Teacher Resilience and Coping with Teacher Stress: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 1 by Silvia Barnová and Version 2 by Wendy Huang.

The concept of human resilience points to the indicators of life adaptation, including the field of work. In the context of the teaching profession, it can be assumed that resilience as an individual’s characteristic can have a significant impact on a teacher’s career path and can contribute to the decision of whether to leave the teaching profession or to remain in the school system despite the presence of a whole range of stressors. Resilience is important also from the aspect of coping with demanding tasks and fulfilling the requirements asked of teachers in such complex organizations as schools undeniably are. Resilient teachers are able to take advantage of their individual characteristics, as well as of the occurring situations, in order to deal with challenges and to achieve professional/job satisfaction contributing to their well-being.

  • teacher resilience
  • teacher stress
  • coping
  • vocational schools
  • coping strategies

1. Introduction

In schools, there is a range of factors that have an impact on teachers’ motivation, their activities in the classroom, and their students’ performance—including stress, which is defined by WHO [1] as a “state of worry or mental tension caused by a difficult situation”. Teacher stress—as a specific type of occupational stress occurring in the context of the teaching profession—can be defined as negative physical and psychological responses to a variety of events pertaining to a teacher’s job caused by an imbalance between risk and protective factors [2], which means that when stressful situations occur, increased demands are placed on a person’s adaptive capacity [3] and there is an inconsistency between society’s expectations and requirements on one hand and the educational reality on the other hand [4]. Kyriacou [5] identified three types of stress in teachers’ work—1. stress stemming from work requirements; 2. stress as an emotional and behavioral response to pedagogical situations; and 3. Stress as transaction between teachers’ resources and demands.
Several research studies have been carried out on specific sources of teacher stress, e.g., Průcha, Walterová, and Mareš [6] identified the following nine factors: 1. students’ negative attitude towards learning; 2. behavior issues in the classroom that were also confirmed in the TALIS 2018 survey, according to which 18% of teachers reported experiencing stress frequently [7]; 3. curricular changes; 4. frequent organizational changes; 5. unfavorable conditions in the workplace; 6. a lack of opportunities for career advancement; 7. a lack of time; 8. conflicts between colleagues, and 9. a lack of recognition. Harmsen et al. [8] also include work requirements, conflict of roles, role ambiguity, lack of autonomy, and poor school ethos among the most frequently occurring sources of teacher stress, while Stapleton, Garby, and Sabot [9], Mark and Smith [10] and Leher, Hillert, and Keller [11] draw attention to the perceived lack of balance between teachers’ effort and remuneration. In the context of classroom management, other factors related to managerial stress, such as exhaustion, emotional distress, and conflicts between the demands placed on teachers at work and in their private lives also occur (for more details, see Richardsen and Matthiesen [12]).
As confirmed by TALIS 2018 results, teacher stress and stressors in schools are considered a serious issue by teachers [13]. They are associated with teachers’ job dissatisfaction, which plays an important role from the aspect of teachers’ decision to remain in the teaching profession or to find a job outside the school system. Ingersoll’s [14] findings show that constant challenges and stressors in the school environment are the reason for changing occupation in the case of teachers with fewer than ten years of experience.
Hennig and Keller [15] categorized sources of teacher stress into 1. psychological—related to teachers’ cognition, emotions, and situations subjectively experienced as stressful—e.g., personality traits, coping strategies, resilience, etc.; 2. physical—e.g., unhealthy lifestyle, injury, or serious disease; 3. institutional—e.g., working conditions, workload, relationships, autonomy, professional development, and career advancement; and 4. social—e.g., family background, media, social status, etc.

