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International. doi: 10.1007/978-3-
319-53053.6.
Schwab, R. L., & Iwanicki, E. F. (1993). Perceived role conflict, role ambiguity, and teacher
burnout. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(1), 60-74. Retrieved from Sage
Journals website:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0013161X82018001005?icid=int.sj-
abstract.similar-articles.1
Schweickert, R., & Boggs, G.J. (1984). Models of central capacity and concurrency. Journal of
Mathematical Psychology, 28, 223-281.
Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of
destructive leadership and its outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 24, 138-158.
Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. London, UK: Sage.
Seale, J. (2007). Strategies for supporting the online publishing activities of adults with learning
difficulties. Disability and Society, 22(2), 173-186.
Selye, H. (1955). Stress and disease. Science, 122, 625-631.
Selye, H. (1964). From dream to discovery: On being a scientist. Chicago-IL: McGraw-Hill.
252
Selden, S.C., & Moynihan, D. (2000). A model of voluntary turnover in state government.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 20(2), 63-74.
Selye, H. (1936). A syndrome produced by diverse nocuous agents. Nature, 138, 32-39). doi:
https://doi.org/10.1038/138032a0
Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Shapiro, J. P., & Gross, S. J. (2013). Ethical educational leadership in turbulent times: (Re)
solving moral dilemmas. New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9780203825389. doi:
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203825389
Shernoff, E., Mehta, T., Atkins, M., Torf, R., & Spencer, J. (2011). A qualtitative study of the
sources and impact of stress among urban teachers. School Mental Health, 3(2), 59-69.
Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 27-41.
Siegrist, J. (2002). Effort-reward imbalance at work and health. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster
(Eds.), Historical and current perspectives on stress and health (pp. 261-291).
Amsterdam: JAI Elsevier.
Simbula, S., Panari, C., Guglielmi, D., & Fraccaroli, F. (2012). Teachers' well-being and
effectiveness: The role of the interplay between job demands and job resources. Social
and Behavorial Sciences, 69, 729-738.
Simon, M., Czéh, B., & Fuchs, E. (2005). Age-dependent susceptibility of adult hippocampal
cell proliferation to chronic psychosocial stress. Brain Research, 1049(2), 244-248.
253
Skaalvik, E.M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with
strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of
Skinner, B., Leavey, G., & Rothi, D. (2018, December 4). Managerialism and teacher
professional identity: Impact on wellbeing among teachers in the UK. Educational
Review, [CEDR 1556205] 1-16. Retrieved from
https://pure.ulster.ac.uk/en/publications/managerialism-and-teacher-professional-identity-
impact-on-wellbei. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2018.1556205
Skulmowski, A., & Rey, G. (2017). Measuring cognitive load in embodied learning settings.
Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1191.
Slay, H.S., & Smith, D.A. (2011). Professional identity construction: Using narrative to
understand the negotiation of professional and stigmatized cultural identities. Human
Relations, 64(1), 85-107.
Smith, A., Brice, C., Collins, A., Matthew, V., & Namara, M. (2000). The scale of occupational
stress: A further analysis of the impact of demographic factors and type of job. London,
England: The Health and Safety Executive.
Smith, J. L., & Perez, M. A. (2018). The importance of stress management in today's society.
International Journal of Sciences and Education, Sena Aires, Brazil, 7(1), 1-4.
Smith, S.M., & Ward, T. B. (2012). Cognition and the creation of ideas. In K. Holyoak & R. G.
Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 456-474). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
254
Speier, C., Valacich, J., & Vessey, I. (1999). The influence of task interruption on individual
decision making: An information overload perspective. Decision Sciences, 30(2), 337-
360.
Stansfeld, S. R. (2011). Occupation and mental health in national UK survey. Social Psychiatry
and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 46, 101-110.
Starratt, R.J. (1996). Transforming educational administration: Meaning, community, and
excellence. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Stewart, V. (2012). A world-class education: Learning from International models of excellence
and innovation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum
Development.
Stewart, V. (2017). A world-class education. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Stillman, J. (2011). Teacher learning in an era of high-stakes accountability: Productive tensions
and critical professional practice. Teachers College Record, 113(1), 133-180.
Subramanyam, M., Muralidhara, P., & Pooja, M. (2013). Mental workload and cognitive fatigue:
A study. IUP Journal of Management Research, 12(2), 29-39.
Sun, P. (2018). The motivation to serve as a corner stone of servant leadership. In D. van