2. Teacher Stress in the Context of Vocational Schools

Vocational school teachers are confronted with some additional sources of stress when compared with their colleagues in other types of secondary schools, i.e., secondary grammar schools. This is due to the fact that a decrease in students’ interest in VET has been observed during the last decades and studying at a vocational school is usually not the applicants’ first choice. Therefore, in Slovakia, in certain cases, carrying out selection of students is impossible and schools must also recruit poor-performing students and subsequently, motivate them to learn. Moreover, available research results shows that, for the above reasons, working with vocational school students is more demanding compared with students in other types of schools [16].
Gonon [17] claims that vocational subject teachers, particularly teachers working in schools with dual VET, are the most impacted by specific requirements placed on them—i.e., to keep pace with the newest developments in a particular field; develop their knowledge, skills, and competencies related to the vocational subject they teach; and find links between theory and practice—as their students are confronted with the reality at workplaces as soon as during their studies. Moreover, especially vocational subject teachers feel pressure from the educational system, but also from the labor market, as their requirements are often conflicting. According to Adams [18], the highest levels of stress are experienced by vocational school teachers who do not feel sufficiently prepared for performing their job.
In their research studies, Kärner et al. [19], Kärner and Höning [20], and Sappa, Aprea, and Barbarasch [21] focused on specific sources of teacher stress in vocational schools and they identified heavy workload, performance pressure, factors interrupting the natural workflow, tight deadlines, conflicts at the workplace, and vocational school teachers’ administrative burden. Boldrini, Sappa, and Aprea [22]—alongside factors reported by other groups of teachers—identified factors such as teachers’ frustration from students’ weak motivation to study in vocational schools, immaturity of students, and challenges related to teaching vocational subjects. Kärner et al. [19] also included behavior issues in the classroom, conflicts between students, between teachers and students, and the heterogeneous composition of classes among the above factors.

3. Coping

When defining coping, most frequently, the relatively old definition by Lazarus and Folkman [23] is used, according to which coping means “constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts to manage specific external and internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the person”. Coping represents an adaptive force that helps individuals act constructively even in demanding situations [24]. Lazarus [25] considers coping a conscious process of overcoming distress, which plays the role of a mediator between a stressful situation and an individual’s response, and is a determinant of the degree of the individual’s adaptation to particular circumstances. According to Voitenko et al. [26], insufficient adaptation to distress is related to a lack of a flexible system of coping strategies appropriate for a certain situation and its circumstances, as well as an individual’s abilities. Coping strategies can be defined as ways of overcoming adversity, certain patterns of behavior, which are used when dealing with demanding situations. Coping strategies can be developed, extended, and supplemented based on newly gained experiences since for handling a new situation, the existing coping strategies are not necessarily effective.
Coping strategies can be considered a potential resource that can be used for dealing with adversity when performing any profession with the aim to achieve an optimal level of mental functioning (problem solving, positive reassessment, seeking help, etc.) [27]. Lazarus [28] divided coping strategies into two categories—1. problem-focused coping strategies and 2. emotion-focused coping strategies. A third category also exists—the group of the so-called maladaptive coping strategies, e.g., escape or self-blame, but other ineffective or even harmful strategies, such as substance abuse, avoidance, procrastination, self-harm, etc. can also be used. Maladaptive coping strategies can lead to psychosomatic problems, emotional exhaustion, job dissatisfaction, depression, or anxiety [9][27].
Brandtstädter [29] uses the notion of coping processes and distinguishes between assimilative and accommodative processes. While by using assimilative processes, individuals try to change the current situation and life conditions in compliance with their goals, accommodative processes help individuals adapt their personal goals to the existing circumstances. Earlier, Brandtstädter and Greve [30] mentioned a third type of process—immunization—when individuals deny the existence of a problem. Despite using different terminology, it can be assumed that this classification of coping processes is similar to the above-mentioned Lazarus’s [28] categorization of coping strategies.
Ungar et al. [31] carried out a research study on overcoming stress. They identified a three-phase reciprocal process that individuals typically apply when facing harsh circumstances. In the first phase, individuals rely on their own resources and try to solve problems without any external help. This coping strategy can be functional only if the intensity of the burden is weak or moderate. If it comes to an increase in the intensity of stress related to a particular issue or it is a complex situation, to successfully adapt, it is important to select from among available alternative strategies. In the second phase, if the first strategy is shown to be ineffective and the individual is not able to solve the problem without using external help, they should be ready to accept help from significant others. In some cases, individuals get to the stage when institutional help is needed. If this is the case, it is crucial to recognize that without professional help, there is an increased probability of failure.
In everyday situations, it can be observed that there is a group of individuals who are able to deal with harsh circumstances with an ease, but others have problems with handling even much simpler situations, which are subjectively perceived by them as demanding or exceeding their limits. The degree to which individuals can adapt to adverse situations is influenced by several factors, including:
  • coping strategies at an individual’s disposal at a certain point in time;
  • the extent to which the existing coping strategies are appropriate for a particular situation;
  • an individual’s ability to cope with stress, i.e., resilience [32][33].

4. Coping Strategies Applied by Teachers

For dealing with stress and negative emotions, teachers use a variety of more or less functioning coping strategies. As research results show, they often experience anxiety or even anger stemming from behavior issues in the classroom and other demanding pedagogical situations. As accentuated by Wang, Lee, and Hall [34], selecting appropriate coping strategies is important as they are sources of positive emotions, prevent exhaustion, and contribute to teachers’ mental well-being. On the other hand, inappropriate coping strategies evoke negative emotions, increase stress levels, and thus, can have a negative impact on individuals’ mental health. It must be pointed out that it is not possible to categorize certain coping strategies as effective or ineffective as their appropriateness is situationally bound and their application depends on a particular teacher’s personality, experiences, available scale of coping strategies, etc.
Boon [35] claims that experiencing stress, insufficient attention paid to well-being, or other mental processes that teachers perceive as sources of dissatisfaction with their working conditions leading to leaving the teaching profession are associated with burnout or an inability to apply effective coping strategies. Montgomery [36] focused on the role of coping in the context of teacher stress and found out that coping strategies regulate the relationship between stressors and burnout by decreasing the impact of stressors. His results also showed that teacher stress in combination with an inability to cope is associated with adversity, such as burnout, low self-efficacy, poor classroom management, students’ underachievement, and depression symptoms, but problems can also be observed in building relationships and teachers’ communication with their students’ parents [37].
Chang [38], in agreement with the above categorization by Lazarus [28], applied the specified types of coping strategies to teachers. Teachers use problem-focused strategies to solve a particular situation when they subjectively evaluate it as difficult to cope with and they ask for advice or help from colleagues that have already experienced such an adversity. It is a different situation when teachers seek psychological and mental support from their colleagues, which does not help them solve the problem, but it can make them feel better—i.e., they apply emotion-focused coping strategies. Escape as an ineffective coping strategy is used when a teacher gives up and resigns, e.g., leaving the teaching profession means using escape as a coping strategy and Marais-Opperman, Rothmann, and Van Eeden [39] consider it the final phase of the decision-making process related to changing jobs.