Doerendonck and K. Patterson (Eds.), Practicing servant leadership (pp. 66-80). London,
England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sun, R., & Wang, W. (2016, November 21). Transformational leadership, employee turnover
intention, and actual voluntary turnover in public organizations. Public Management
Review, 19(8), 1124-1141. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1257063
255
Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching?
Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the US. Retrieved from Learning Policy
Institute: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming-crisis-teaching
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive
Science, 12, 257-285.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning
and Instruction, 4, 295-312.
Talmor, R, Reiter, S., & Feigin, N. (2005). Factors relating to regular education teacher burnout
in inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20(2), 215-229,
https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250500055735
Tang, Y.Y., Ma, Y., Wang, J., Fan, Y., Feng, S., Lu, Q., Yu, Q., . . .Posner, M.I. (2007). Short-
term meditation training improves attention and self-regulation. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(43), 17152-
17156. Retrieved from PNAS website: https://www.pnas.org/content/104/43/17152
Tang, Y.Y., Tang, R., Jiang, C., & Posner, M. I. (2014). Short-term meditation intervention
improves self-regulation and academic performance. Journal of Child and Adolescent
Behaviour, 2, 154. doi: 10.4172/2375-4494.1000154
Tayfur, O., & Arslan, M. (2013). The role of lack of reciprocity, supervisory support, workload
and work-family conflict on exhaustion: Evidence from physicians. Psychology Health
and Medicine, 18, 564-575.
Taylor, C. (1992). The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tepper, B. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43,
178-190.
256
Terrell, S., & Edmonds, W. (2017). Mixed-methods research methodologies. Graduate School of
Computer and Information Sciences. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova Southeastern University.
The New Teacher Project (2013). Teacher retention. Retrieved from The New Teacher Project
website: https://www.TNTP.com
The PIECES Framework (2015, February 27). University of Texas paper. Retrieved from
https://www.coursehero.com/file/10676400/PIECES/
Thomas, N. (2016, June 30). These jobs have highest suicide rates in the United States.
Retrieved from CBS News website: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/these-jobs-have-
the-highest-rate-of-suicide/
Thompson, I., Amatea, E., & Thompson, E. (2014). Personal and contextual predictors of mental
health counselors' compassion fatigue and burnout. Journal of Mental Health Counseling,
36(1), 58-77. doi: 10.17744/mehc.36.1.p61m73373m4617r3.
Travers, C., & Cooper, C. (1996). Teachers under pressure. New York, NY: Routledge.
Troman, G. (2008). Primary teacher identity, commitment and career in performative school
cultures. British Educational Research Journal, 34(5), 619-633.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A., & Joy, W. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure.
Review of Educational Research, 68, 202-248.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
Tse, H.H.M., Huang, X., & Lam, W. (2013). Why does transformational leadership matter for
employee turnover? A multi-foci social exchange perspective. Leadership Quarterly,
24:763-776.
257
Tuettemann, E., & Punch, K.F. (1992). Psychological distress in secondary teachers: Research
findings and their implications. Journal of Educational Administration, 30(1), 42-54.
United States Department of Education (2009, March 10). Our future, our teachers: The Obama
administration’s plan for teacher education reform and improvement. Remarks of the
President of the United States [Barack Obama] to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
Retrieved from Department of Education website:
https://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/our-future-our-teachers.pdf
United States Department of Education. (2016). Teacher turnover: Stayers, movers, and leavers.
Retrieved from https://nces.id.gov
United States Department of Health and Human Services (2004). Mental health response to mass
violence and terrorism: A training manual. Rockville, MD: Author.
United States Department of Health and Human Services (2016). A treatment improvement
protocol - improving cultural competence. Morrisville, NC: Lulu.com
Urzua, A., & Vasquez, C. (2008). Reflection and professional identity in teachers' future-
oriented discourse. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1935-1946.
Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes
accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 519-558.
Valli, L., & Chambliss, M. (2007). Creating classroom cultures: One teacher, two lessons, and a
high-stakes test. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 38(1), 42-60.
van der Lippe, T. (2007). Dutch workers and time pressure: Household and workplace
characteristics. Work, Employment and Society, 21, 693-711.
Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee
voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359-1392.
258