5. Teacher Resilience

There are several definitions of teacher resilience in available literature. Clarà [40] defines teacher resilience as positive adaptation in a demanding situation. Gu and Day [41] provide a more detailed description and define teacher resilience as a teacher’s ability or capacity to deal with an unavoidable level of uncertainty in the educational reality and to maintain balance, sense of duty, and focus. Gu [42] emphasizes the dynamic character of teacher resilience. Mansfield et al. [43] point out that teacher resilience is not exclusively an ability or a process, but an output. In compliance with the above definitions, teacher resilience can be considered a progressive competence, the capacity of an individual to maintain mental health and normal functioning in the context of challenges or significant adversity (stress).
Kärner et al. [44]—in the context of resilience—use the notion of resilience competencies. They define them as individuals’ ability to cope with job-related requirements and to maintain health, which they explain by the fact that resilience can be developed. These competencies have three dimensions—flexibility (ability to adapt); dynamics (openness to changes); and resistance (ability to recover quickly).
Research has confirmed the existence of associations between teacher resilience on one hand and the effectiveness of teachers’ educational work, their job satisfaction, and self-efficacy on the other hand [45]. In their research studies, Pretsch, Flunger, and Schmitt [46], as well as Kärner et al. [44], found statistically significant correlations between teacher resilience and their job satisfaction. Alongside that, the level of teachers’ resilience is determined by a range of factors, e.g., coping strategies, social competencies, teaching skills and competencies, as well as personal characteristics—altruism, enthusiasm, emotional stability, and optimism. From the aspect of the work environment, providing teachers with support from the school leader is important, as well as enabling contact with a mentor, peers, colleagues, family, and friends, which, in general, can be included among protective factors [47]. Ainsworth and Oldfield [48] also point out the importance of external factors from the aspect of teacher resilience and accentuate that in the process of developing resilience in teachers, it is necessary to pay sufficient attention to improving the quality of their work environment. Support by the school management, reasonable workload, a positive school culture characterized by collaboration between teachers, and positive social relationships at the workplace have a big role to play as well. These ecological factors having an impact on teachers’ adaptation to the changing environment and on teacher resilience are highlighted by other authors, too. They mention determinants such as school culture [49], teachers’ participation in decision making [50], positive relationships between teachers and the school management [51], mentoring relationships with colleagues, and mutual support [52].
In their research study, Drew and Sosnowski [45] identified the following characteristics associated with teacher resilience:
  • Resilient teachers are rooted in their school community, which helps them react to challenges effectively. They have an overview of risk factors and they can benefit from protective factors.
  • Resilient teachers can better cope with uncertainty and turn negative circumstances to experiences that they can learn from. Such transformation helps teachers gain strength to maintain balance between risk and protective factors.
  • Resilient teachers use relationships with their colleagues, students, and the school management as resources helping them to overcome adversity.
In the field of teacher resilience, no available research studies have targeted teachers not being able to cope with adversity related to performing their job, but they have studied mainly successful teachers and investigated the factors helping teachers overcome difficulties and thus, promoting their professional development instead of only surviving [47].

References

  1. WHO. Stress. Available online: https://www.who.int//news-room/questions-and-answers/item/stress/?gclid=CjwKCAjwxaanBhBQEiwA84TVXC7c8U57962wJ7KjN6mbvWqKOCG5vbwDdL-XXTbcnqQvuoeo7ScdGRoCJqUQAvD_BwE (accessed on 24 August 2023).
  2. Prilleltensky, I.; Neff, M.; Bessell, A. Teacher stress: What it is, why it’s important, how it can be alleviated. Theory Pract. 2016, 55, 104–111.
  3. Fontana, D. Psychologie ve školní Praxis; Portál: Prague, Czech Republic, 1997.
  4. Řehulka, E.; Řehulková, O. Teacher’s profession and teacher stress. In Proceedings of the 10th European Congress of Psychology, Prague, Czech Republic, 3–6 July 2007.
  5. Kyriacou, C. Teacher stress and burnout: An international review. Educ. Res. 1987, 29, 146–152.
  6. Průcha, J.; Walterová, E.; Mareš, J. Pedagogický Slovník; Portál: Prague, Czech Republic, 2013.
  7. OECD. TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners; TALIS, OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2019.
  8. Harmsen, R.; Helms-Lorenz, M.; Maulana, R.; van Veen, K. The relationship between beginning teachers’ stress causes, stress responses, teaching behaviour and attrition. Teach. Teach. 2018, 24, 626–643.
  9. Stapleton, P.; Garby, S.; Sabot, D. Psychological distress and coping styles in teachers: A preliminary study. Aust. J. Educ. 2020, 64, 127–146.
  10. Mark, G.; Smith, A.P. Occupational stress, job characteristics, coping, and the mental health of nurses. Br. J. Health Psychol. 2012, 17, 505.
  11. Leher, D.; Hillert, A.; Keller, S. What can balance the effort? Associations between effort-reward imbalance, over-commitment, and affective disorders in German teachers. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 2009, 15, 374–384.
  12. Richardsen, A.M.; Matthiesen, S.B. Less Stress when Work Relationships Are Good. Available online: https://www.bi.edu/research/business-review/articles/2014/08/less-stress-when-work-relationships-are-good/ (accessed on 25 August 2023).
  13. OECD. TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals; TALIS, OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2020.
  14. Ingersoll, R.M. The teacher shortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong prescription. NASSP Bull. 2002, 86, 16–31.
  15. Henning, C.; Keller, G. Antistresový Program pro Učitele: Projevy, Příčiny a Způsoby Překonaní Stresu z Povolání; Portál: Prague, Czech Republic, 1999.
  16. Bonica, L.; Sappa, V. Early school-leavers microtransitions: Toward a competent self. Educ. Train. 2010, 52, 368–380.
  17. Gonon, P. Apprenticeship as a model for the international architecture of TVET. In Assuring the Acquisition of Expertise: Apprenticeship in the Modern Economy; Zhao, Z., Rauner, F., Hauschildt, U., Eds.; Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press: Beijing, China, 2011; pp. 33–42.
  18. Adams, E. Vocational teacher stress and internal characteristics. J. Vocat. Tech. Educ. 1999, 16, 7–22.
  19. Kärner, T.; Steiner, N.; Achatz, M.; Sembill, D. Tagebuchstudie zu Work-Life-Balance, Belastung und Ressourcen bei Lehrkräften an Beruflichen Schulen im Vergleich zu anderen Berufen. Z. Berufs-. Wirtsch. 2016, 112, 270–294.
  20. Kärner, T.; Höning, J. Teachers’ experienced classroom demands and autonomic stress reactions: Results of a pilot study and implications for process-oriented research in vocational education and training. Empir. Res. Vocat. Educ. Train. 2021, 13, 8.
  21. Boldrini, E.; Sappa, V.; Aprea, C. Which difficulties and resources do vocational teachers perceive? An exploratory study setting the stage for investigating teachers’ resilience in Switzerland. Teach. Teach. 2019, 25, 125–141.
  22. Sappa, V.; Aprea, C.; Barbarasch, A. Bouncing Back From Adversity: A Swiss Study on Teacher Resilience in Vocational Education and Training; The Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training: Bonn, Germany, 2021.
  23. Lazarus, R.S.; Folkman, S. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping; Springer Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1984.
  24. Holahan, C.J.; Moos, R.H. Life stressors and mental health: Advances in conceptualizing stress resistance. In Stress and Mental Health: Contemporary Issues and Prospects for the Future; Avinson, W.R., Godlib, I.H., Eds.; Plenum: New York, NY, USA, 1994; pp. 213–238.
  25. Lazarus, R.S. Emotions and interpersonal relationships: Toward a person-centered conceptualization of emotions and coping. J. Personal. 2006, 74, 9–46.
  26. Voitenko, E.; Myronets, S.; Osodlo, V.; Kushnirenko, K.; Kalenychenko, R. Influence of emotional burnout on coping behavior in pedagogical activity. Int. J. Organ. Leadersh. 2021, 10, 183–196.