Van Gog, T., Kester, L., & Paas, F. (2011). Effects of concurrent monitoring on cognitive load
and performance as a function of task complexity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25,
584-587.
Van Horn, J. E., Schaufeli, W., & Taris, T. (2001). Lack of reciprocity among Dutch teachers:
Validation of reciprocity indices and their relation to stress and well-being. Work and
Stress, 15, 191-213.
Van Voorhees, B. (2007, February 29). Stress and anxiety health article. Retrieved from
Healthline Online: www.healthline.com
Van, D., & Wagner, U. (2001). Stress and strain in teaching: A structural equation approach.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 243-259.
Vettenburg, N. (2002). Unsafe feelings among teachers. Journal of School Violence, 1(4), 33-49.
Vigota-Gadot, E. (2006). Compulsory citizenship behavior: Theorizing some dark sides of the
good soldier syndrome in organizations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 36,
77-93.
Virtanen, M., Kivimäki, M., Pentti, J., Oksanen, T., Ahola, K., Linna, A., . . . & Vahtera, J.
(2010). School neighborhood disadvantage as a predictor of long-term sick leave among
teachers: Prospective cohort study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 171(7), 785-792.
Voorhies, D., & Scandura, J. M. (1977). Determination of memory load in information
processing. In J. M. Scandura (Ed.), Problem solving: A structural process approach with
instructional implication (pp. 299-316). New York: Academic Press.
Waldman, D. A., Carter, M. Z., & Hom, P. W. (2015). A multilevel investigation of leadership
and turnover behavior. Journal of Management, 41(6), 1724-1744.
259
Wang, H., Hall, N.C., & Rahimi, S. (2015). Self-efficacy and causal attributions in teachers:
Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 47, 120-130.
Watanabe, Y., Gould, E., & McEwen, B. S. (1992). Stress induces atrophy of apical dendrites of
hippocampal CA3 pyramidal neurons. Brain Research, 588(2), 341-345.
Watts, J. H. (2009, January). Allowed into a man's world. Meanings of work-life balance:
Perspectives of women civil engineers as "minority" workers in construction. Gender,
Work and Organization, 16(1), 37-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00352.x
Weare, K. (2015). Innovative contemplative/mindfulness-based approaches to mental health in
schools. In S. Kutcher, Y. Wei, & M. Weist (Eds.), School Mental Health (pp. 252-266).
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Weist, M.D., Lever, N.A., Bradshaw, C.P., & Owens, J. (2014). Handbook of school mental
health: Research, training, practice and policy (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Whitehead, J. (2008). Using a living theory methodology in improving practice and generating
educational knowledge in living theories. Educational Journal of Living Theories, 1(1),
103-126.
Whitehead, J. (2009). Generating living theory and understanding in action research studies .
Action Research, 7(1), 85-99.
Whitehead, J. (2011, July 18). Inaugural Mandela day lecture at Durban University of
Technology . Retrieved from
http://www.actionresearch.net/writings/jack/jwmandeladay2011.pdf
260
Whitehead, J. (2017). Practice and theory in action research: Living-theories as frameworks for
action. In L. Rowell, C. Bruce, J. Shosh, & M. Riel (Eds.), The Palgrave international
handbook of action research (pp. 387-401). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in
Ergonomics Science, 3, 159-177.
Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple Resources and Mental Workload. Human Factors, 50, 449-
455.
Wickens, C.D., & Flach, J.M. (1988). Information processing. In E.L. Wiener & D.C. Nagel
(Eds.) Human factors in aviation: Cognition and perception (pp. 111-155). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Walumbwa, F.O., & Schaubroeck, J. (2009). Leadership personality traits and employee voice
behavior: Mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1275-1286.
Wieclaw, J.A., Agerbo, E., Mortensen, P.B., & Bonde, J.P. (2005). Occupational risk of
affective and stress-related disorders in the Danish workforce. Scandinavian Journal of
Work, Environment & Health, 31, 343-351.
Wilson, C. M. (2011). Violence against teachers: Prevalence and consequences. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 2353-2371.
Wolters, C., & Daugherty, S. (2007). Goal structures and teachers' sense of efficacy: Their
relation and association to teaching experience and academic level. Journal of
Wood, T. C. (2002). Understanding teacher burnout. Retrieved from
https://www.ericdigests.org/2004-1/burnout.htm
261
Woolfolk-Hoy, A., & Burke Spero, R. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years
of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 343-
356.
Yang, X., Ge, C., Hu, B., Chi, T., & Wang, L. (2009). Relationship between quality of life and
occupational stress among teachers. Public Health, 123(11), 750-755.
Yoo, J. H. (2016). The effect of professional development on teacher efficacy and teachers' self-
analysis of their efficacy change. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 18(1),
84-94.
YouGov (2015, October 4). NUT/YouGov Teacher Survey on Government Education Policy.
NUT Section.
262

Out

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Out

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TEACHER STRESS: EFFECTS ON OCCUPATIONAL

PERFORMANCE IN AN URBAN DISTRICT

Presented to the Educational Leadership Program of the College

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

All Rights Reserved.

Title: TEACHER STRESS: EFFECTS ON OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE IN AN

experiences as an educator and became the most heart-welcoming challenge of my life. My

of education, and cultivate my spirituality based on my decision as a servant leader. The

Gibson. Finally, I wish to acknowledge the unwavering dedication of my Teachers College

professors and colleagues which strengthened my core beliefs in myself.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ vii

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... xvi

CHAPTER I: Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1

Teacher Well-Being .................................................................................................................... 5

Teacher Performance .................................................................................................................. 7

Effects of Stress on Job Retention .............................................................................................. 8

Statement of Purpose ................................................................................................................ 10

Area of Inquiry .......................................................................................................................... 10

Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 11

Design of the Study ................................................................................................................... 12

Rationale and Significance of the Study ................................................................................... 14

Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................................. 16

CHAPTER II: Review of Literature .............................................................................................. 19

General Overview ..................................................................................................................... 19

Historical Framework of Teacher Stress............................................................................... 20

Organization of the Review .................................................................................................. 20

Sources of Stress: How Stress Affects Health ..................................................................... 21

Causes of Stress .................................................................................................................... 27

Employer Contribution Reduction in Pension and Health Benefits ......................................... 40

Effect of Stress .......................................................................................................................... 41

Teacher performance ............................................................................................................ 41

Teacher absenteeism ............................................................................................................. 44

Teacher self-efficacy ............................................................................................................. 45

Student achievement ............................................................................................................. 46

Job satisfaction ...................................................................................................................... 46

Teacher retention .................................................................................................................. 48

Turnover Behaviors .............................................................................................................. 49

Cost to School Districts ........................................................................................................ 51

School Culture ...................................................................................................................... 53

Transformational Wellness Stress Policy ................................................................................. 55

Servant Leadership in an Ethical, Moral Culture.................................................................. 55

Coping with the Stress .............................................................................................................. 64

Cognitive Self-Efficacy Thinking with Mindfulness Professional Development ................ 64

Chapter III: Methodology ............................................................................................................. 70

Rationale for Research Design.................................................................................................. 71

Research Questions and Assumptions ...................................................................................... 74

Methods of Data Collection ...................................................................................................... 76

Online Open Survey .............................................................................................................. 79

Online Questionnaires ........................................................................................................... 80

Environmental Preference Inventory (EPI) .......................................................................... 81

The Occupational Stress Questionnaire ................................................................................ 82

Teachers’ Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) ........................................................................... 82

Interview with Human Resources Department Representative ............................................ 83

Analysis and Synthesis of Data............................................................................................. 85

Issues of Trustworthiness ...................................................................................................... 87

Reliability and Validity ......................................................................................................... 87

Ethical Considerations .......................................................................................................... 87

Action research and ethics .................................................................................................... 88

Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................................... 90

Chapter IV: Results and Findings................................................................................................. 91

Research Participants ................................................................................................................ 93

Data Sources ............................................................................................................................. 94

Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 95