  27. Johnson, S.; Cooper, C.; Cartwright, S.; Donald, I.; Taylor, P.; Millet, C. The experience of work-related stress across occupations. J. Manag. Psychol. 2005, 20, 178–187.
  28. Lazarus, R.S. Cognition and motivation in emotion. Am. Psychol. 1991, 46, 352–367.
  29. Brandtstädter, J. Positive Entwicklung: Zur Psychologie Gelingender Lebensführung; Spektrum Akademischer Verlag: Heidelberg, Germany, 2011.
  30. Brandtstädter, J.; Greve, W. The aging self: Stabilizing and protective processes. Dev. Rev. 1994, 14, 52–80.
  31. Ungar, M.; Theron, L.; Liebenberg, L.; Tian, G.X.; Restrepo, A.; Sanders, J.; Munford, R.; Russell, S. Patterns of individual coping, engagement with social supports and use of formal services among a five-country sample of resilient youth. Glob. Ment. Health 2015, 2, e21.
  32. Barnová, S. Resiliencia a sociálna opora ako dva kľúčové faktory pri zvládaní záťaže. In Socialium Actualis II; Horváth, M., Barnová, S., Eds.; Tribun: Brno, Czech Republic, 2018; pp. 97–105.
  33. Barnová, S.; Tamášová, V.; Krásna, S. The role of resilience in coping with negative parental behaviour. Acta Educ. Gen. 2019, 9, 93–106.
  34. Wang, H.; Lee, S.Y.; Hall, N.C. Coping profiles among teachers: Implications for emotions, job satisfaction, burnout, and quitting intentions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2022, 68, 102030.
  35. Boon, H.J. Teachers’ Resilience: Conceived, Perceived or Lived-In. In Cultivating Teacher Resilience—International Approaches, Applications and Impact; Mansfield, C.F., Ed.; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 263–278.
  36. Montgomery, C. Development and testing of a theoretical-empirical model of educator stress, coping and burnout. In Educator Stress: An Occupational Health Perspective; McIntyre, T.M., McIntyre, S.E., Francis, D.J., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 181–196.
  37. Herman, K.C.; Prewitt, S.L.; Eddy, C.L.; Savale, A.; Reinke, W.M. Profiles of middle school teacher stress and coping: Concurrent and prospective correlates. J. Sch. Psychol. 2020, 78, 54–68.
  38. Chang, M.L. Toward a theoretical model to understand teacher emotions and teacher burnout in the context of student misbehavior: Appraisal, regulation and coping. Motiv. Emot. 2013, 37, 799–817.
  39. Marais-Opperman, V.; Rothmann, S.; Van Eeden, C. Stress, flourishing and intention to leave of teachers: Does coping type matter? SA J. Ind. Psychol. SA Tydskr. Vir Bedryfsielkunde 2021, 47, a1834.
  40. Clarà, M. Teacher resilience and meaning transformation: How teachers reappraise situations of adversity. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2017, 63, 82–91.
  41. Gu, Q.; Day, C. Challenges to teacher resilience: Conditions count. Br. Educ. Res. J. 2013, 39, 22–44.
  42. Gu, Q. The role of relational resilience in teachers’ career-long commitment and effectiveness. Teach. Teach. 2014, 20, 502–529.
  43. Mansfield, C.; Beltman, S.; Broadley, T.; Weatherby-Fell, N. Building resilience in teacher education: An evidenced informed framework. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2020, 54, 77–87.
  44. Kärner, T.; Bottling, M.; Friederichs, E.; Sembill, D. Between adaptation and resistance: A study on resilience competencies, stress, and well-being in German VET teachers. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 619912.
  45. Drew, S.V.; Sosnowski, C. Emerging theory of teacher resilience: A situational analysis. Engl. Teach. Pract. Crit. 2019, 18, 492–507.
  46. Pretsch, J.; Flunger, B.; Schmitt, M. Resilience predicts well-being in teachers, but not in non-teaching employees. Soc. Psychol. Educ. Int. J. 2012, 15, 321–336.
  47. Beltman, S.; Mansfield, C.; Price, A. Thriving not just surviving: A review of research on teacher resilience. Educ. Res. Rev. 2011, 6, 185–207.
  48. Ainsworth, S.; Oldfield, J. Quantifying teacher resilience: Context matters. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2019, 82, 117–128.
  49. Day, C. Resilient principals in challenging schools: The courage and costs of conviction. Teach. Teach. 2014, 20, 638–654.
  50. Johnson, B.; Down, B.; Le Cornu, R.; Peters, J.; Sullivan, A.; Pearce, J.; Sullivan, A.; Pearce, J.; Hunter, J. Promoting early career teacher resilience: A framework for understanding and acting. Teach. Teach. Theory Pract. 2014, 20, 530–546.
  51. Cameron, M.; Lovett, S. Sustaining the commitment and realising the potential of highly promising teachers. Teach. Teach. 2014, 21, 150–163.
  52. Brunetti, G.J. Resilience under fire: Perspectives on the work of experienced, inner city high school teachers in the United States. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2006, 22, 812–825.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback