Teacher Satisfaction and Stress

Job Satisfaction Satisfaction and Occupational Stress among Primary School Teachers and School Principals in Ireland

A Report Compiled by the ESRI on Behalf of The Teachin eaching g Council Cou ncil

Merike Darmody and Emer Smyth

Acno!ledgement This report report was compiled by the ESRI on behalf of The Teaching Counc Co uncil il from from data data obtain obtained ed throug through h the Growing Up in Ireland resear research. ch. Growing Up in Ireland data hae been funded by the !oer !oernme nment nt of Irela Ireland nd throug through h the "#ce "#ce of the Minis Minister ter for for Children and $outh %&airs' and hae been collected under the Sta Statis tistics tics %ct( )**+( of the Centra ntrall Stat tatisti istics cs "#ce "#ce ,Depa Depart rtme ment nt of eal ealth th and and Child Childrren/. en/. The The pro0 pro0ec ectt has has been been designed and implemented by the 0oint ESRI1TCD Growing Up in Ireland Study Team.

The authors are ery grateful to the !2I co1directors( co1directors( 3ames 4illiams and Sheila !reene( and to the rest of the study team.

Table of Contents Contents Executive Summary

"

C#APTER $% I&TRO'(CTIO&

$

ST(' IES O& JOB SATIS+ACTIO& SATIS+ACTIO& A&' OCC(PATIO&A, OCC(PATIO&A, C#APTER )% PRE*IO(S ST('IES STRESS A-O&. TEAC#ERS / ATA A&' A &' -ET#O'O,O.1 - ET#O'O,O.1 C#APTER 0% 'ATA

$0

C#APTER 2% RESEARC# RES(,TS $/ 5.) 3ob satisfaction among teachers and principals )6 5.7 3ob 3ob stress stress amon among g prima primary ry schoo schooll teache teachers rs and princ principa ipals ls

78

5.+ Multiariate analysis +) C#APTER /% CO&C,(SIO&S A&' I-P,ICATIO&S +OR PO,IC1 A&' PRACTICE RE+ERE&CES 22 APPE&'I4

25

03

E9ecutie Summary6 "

E7ecuti"e Summary Internationally( a considerable amount of literature has emerged on the factors in:uencing 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress among school teachers. oweer( there is a paucity of recent( comprehensie empirical research in this area in the conte9t of Irish primary schools. In iew of ongoing changes in schools and curricula as well as the working conditions of teachers( identifying factors in:uencing 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress is timely as the ability to cope with change has become increasingly important for teachers and principals. Teacher 0ob satisfaction and stress can hae both economic and personal implications as it can lead to stress1related employee absenteeism( burnout and a negatie impact on pupil outcomes ,;yriacou( )*<=/.

The >ndings of this study indicate that an oerall ma0ority of Irish primary school teachers ,*
-ICRO8,E*E, +ACTORS 1 !EADERB 4hile gender was not a signi>cant factor in teacher 0ob stress( female teachers had higher 0ob satisfaction leels than their male counterparts. rincipals occupational stress did not ary by gender. 2 %!EB Teachers aged in their forties had higher stress leels than other age1groups. Stress leels were also higher for principals oer 5@ years of age whereas principals 0ob satisfaction did not ary by age. 3 EA!T "F SERGICEB There was some :uctuation in 0ob satisfaction leel by length of serice with newly recruited teachers and principals and those with a longer serice record reporting higher 0ob satisfaction leels. "ccupational stress was eident at all stages of the teaching career( but stress leels were somewhat lower for those teaching for 7 to 6 years. Stress leels were signi>cantly lower among those principals who had preious e9perience in a similar role in another school. %s with teacher stress( principal stress was eident across all stages of the career( but was somewhat

-ESO8,E*E, +ACTORS 9SC#OO,:

TEAC#ER A&' P(PI, 'O-AI&S ;

1 Teacher stress was not directly associated with school location( siHe ,although 0ob satisfaction was somewhat higher in large schools/ and class

i" 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

siHe. Teachers teaching multi1grade classes were more stressed( but teaching multi1grade classes did not a&ect their 0ob satisfaction leel. The study highlights the need to support teachers through professional deelopment in engaging with the comple9ities inoled in teaching multi1grade classes. 1 Teacher stress was associated with the composition of the student body ,especially in terms of behaioural di#culties/ and with the e9tent of contact with parents. Teachers were also more satis>ed when their students were well behaed and parents were more inoled in school life. The composition and climate of the school was also an important drier of principal stress leels and satisfactionB the more pupils with emotionalbehaioural di#culties there were in the school( the higher the stress leels e9perienced by the principal. The releance of school composition for 0ob satisfaction and stress points to the need to proide teachers with behaiour management skills through initial and continuing teacher education and to proide principals with appropriate professional deelopment support in fostering a whole1school approach to dealing with pupil misbehaiour. 2 Teacher stress was associated with relationships with other sta& members and stress leels of the principal in the school. The leel of teacher 0ob satisfaction was associated with that of the principal. Day1to1day interaction among the school partners J teachers( pupils( parents J matters in shaping teachers own e9periences. romoting a positie school climate should therefore be considered a fundamental part of school deelopment planning. 3 Teachers sense of control oer arious actiities at school enhanced their 0ob satisfaction( especially when they had a say in which class groups to teach. 4 Combining teaching with school leadership poses considerable challenges not only for principals but also for classroom teachers in their school. This points to the need for professional deelopment support for school principals but perhaps suggests more fundamental concerns about the long1 term iability of this dual role. 5 %deKuate resources( especially sta& resources( enhanced principal 0ob satisfaction and reduced stress. oor administratie support( in particular( was associated with higher stress leels among principals. rincipals were also more likely to report feeling stressed where they considered teachers in their school to be less open to new deelopments

6 !ood Kuality school facilities also mattered 1 principals in ery old school buildings e9perienced higher stress leels than other principals. In addition( there were lower leels of 0ob satisfaction among principals who described school facilities as Lpoor or only Lfair. "n the basis of this study( it is

E9ecutie Summary6 "ii

recommended that continued attention should be gien to the design of new school buildings and retrospectie refurbishment of older ones.

Introduction66 $ Introduction

Chapter $ Introduction International research literature shows that the e9tent to which teachers are satis>ed with their 0obs and working conditions is lik likely ely to hae hae sign signi> i>ca cant nt cons conseK eKue uenc nces es for for the the reten etenti tion on of teachers within the profession( for their approach to teaching( for the creation of collegial relations within a school( and for student outcomes ,Crossman  arris( 7@@8' Chaplain( )**6/. There is now e9tensi e9tensie e internatio international nal resear research ch in the area area focussing focussing on second1leel as well as primary schools. The ma0ority of articles e9plore the factors in:uencing the 0ob satisfaction of teachers( with with fewer fewer focusi focusing ng on schoo schooll princi principal pals. s. Studie Studies s on teache teacherr stress also abound ,see ;yriacou( 7@@)/. E9isting studies on the 0ob satisfaction satisfaction and occupational occupational stress of teachers focus on teac teache herr back backgr grou ound nd char charac acte teri rist stic ics s ,age ,age(( gend gender er(( year years s of seric serice( e( etc./ etc./ as we well ll as workpl workplace ace condit condition ions s ,org ,organ anisa isatio tiona nall cult cultur ure( e( pupi pupill beha behai iou our( r( work work1lo 1load ad(( etc. etc./. /. igh igher er lee leels ls of dissa dissatis tisfac factio tion n with with work work and occup occupat ation ional al stress stress hae hae been been associated with teacher performance( absenteeism and leaing the 0ob ,see ,see ;yriac yriacou( ou( ;unc( unc( Stephe Stephens ns  ultgr ultgren en(( 7@@+ 7@@+/. /. In addition( Sodoma and Else ,7@@*/ note that a sharp increase in responsibilities in recent years has made the 0ob of principals more stressful.

4hile these iss issues hae been e9tensie iely researched inter internat nation ionall ally( y( rese resear arch ch in Irela Ireland nd on 0ob satis satisfac factio tion n among among ) teachers and principals has remained relatiely limited. Some of the issues associated with 0ob satisfaction and occupational occupational stress hae been discussed in the T%IS report for Ireland ,Shiel( erkins  !illeece( 7@@*/( the Council of Teachers 2nions report ,4ynne( Clarkin( Dolphin( )**)/ and some articles by Irish academics ,see Morgan  ;itching( 7@@=' Morgan  "eary( 7@@5/. ow oweer er( the the pro proces cesses sha shaping ping 0ob 0ob satisfact satisfaction ion among among teachers teachers and principal principals s hae hae receie receied d little attention in the Irish conte9t( especially in recent years. Researc Research h on these topics is especially releant in a conte9t where teacher work worklo load ads s are are chan changi ging ng as a resul esultt of a numb number er of fact factor ors( s( including the mainstreaming of pupils with special educational needs( greater ethnic diersity in classrooms and the increase in

increasing pressures on school principals are also likely to impact on their heir 0ob 0ob satisfa isfac ctio tion. E9ami aminati natio on of the nat nature ure of principalship and the factors that contribute to 0ob satisfaction can can pro proide ide a bett better er unde underrsta standing ding of their heir 0ob( 0ob( a topi topic c particularly releant with regard to 1

Some research on 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress has been conducted as part of post1 graduate studies ,Masters and hD theses/( but not in recent years.

di#culties in recruiting principals in recent years. This study uses a large sample of primary teachers and principals in Ireland drawn from the Growing Up in Ireland (GUI) study to e9amine 0ob satisfaction and 0ob stress. The !2I study was not speci>cally designed to e9plore leels of occupational stress and 0ob satisfaction among teachers and principals. 7 %s a result( it has some limitations in terms of being con>ned to the responses of teachers teaching * year old children and in not collecting data speci>cally intended to capture potential stressors. Further ,Kualitatie/ research could proide additional insights into the comple9ities of the processes shaping the work e9periences of primary school teachers and principals. oweer( measures of stress and satisfaction were collected from a large sample of teachers and principals across a range of Irish primary schools. The data thus enable us to proide the >rst systematic analysis of the micro ,indiidual/ and meso ,school/ leel factors shaping 0ob satisfaction and stress among teachers and principals and proide an important eidence base to inform policy1making in this area.

The report presents a literature reiew on teacher 0ob satisfaction and stress. It proides a descriptie analysis of factors ,teacher background as well as institutional characteristics/ that may hae an impact on 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress. It then proceeds to identify the key factors in:uencing satisfaction and stress( using multiariate analyses.

The study will address the following KuestionsB 1. 4hat background ariables ,gender( age( Kuali>cations( years of e9perience( etc./ are likely to impact on 0ob satisfaction among primary school teachers and principals in IrelandN 2. 4hat institutional ariables ,school siHe( number of sta&( condition of school buildings( etc./ are likely to impact on 0ob satisfaction among primary school teachers and principals in IrelandN 3. 4hat ariables are the best predictors of high 0ob satisfaction and low leels of occupational stress among primary school teachers and principals in IrelandN

It is e9pected that a combination of background and school1leel

primary school teachers and principals.

7

Copies of the Kuestionnaires administered to teachers and principals are proided in %ppendi9 ).

Introduction 6 0

The analysis proided in this study will proide uniKue insights into whether issues of 0ob satisfaction and stress should be addressed by supporting indiidual teachers andor by proiding supports and resources at the school leel.

reious Studies on 3ob Satisfaction 6 /

Chapter ) Pre"ious Studies on Job Satisfaction and Occupational Stress Among Teachers This section of the report focuses on e9isting empirical studies that that hae hae dealt dealt with with 0ob satis satisfa facti ction on and occupa occupatio tional nal stress stress among teachers and school principals. In other countries there is now a large body of work that deals with 0ob satisfaction within the teachi teaching ng prof profess ession ion.. The term term L0ob L0ob satis satisfac factio tion n was was >rst >rst util utilis ised ed by opp oppoc ock k ,)*+ ,)*+6/ 6/(( refer eferri ring ng to a comb combin ina ation tion of psycholo psychological gical(( physiolo physiological gical and enironme enironmental ntal circumsta circumstances nces that make a person feel satis>ed with their 0ob. The importance of being satis>ed with ones 0ob is captured by a Kuote by Darboe ,7@@+/( according according to whom( La 0ob is not merely life sustaining but life1enha life1enhancing ncing and enriching enriching because because most people continue continue to work een if their economic needs are met( suggesting that for most people work satis>es arious needs( such as a need for indiidual recognition( achieement( or the pleasure pleasure deried from working with other people ,ibid.B <5/. The e9isting research on 0ob satisfaction e9plores e9plores a ariety of teacher background background and school1leel factors that impact on teachers e9periences in their work work enir enironm onment ent ,see ,see the more more detail detailed ed discus discussio sion n below below/. /. rolo rolonge nged d dissa dissatis tisfac factio tion n with with ones ones 0ob may may lead lead to teache teacherr stress stress.. %cco %ccord rding ing to ;yriac yriacou ou ,7@@) ,7@@)/( /( Lteac Lteacher her stress stress may may be de>ned as the e9perience by a teacher of unpleasant( negatie emo emotion tions( s( such such as ange anger( r( an9 an9iety iety(( tens tensio ion( n( frus frustr trat atio ion n or depr depres essi sion on(( result esulting ing from from some some aspe aspect ct of thei theirr work work as a teacher ,ibid.B 7
;yria yriaco cou u ,7@@ ,7@@)/ )/ obse obser res es that that(( due due to ari ariat atio ion n betw betwe een countries and national education systems( there are di&erences in the main sources of teacher stress ,ibid.B +@/. e also obseres that that 0ob 0ob sati satisf sfac acti tion on is a comp comple le9 9 issu issue e in that that Lee Leen n in the the

enhance 0ob satisfaction satisfaction ,ibid.B +@/.

;yriacou ,7@@)/ lists the main sources of stress facing teachersB teaching pupils who lack motiation' maintaining discipline' time pressures and workload' coping

< 6 3ob 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational "ccupational Stress

with change' being ealuated by others' dealings with colleagues' self1este self1esteem em and status' status' administr administratio ation n and manageme management' nt' role role con:ict and ambiguity' and poor working conditions ,ibid.B 7*/. "erall( the factors that hae been found to impact on the 0ob satisfaction of teachers and principals can be diided into three broad categoriesB micro leel ,teacher background factors/' meso leel ,school1leel factors/' and macro leel ,factors associated with society and the education system/. Meso1leel factors can further be diided into di&erent domains( namely( school( teacher and stude student nt domain domains. s. The The follo followin wing g sectio sections ns will will pro proide ide an oeriew of e9isting research drawing on these categories.

TEAC#ER BAC=.RO(&' +ACTORS 9-ICRO ,E*E,; This section e9plores e9plores teacher background factors that hae been found to impact on their 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress. It is important to note that it is often a combination of micro and meso leel factors that a&ect perceied satisfaction( stress stress leels and motiation. In addition( research e9ploring the in:uence of background ariables( such as gender( age( teaching e9perience and type of school( on teacher stress has produced contradictory >ndings. 4hile some studies note that these ariables hae little to do with teacher stress ,see ;yriacou ;yriacou  Sutcli&e( )*=<' Manthei  !ilmor !ilmore( e( )**8 )**8/( /( other other studie studies s hae hae identi identi>ed >ed backgr backgroun ound d ariables as mediators of stress perceptions perceptions ,e.g. Chaplain( )**6' aug aughl hlin in(( )*<5 )*<5'' Smit Smith h  Oour Oourk ke( 7@@7 7@@7/. /. In his his sur surey ey of 2S seco second ndar ary y scho school ol teac teache hers rs(( Oish Oishay ay ,)** ,)**8/ 8/ foun found d that that 0ob 0ob satisfaction and motiation correlated signi>cantly with teachers gender and age' but also with their responsibility leels( sub0ect( years of teaching e9perience( and actiity. 4hile all teachers were gener generall ally y happy happy with with their their 0ob( 0ob( fema female le teache teachers rs in this this study study reported lower oerall leels of satisfaction with their 0ob. + The study indicated that stress leels reduced with years of teaching e9perience( e9perience( possibly arising from a heightened ability to deal with arious situations at school that comes from e9perience. Teachers Teachers age and e9perience were also identi>ed as factors in a study by erie and Oaker ,)**=/ in the 2S( which found that in public schools( younger and less e9perienced e9perienced teachers had higher leels of satisfaction than older and more e9perienced teachers( while in priate schools( the relationship was di&erent 1 the ery young younges estt and ery ery oldest oldest teache teachers rs had had the highes highestt leels leels of satisfaction satisfaction as did the least l east and most e9perienced teachers.

Ine Inest stig igat ating ing the the pre preal alen ence ce of str stress ess and and the the lee leell of 0ob 0ob

or e9tremely stressful. oweer( the great ma0ority of respondents ,=8?/ were fairly or ery satis>ed with teaching. !ender of a teacher

3

The author refers to the paperwork inoled and work1home balance as possible reasons for low 0ob satisfaction among female teachers.

reious Studies on 3ob Satisfaction 6 5

and age1group taught proed to be moderators of 0ob satisfaction while length of teaching e9perience and age1group taught were found to be moderators of teacher stress. The results of the study reealed signi>cant negatie correlations between self1reported teacher stress and 0ob satisfaction( and between teacher stress and intention to take up a teaching career a second time.

Chaplain ,)**6/ identi>ed biographical factors with regard to 0ob stress in 2; primary schools and found signi>cant di&erences between men and women( and teachers of di&erent ages and length of teaching e9perience. Male teachers reported more stress than their female counterparts in relation to professional tasks and pupil behaiour attitude. Female teachers scored higher than men on professional concerns. %ccording to the author( 0ust oer one1third of all teachers were satis>ed with their 0ob. 4hen speci>c facets of 0ob satisfaction were e9amined( teachers were most satis>ed with their professional performance and least satis>ed with teaching resources. Teacher stress and 0ob satisfaction were found to be negatiely correlated( with high reports of occupational stress related to low leels of 0ob satisfaction.

In Canada( Ma and MacMillan ,)***/ sureyed oer 7(@@@ elementary school teachers. The study found that female teachers were more satis>ed with their professional role as a teacher compared to their male counterparts. The gender gap in professional satisfaction grew with increased teaching competence. The study also found that teachers who stayed in the profession longer were less satis>ed with their professional role. !ender was also a signi>cant factor in a study by ;lecker and odman ,)***/ in the 2S who found that female elementary teachers rated their 0ob satisfaction more positiely( een across years of teaching e9perience.

%s these studies represent a broad range of national conte9ts as well as education systems( it is di#cult to draw conclusions as to the e9tent to which demographic ariables hae an impact on satisfaction and teacher stress. Furthermore( the studies hae been conducted using di&erent samples and di&erent self1report measures. Aeertheless( these studies proide a aluable insight into the comple9ity of factors impacting on 0ob satisfaction and teacher stress.

'O-AI&S

The ma0ority of e9isting studies on teacher 0ob satisfaction and stress deal with meso1leel factors. Crossman and arris ,7@@8/( e9ploring 0ob satisfaction among secondary school teachers in the 2;( demonstrate a signi>cant di&erence in the oerall 0ob satisfaction scores of teachers by type of school. Teachers in

> 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

independent and priately1managed schools e9hibited the highest satisfaction leels while those in foundation schools e9hibited the lowest.5 In the same ein( the study by erie and Oaker ,)**=/ discoered di&erences between school types with regard to 0ob satisfactionB priate school teachers tended to be more satis>ed than public school teachers and elementary school teachers tended to be more satis>ed than secondary school teachers. School location was also found to be a factor in predicting 0ob satisfaction leels among teachers. %bel and Sewell ,)***/ in the 2S found that urban secondary school teachers e9perienced signi>cantly more stress from poor working conditions and poor sta& relations than did rural school teachers. oor working conditions and time pressures predicted burnout for rural school teachers while pupil misbehaiour and poor working conditions predicted burnout for urban school teachers.

In addition to school type and location( workplace conditions hae been found to impact on the 0ob satisfaction of teachers. In Canada( Ma and MacMillan ,)***/ found that workplace conditions such as administratie control( teaching competence and organisational culture positiely a&ected teacher satisfaction. erie and Oaker ,)**=/ identi>ed the following school1 leelworking condition factors associated with teacher satisfactionB administratie support and leadership( student behaiour and school atmosphere( relations with parents( and teacher autonomy ,their sense of control oer classroom procedures/. The study noted that the more faourable the working conditions were( the higher the satisfaction scores were. Skaalik and Skaalik ,7@@*/ e9amined relations between teachers perception of the school conte9t ,superisory support( time pressure( relations with parents( and autonomy/( teacher burnout ,emotional e9haustion( depersonaliHation( and reduced personal accomplishment/( and teacher 0ob satisfaction among Aorwegian teachers in elementary and middle school. The authors found that teachers 0ob satisfaction was directly related to emotional e9haustion and reduced personal accomplishment. Emotional e9haustion was most strongly related to time pressure whereas depersonaliHation and reduced personal accomplishment were most strongly related to teachers relations with parents. 3ohnson and oldaway ,)**5/ e9plored 0ob satisfaction among elementary and 0unior high school principals in %lberta( Canada. The authors argue that in iew of the changing role of school principals( studies of 0ob satisfaction and the importance of 0ob facets for satisfaction are urgently needed. Important areas to fo includ in l t in th hiri of sta& d th

Seeral studies hae e9plored the topic of teacher stress. Chaplain ,)**6/ inestigated the sources of stress and 0ob satisfaction amongst primary school 4 %ccording to the authors( no signi>cant di&erence in satisfaction was found when the data were analysed by age( gender and length of serice.

reious Studies on 3ob Satisfaction 6 3

teachers in the Aorth and Eastern regions of England and identi>ed three factorsB professional concerns( pupil behaiour and attitude( and professional tasks. The strongest correlations were found between professional concerns and occupational stress. Oorg( Riding and FalHon ,)**)/ studied occupational stress and its determinants among Maltese primary school teachers. The authors discoered that enironmental factors( such as pupil misbehaiour( timeresource di#culties( professional recognition needs( poor relationships and ability group taught( had an impact on teacher stress. Their results also showed that teachers who reported greater stress were less satis>ed with their 0ob and less committed to choose a teaching career gien a second chance. %bel and Sewell ,)***/ in the 2S found that stress from pupil misbehaiour and time pressures was signi>cantly greater than stress from poor working conditions and poor sta& relations for both rural and urban school teachers.

!ri#th( Steptoe and Cropley ,)***/ in the 2; e9plored coping strategies and 0ob stress among teachers and found that high 0ob stress was associated with low social support at work and greater use of coping by disengagement and suppression of competing actiities. Dick and 4agner ,7@@)/ found that workload and feeling oerwhelmed by the tasks reKuired led to stress reactions among !erman school teachers( whereas principal support reduced the perception of workload and feeling oerwhelmed. Smith and Oourke ,7@@7/ in %ustralia e9plored work1related stress and 0ob satisfaction among secondary school teachers and identi>ed four aspects of teacher stressB sta& tensions and con:ict( time pressure( students and classroom conditions( and lack of rewards and recognition. Teaching conte9t( workload and satisfaction were found to a&ect stress directly.

Some school1leel factors hae been found to hae a negatie impact on teacher retention. Research by ;yriacou( ;unc( Stephens and ultgren ,7@@+/ notes that factors such as workload( salary( disruptie pupils and the status of the teaching profession result in some teachers leaing the profession early.

Some studies hae e9plored the association between 0ob satisfaction and stress. De Aobile and McCormick ,7@@6/ inestigated the relationships between 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress among Catholic primary schools in Aew South 4ales %ustralia They found that four stress domains

,information domain( personal domain( student domain( and school domain/ were predictors of 0ob satisfaction. Aegatie associations were found between 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress. Sources of stress included lack of support from school administration( superision( 0ob ariety( the sta&1 principal relationship and sta&1student relationships.

$? 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

-ACRO8,E*E, +ACTORS Some research has identi>ed macro1leel factors that impact on the 0ob satisfaction of teachers. In e9ploring teacher stress in primary schools in Taiwan( ;yriacou and Chien ,7@@5/ found that 78 per cent of the teachers reported that being a teacher was either ery or e9tremely stressful. The main source of stress identi>ed was the changing education policies of the goernment. % study by "lolube ,7@@6/ assessed the relationship between the leel of teachers 0ob satisfaction( motiation and their teaching performance in Riers State( Aigeria. The surey results reealed that teacher dissatisfaction was associated with educational policies( administration( pay and fringe bene>ts( material rewards and adancement. % study by errie and Oaker ,)**=/ found that salary and bene>ts did not seem to hae an impact on teacher satisfaction with their 0ob. Conersely( ee ,7@@8/ found that the 0ob satisfaction of primary school teachers in Cambodia was closely associated with salary leel and welfare conditions. oweer( 0ob satisfaction was also intertwined with non1 remuneratie incenties( such as school management( principal leadership( and professional deelopment. Macro1leel factors were also important in Cyprus 1 Cypriot teachers chose the teaching profession because of the salary( the hours( and the holidays associated with this profession ,see Pembylas( 7@@5/. The >ndings of these studies demonstrate that national conte9ts may hae a di&erent impact on teachers perceied 0ob satisfaction.

-EAS(RES TO CO-BAT 'ISSATIS+ACTIO& A&' OCC(PATIO&A, STRESS Teacher stress and 0ob satisfaction hae been found to be negatiely correlated 1 high reports of occupational stress were related to low leels of 0ob satisfaction ,see Chaplain( )**6/. Earlier sections of this report hae shown that sustained occupational stress may lead to teacher burnout and hae implications for retention. Researchers hae e9plored what measures could combat 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress in teachers. ;yriacou and Chien ,7@@5/ found that( according to primary school teachers in Taiwan( the most e&ectie action that schools or the goernment could take to reduce teacher stress was to decrease teachers workload. These >ndings are in line with other studies. In addition( ;yriacou ,7@@)B +)/ highlighted the positie impact of working in a school with a positie climate in terms of social support. The author noted that teachers and senior managers in schools must aoid creating unnecessary of st th gh nt ,e ttin

healthy school as includingB good communication between sta&' a strong sense of collegiality' management decisions based on consultation' consensus established on key alues and standards' whole school policies in place' roles and e9pectations clearly de>ned' teachers receiing positie feedback and praise' a good leel of resources and facilities to support teachers' support aailable to help sole problems' policies and procedures being

reious Studies on 3ob Satisfaction 6 $$

easy to follow' red tape and paperwork being minimised' additional duties being matched to teachers skills' a building enironment which is pleasant to work in' senior management making good use of forward planning' and induction and career deelopment adice being gien ,ibid.B +)1+7/. Support measures could also include a counselling serice for teachers and a teacher helpline ,e.g. as in the 2;B teacherline www.teacherline.org.uk/. In addition( in1serice workshops aimed at helping to reduce stress hae been found to support teaching sta&.

;yriacou ,7@@)/ obseres that there are arious coping strategies that teachers can use in coping with stress and distinguishes between two main typesB direct action techniKues and palliatie techniKues. The former refers to things that teachers can do that eliminate the source of stress( including identifying the source of stress and then carrying out some form of action to combat this ,ibid.B +@/. alliatie techniKues refer to lessening the feeling of stress that occurs( relieing the tension and an9iety that has built up. "erall( the techniKues that teachers use include trying to keep problems in perspectie' aoiding confrontation' trying to rela9 after work' taking action to deal with problems' keeping feelings under control' deoting more time to particular tasks' discussing problems and e9pressing feelings to others' haing a healthy home life' planning ahead and prioritising' and recognising ones own limitations ,ibid.B +@1+)/. !ri#th at al. ,)***/ obsered that the presence of social support and the use of e&ectie coping behaiour can a&ect the teachers perception of stress.

RESEARC# I& T#E IRIS# CO&TE4T%

TEAC#ER JOB SATIS+ACTIO& A&' STRESS

Teachers e9periences in school hae also been e9tensiely researched in Ireland ,see Morgan( udlow( ;itching( "eary( Clarke( 7@)@' ;itching( 7@@*' ;itching( Morgan  "eary( 7@@*' Morgan  Sugrue( 7@@<' Drudy( Martin( "Flynn  4oods( 7@@6' Morgan  "eary( 7@@5/. oweer( ery few studies e9plicitly focus on the 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress of teachers.

The T%IS6 summary report for Ireland ,see Shiel et al.( 7@@*/ documents leels of 0ob satisfaction among Irish teachers in comparison with other countries. The surey focuses on the learning enir nts and teaching condition in nd1leel

was somewhat lower in Ireland than in other comparison countries e9cept oland. Shiel and colleagues found that( across all T%IS countries( teachers 0ob

6

T%IS J the Teaching and earning International Surey is a pro0ect of the "ECD.

$) 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

satisfaction was positiely related to classroom disciplinary climate( teacher1student relations and self1e#cacy. 8

2sing a surey of %STI( T2I and IAT" members( 4ynne( Clarkin and Dolphin ,)**)/ e9plored stress among Irish teachers focussing on a number of issuesB principal sources of stress( coping and social support( and outcomes of stress. The study focussed on generic occupational stress( teaching1speci>c stress( physical work enironment stress and life eents ,measurement of non1work stress/. The authors found that teachers in Ireland e9perienced moderate to high leels of stress compared to other occupational groups. In addition( personal and school demography were not signi>cantly associated with stress in the workplace. oweer( adeKuate facilities in the school were strongly associated with the sources of stress. In terms of generic occupational stress( the >e highest scoring items among IAT" members wereB workload( insu#cient resources with which to work( being underalued( eKuipment( and not being able to switch o& at home. Teaching1speci>c stress was associated withB lack of time to spend with indiidual pupils( large classes( noisy pupils( di#cult classes( and pupil motiation. The top ten sources of self1reported stress includedB the pupil1teacher ratio( discipline( pupil motiation( inadeKuate resources( lack of parental support( teaching groups of di&ering ability( workload( parental e9pectations( salary( superisioncoering for absent teachers( and demands on after1school time ,ibid.B )@1)7/. 4hile this research took place some time ago( it is still likely to yield useful insights into the processes inoled( especially in the absence of more recent systematic data on teacher stress.

Elsewhere( ;itching et al. ,7@@*/ note that a&ect is important for motiation and 0ob satisfaction among teachers. The term includes emotions and moods( feelings that range in intensity from mild satisfaction to 0oy on the positie side and from low1 leel irritation to e9treme annoyance and depression on the negatie side ,ibid.B 56/. %nother releant factor that in:uences satisfaction is comparison with other teachers ,Morgan  ;itching( 7@@=/. Some post1graduate research also e9ists. Carroll ,)**6/ e9plored 0ob satisfaction among school principals. %dministratie as well as teaching principals had relatiely high leels of satisfaction( with the former reporting somewhat higher leels of satisfaction. ater work by the same author found that teaching principals reported greater work oerload arising from their dual role ,Carroll( )**8/. 4hat these studies show is that the

factors in:uencing 0ob satisfaction among teachers are aried but strongly in:uenced by school1leel characteristics.

6 Figure 5.=B Mean 3ob Satisfaction Scores of Teachers J Ireland %nd Comparison Countries ,7@@=1@
Data and Methodology6 $0

Chapter 0 'ata and -ethodology This section introduces the data and methodology used to study 0ob satisfaction and stress among primary school teachers and principals. The analysis draws on data collected for Growing Up in Ireland study. !rowing 2p in Ireland is a national study of * year old children( the main aim of which is to paint a full picture of children in Ireland and how they are deeloping in the current social( economic and cultural enironment. %s well as focusing on children and their parents( the study collected ery detailed information on the school conte9t oer the school year 7@@=7@@<. For each of the oer <(@@@ children in the study( Kuestionnaires were completed by their school principal and their classroom teacher. The principal Kuestionnaires recorded school1 leel details on characteristics including siHe( challenges( ethos etc.( along with some personal details about the principal. The teacher Kuestionnaire( completed by almost 7(@@@ primary teachers( recorded class1leel details such as class siHe( curriculum( teaching methods etc. and some personal details about teachers themseles. In addition( detailed information was collected from * year old children on their perceptions of school and their teachers. Children also completed academic assessment tests ,Drumcondra reading and Maths tests/.

%n adantage of the database is that it collects measures of both 0ob satisfaction and 0ob stress for teachers and principals ,LIn general terms a/ how stressed do you feel by your 0ob and b/ how satis>ed do you feel with your 0ob/. Satisfaction and stress might be e9pected to be interrelated but not perfectly correlated( thus yielding a more comple9 picture of teacher e9periences of their profession. The data are limited to the teachers of * year old children. oweer( this is in itself an adantage since it allows for greater insights into ariation across teachers in 0ob satisfaction and stress( holding the e&ect of class age1group constant. The study will disentangle the e&ects of indiidual and school characteristics on teacher and principal reports of 0ob satisfaction and 0ob stress.

In particular( the study will e9plore the impact of the following factorsB

1

!ender

2

%ge

3

$ears of teaching e9perience

$2 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

1

Quali>cations

2. School and classroom characteristics( includingB 1

SiHe of class' school siHe

2

ro>le of children in the class and school

3

erceptions of pupils

4

Teacher inolement in decision1making in the school

5

erceptions of parental inolement

6

School facilities and resources.

The following sections of this report present descriptie as well as multiariate analyses of teacher and school1leel factors. The sample description is presented in Tables ) and 7.

Table $% Sample 'escription @ Teachers 9n$:3$<;: School 1ear )??5)??> Variable name .ender Male Female Age 7@ to 7* +@1+* 5@15* 6@ years or oer 1ears of ser"ice in this school ) 716 81)@ ))17@ 7)1+6

%

)6.) <5.* 57.8 7).5 [email protected] )6.8 )6.< +=.* )*.@ )7.+ )6.)

SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

Table )% Sample 'escription @ Principals 9n>3>;: School 1ear )??5)??> Variable name .ender Male Female Age +@1+* 5@15* 6@16* 8@ 1ears of ser"ice in this school + 518 =1)@ ))1)6 )6 Source: Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

%

6@.+ 5*.= )@.6 +5.8 58.* <.@ 7=.+ )8.7 [email protected] )8.= 7@.*

Research Results6 $/

Chapter 2 Research Results 2$ JOB SATIS+ACTIO& A-O&. TEAC#ERS A&' PRI&CIPA,S The analyses presented in this section focus on 0ob satisfaction among the teachers of *1year1old primary school pupils and among primary school principals. In the Kuestionnaire( the teachers and principals were asked to indicate a/ how satis>ed they felt with their 0ob' and b/ how stressed they felt by their 0ob. The scale of the answers ranged from Lery( Lfairly( Lnot ery( to Lnot at all. The following sub1sections e9plore the associations between feelings of 0ob satisfaction and stress and arious school( pupil and teacher leel ariables.

The ma0ority of primary school teachers participating in the surey were satis>ed with their 0ob ,see Figure )/ with 6* per cent of them feeling Lery satis>ed. "nly a ery small proportion of teachers ,7?/ were not satis>ed with their 0ob. rimary school principals reported similarly high leels of 0ob satisfaction ,see Figure 7/. Forty1nine per cent were Lery satis>ed and 55 per cent Lfairly satis>ed. Oecause satisfaction leels are high among both teachers and principals( the following analyses focus on teacher1 leel and school1leel factors associated with being Lery satis>ed.

+igure $% TeachersD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction: School 1ear )??5)??>

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 %

Very

Fairly


Not Very

Not At All

$< 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

+igure )% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction: School 1ear )??5)??>

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 % Very

Fairly

Not very

Not at all


9a; Teacher8le"el factors associated !ith ob satisfaction In line with some international research ,see Ma and MacMillan )*** in Canada' ;lecker and odman )*** in the 2S/( gender was highly signi>cant ,p.@@)/ in self1reported satisfaction leels( with female teachers being more satis>ed with their 0ob compared to their male colleagues. Si9ty per cent of female teachers were Lery satis>ed compared with 67 per cent of male teachers while 6 per cent of male teachers were Ldissatis>ed compared with 7 per cent of female teachers. Satisfaction leels di&ered also by age group ,see Figure +/.= $ounger teachers ,7@17* years of age/ were more satis>ed with their 0ob compared to older teachers. The lowest proportion who described themseles as Lery satis>ed were aged in their forties. There are few systematic ariations in 0ob satisfaction by Kuali>cation leel. oweer( the proportion who are Lery satis>ed is somewhat higher among those with a postgraduate Kuali>cation than those with an undergraduate Kuali>cation ,8=? and 68? Lery satis>ed respectiely/.

2nlike the teachers( there was an een gender balance among primary school principals participating in this study ,see Tables ) and 7/. In contrast to the teachers( the analysis showed somewhat higher 0ob satisfaction leels among male principals than female principals but the di&erence is not marked. %ge seemed to be a factor' younger principals were somewhat less

older colleagues ,see Figure +a/. The highest satisfaction leels were found among the small group of principals

7

%ge brackets for teachers and principals di&er slightly due to the di&erent age distributions of the two groups( resulting in a small number of respondents in some categories.

Research Results 6 $5

aged oer 8@ years' this pattern may re:ect the fact that more satis>ed principals retire at a later time1point than their less satis>ed peers.

+igure 0% TeachersD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction 9F G*ery SatisHedD; by Age .roup: School 1ear )??5)??>

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

%

20-29 30-39 40-49 >50

NoteB di&erences are signi>cant at the p.@@) leel.

<


+igure 0a% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction 9F G *ery SatisHedD; by Age .roup: School 1ear )??5)??>

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% %

30-39 40-49 50-59 >60

NoteB di&erences are signi>cant at the p.@@) leel.

8

% signi>cance leel of p.@@) means that the likelihood is less than one in a thousand that this relationship would occur by chance.

$> 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

Figures 5 and 5a present self1reported 0ob satisfaction of teachers and principals by years of serice in their current school. In keeping with the patterns shown for age1group( the most recently recruited teachers ,that is( those who hae 0oined the school in the past >e years/ show the highest satisfaction leels( with satisfaction leels reaching a plateau among those who hae been in the school for longer. The highest leel of 0ob satisfaction among less e9perienced teachers could be e9plained by the Lhoneymoon period theory( according to which employees early in their careers embrace the challenges and opportunities the 0ob o&ers and conseKuently e9perience higher perceied 0ob satisfaction ,Schmidt )***/. Satisfaction leels among principals are highest among newly appointed principals and among those with longer serice. rincipals too may e9perience a Lhoneymoon period early in their career( with a slight dip in satisfaction among those in the 0ob 518 years. oweer( in contrast to teachers( their satisfaction leels appear to recoer somewhat as their career progresses and their e9pertise increases.

+igure 2% TeachersD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction 9F G*ery SatisHedD; by 1ears of Ser"ice in the Current School: School 1ear )??5)??>

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

%

<1 2-5 6-10 11-20 21-35

Note: Di&erences are signi>cant at the p.@@) leel. SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

Research Results 6 $3

+igure 2a% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction 9F G *ery SatisHedD; by 1ears of Ser"ice in the Current School: School 1ear )??5)??>

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

% <=3

4-6

7-10

11-15

NoteB di&erences are signi>cant at the p.@@) leel. SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

9b; School8,e"el +actors School domain

This section e9plores associations between school1leel factors ,e.g. class siHe( number of pupils in the school( sense of control autonomy( working conditions/ and self1reported 0ob satisfaction. International studies hae shown that large class siHes can adersely a&ect teachers 0ob satisfaction. Class siHe in Irish primary schools is a hotly debated issue( especially in response to recent increases in the pupil1teacher ratio. Recent >gures demonstrate that the aerage number of primary school pupils per class is higher in Ireland than the "ECD and E2 aerages ,"ECD( 7@)@/. Education at a Glance ,7@)@/ shows that there are 75 pupils in Irish classrooms compared to an E2 aerage of 7@ ,p. +<8/. oweer( our analyses indicate no signi>cant ariation in teacher satisfaction by class siHe or by whether the teacher is teaching a multi1grade class. It could be that other factors( such as the characteristics of the pupil intake( may hae a greater in:uence on teacher satisfaction as discussed later in this report. International studies also indicate that teachers in urban schools are less satis>ed with their 0ob( which may re:ect di&erent social compositions in urban and rural schools ,see %bel and Sewell( )*** in the 2S/. "ur >ndings indicate that a slightly higher proportion of teachers in urban primary schools were ery satis>ed with their 0ob than those in rural or mi9ed primary schools. oweer( the di&erence between the groups is not statistically signi>cant.

>15

)? 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

+igure /% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction 9F G *ery SatisHedD; by &umber of Pupils in the School: School 1ear )??5)??>

.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

1-80

81-120

121-200

201-280

280-400

>400

NoteB Di&erences are signi>cant at the p.@@) leel. SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

There is a siHable literature on the e&ects of school siHe. The ma0ority of these studies show that smaller schools are less impersonal and enable teachers to gie more attention to each indiidual pupil ,4asley et al.( 7@@@/. In the academic year 7@@*7@)@( there were +()86 primary schools in Ireland' almost half ,58?/ had fewer than )@@ pupils while + per cent catered for oer 6@@ pupils ,DES Key Statistics/. The analysis of principals responses reealed that principals in larger schools ,that is( those with more than 7<@ pupils/ were somewhat more likely to report being satis>ed with their 0ob ,Figure 6/' the multiariate analysis presented below e9plores whether this pattern re:ects other characteristics of larger schools. 3ob satisfaction is somewhat greater among principals in urban and mi9ed schools ,65? and 67? Lery satis>ed/ compared with principals in rural schools ,56?/. "nce again( the multiariate analysis will shed light on whether this re:ects location per se or other characteristics of rural schools.

In Ireland( principals can be either administratie or teaching principals. 3ust under half ,5=?/ of the principals participating in the surey had a teaching class. rincipals who taught a class had

somewhat lower satisfaction leels than administratie principals( with 57 per cent describing themseles as Lery satis>ed compared with 65 per cent of administratie principals ,p.@@)/. This may be an indication of di#culties in diiding time between di&erent responsibilities ,see also Carroll( )**8 on this topic/.

Research Results 6 )$

erie and Oaker ,)**=/ found that the e9tent of teacher controlautonomy has an impact on 0ob satisfaction. In this study( teacher control was de>ned as autonomy of action in the following areasB selecting sub0ects to be taught( deciding about the content of sub0ects to be taught( deciding about teaching techniKues( choosing te9tbooks and other learning materials( disciplining children( and selecting the year group they teach ,see Table +/. "ur analyses indicate 57 per cent of primary teachers felt they had no control oer selecting the sub0ects to be taught. Conersely( 78 per cent felt that they had La great deal of control. % ma0ority of teachers felt that they had either a Lgreat deal of control ,5)?/ or Lmoderate control ,7)?/ oer deciding about the content of the sub0ects to be taught. Ainety1two per cent noted that they had control oer what teaching techniKues to use( while only ) per cent felt that they had no control or only slight control oer this domain. %bout )@ per cent of teachers reported limited control oer choosing te9tbooks and other learning materials. The teachers were generally positie about discipline in the school with 86 per cent feeling they had a great deal of control in this area. The situation was di&erent in being able to select a year group to teachB oer a >fth felt that they had little or no control oer it.

Table 0% Sense of Control O"er *arious Acti"ities at School 9All Teachers;: School 1ear )??5)??> A great deal of &o control Selecting sub0ects to be taught Deciding about the content of sub0ects to be taught

control

<.=?

)7.@?

)).)?

76.*?

6.@?

)@.6?

77.*?

7).+?

5@.+?

).5?

8.*?

)8.+?

=6.6?

=.8?

)*.6?

7*.
[email protected]?

).8?

=.=?

78.)?

85.8?

)<.
7*.8?

)*.6?

)@.6?

7.6?

Disciplining children Selecting year group you teach

Some control

57.+?

Deciding about teaching techniKues Choosing te9tbooks and other learning materials

Slight control

-oderate control

7).8?


Teachers who reported moderate or a great deal of control oer the speci>ed actiities tended to report signi>cantly higher leels of 0ob satisfaction than those who reported haing less control oer their work ,see Table +a/. For e9ample( 8+ per cent of teachers who hae moderate or a great deal of control oer the year group they teach describe themseles as Lery satis>ed compared with 68 per cent of those who hae little or no control oer the group taught.

)) 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

Table 0a% Job Satisfaction 9F G*ery SatisHedD; by Sense of Control O"er *arious Acti"ities at School: School 1ear )??5)??> A great deal of moderate control

Someslightno control Selecting sub0ects to be taught ,p.@6/ Deciding about the content of sub0ects to be taught ,p.@@)/ Deciding about teaching techniKues ,p.@@)/ Choosing te9tbooks and other learning materials ,p.)@/ Disciplining children ,p.@@)/ Selecting year group you teach ,p.@)/

66.8?

87.6?

67.8?

87.@?

57.5?

6*.
66.@?

6*.=?

[email protected]?

[email protected]?

68.7?

8+.@?


4orking conditions hae been found to impact on 0ob satisfaction in schools in international research. In this surey( primary school principals were asked to indicate their perception of school facilitiesresources across a range of items comparing them to other primary schools in the country ,see Table 5/. InadeKuacies were most freKuently cited in the following areasB after1school facilities( librarymedia centre( sta& room( sports facilities( facilities for children with disabilities( and number of classrooms. The top >e areas where principals considered resources to be e9cellent included booksworksheets( condition of school buildingclassrooms( learning support proision( number of classrooms and playground facilities.

Table 2% Adeuacy of Resources to the &eeds of the School 8 Perceptions of School Principals 9F;: School year )??5)??>

.ood

Poor

+air

8.5

7=.7

6).<

)5.8

Aumber of classrooms

7).<

76.=

+5.*

)=.8

Oooks and worksheets

)).8

6*.+

7*.)

Computing facilities

)6.=

+).5

+<.<

)5.7

<.5

77.*

68.7

)7.6

Sports facilities

7).<

78.6

+8.5

)6.+

Music facilities

)+.8

+=.+

5).@

<.)

layground Mathematics resourcesfacilities

)<.7

7+.6

5).5

)8.*

+.7

7+.5

8+.)

)@.+

ibrary media centre

+5.8

7=.+

+).7

8.*

Sta& room

+7.+

75.@

++.=

)@.@

)*.<

+@.@

+*.@

)).+

8.=

)<.6

6+.)

7).=

Aumber of teachers

%rts and crafts facilities

Toilet facilities earning support proision

E7cellent

building( classrooms etc. Facilities for children with disabilities

76.6


+6.=

+).@

=.<

Research Results 6 )0

Figure 8 indicates that principals tend to be more satis>ed with their 0obs where they report school facilities as Le9cellent than when they perceie school facilities to be Lpoor. The e9ception relates to playground facilities where the di&erences found are non1signi>cant. Di&erences are notable in relation to sta#ng( with perceied adeKuacy in relation to the number of teachers( administratie support and learning support proision associated with higher satisfaction leels among principals.

+igure <% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Job Satisfaction 9F G *ery SatisHedD; by Percei"ed Adeuacy of School +acilities: School 1ear )??5)??>

Dia!ilitie "#il$i& 'o$itio A$(iitrative A)ter-'*ool +eari& #,,ort oilet ta)) roo( +i!rary

/'ellet

at*

oor

lay&ro#$ #i' ,ort Art'ra)t o(,#ti& "oo No. 'laroo( No. tea'*er

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

% very satisfied SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

9c; Pupil domain upil1related issues hae been found to impact on teachers 0ob satisfaction by international studies. In this study( we e9plored teachers perceptions of the pupils in their school in relation to the following areasB pupils en0oy being in the school( pupils are well behaed in class( pupils show respect for their teacher(

likely to reeal the impact of day1

)2 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

to1day climate in the school which is e9pected to hae more of an impact than ob0ectie measures of school type ,e.g. whether the school is designated disadantaged or not/. * Teachers were asked to indicate whether these statements were true for nearly all the pupils ,in the school/( more than half or less than half. %s demonstrated by Figure =( a ma0ority of teachers felt that pupils in their school en0oyed being there( were well behaed in class and outside( showed respect for their teachers and were rewarding to work with. Teacher satisfaction leels are found to ary markedly by the behaiour and engagement of pupils in the class ,see Table 6/. Thus( teachers are more likely to describe themseles as Lery satis>ed if they feel that Lnearly all pupils in their school are well1behaed( en0oy being at school and show respect for their teacher. Finding the pupils rewarding to work with has the strongest association with 0ob satisfaction leels.

+igure 5% Pupil 'omain 9Perceptions of All Teachers;: School 1ear )??5)??>

Are ell !e*ave$ i t*e ,lay&ro#$'*ool yar$ %

Are rear$i& to or it* %

*o re,e't )or t*eir tea'*er %

Are ell-!e*ave$ i 'la %

/oy !ei& at '*ool %

0 +e t*a *al) SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

20 ore t*a *al)

40

60

Nearly all

80

*

Furthermore( the %nonymised Microdata File ,%MF/ does not include school1leel identi>ers( such as DEIS status.

Research Results 6 )/

Table /% Job Satisfaction ,e"els 9F G*ery SatisHedD; by Perceptions of Pupils: School 1ear )??5)??> &early all

-ore than halfless than half

upils en0oy being in the school ,p.@@)/

87.7?

57.8?

upils are well behaed in class ,p.@@)/

85.5?

5).5?

upils show respect for their teacher ,p.@@)/

87.
5).5?

upils are rewarding to work with ,p.@@)/

86.=?

7=.8?

upils are well behaed in school yard playground ,p.@@)/

85.
[email protected]?


Teachers were also asked to indicate to what e9tent they hae contact with parents across three areasB parents attending parent1teacher meetings( parents attending other actiities organised by the school( and parents approaching teachers informally ,see Figure ed with their 0ob where Lnearly all parents in the school attend meetings ,other than parent1teacher meetings/.

+igure >% TeachersD Contact !ith Parents: School 1ear )??5)??>

Atte$ ot*er (eeti& %

A,,roa'* tea'*er i)or(ally %

Atte$ ,aret-tea'*er (eeti& %

20

40 +e t*a *al)


60 ore t*a *al)

80 Nearly all

)< 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

2) JOB STRESS A-O&. PRI-AR1 SC#OO, TEAC#ERS A&' PRI&CIPA,S 4hile the preious section dealt with 0ob satisfaction and related factors( this section speci>cally focuses on 0ob stress among the teachers and principals participating in the surey. 4hile *< per cent of primary school teachers were satis>ed with their 0ob( 56 per cent also felt they were stressed by the 0ob ,see Figure */. In comparison( *+ per cent of principals felt satis>ed ,either Lery or Lfairly/ with their 0ob( whereas =@ per cent of principals felt stressed ,Figure *a/. This indicates that primary school principals were more likely to e9perience occupational stress than classroom teachers. +igure 3% TeachersD Self8Reported Occupational Stress ,e"els: School 1ear )??5)??>

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 % Very

Fairly

Not very

Not at all


+igure 3a% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Occupational Stress ,e"els: School 1ear )??5)??>

60 50 40 30

10 %

Very Fairly Not very Not at all

Source: Growing Up in Ireland study ! year co"ort#


3ob satisfaction and stress are related to each other( but in ery comple9 ways. Table 8 shows the cross1oer between these two dimensions( reealing four groupsB those who are ery satis>ed with their 0ob and not stressed' those who are ery satis>ed with their 0ob but e9periencing stress' those who are not ery satis>ed with their 0ob and not stressed' and those who are not ery satis>ed with their 0ob and feeling stressed. Those who are ery satis>ed with their 0obs generally tend to report lower stress leels. oweer( a siHeable group ,7@? of teachers and 7=? of principals/ report high leels and feelings of stress. It may be that this group places a strong alue on the conte9t of their 0ob but that day1to1day conditions operate as stressors. In the remainder of this section( we point to a number of potential stressors for teachers and principals.

Table <% Job Satisfaction and Occupational Stress Among Teachers and Principals Teachers 9F;

Principals 9F;

Gery satis>ed( not stressed

+<.+

7@.+

Gery satis>ed but stressed

7@.@

7=.)

Aot ery satis>ed( not stressed

)5.<

*.8

Aot ery satis>ed and stressed

78.*

5+.@

!ender di&erences are apparent among teachersB female primary school teachers were somewhat more likely to report feeling ery or fairly stressed ,58?/ compared to their male counterparts ,57?/ and male teachers were more likely to report feeling Lnot at all stressed ,)le( between male and female teachers( an issue which is assessed in the multiariate analyses presented below. In contrast to the situation for teachers( there are no gender di&erences in principal stress leels. Interesting results were produced by the stress and age associationB teachers aged oer forty were more likely to report stress ,p.@@)( see Figure )@/. %mong principals( there was little di&erentiation by age1group( with the e9ception of slightly ,but not signi>cantly/ lower stress leels among those aged oer 8@ ,Figure )@a/. %s with the pattern for 0ob satisfaction( this is likely to re:ect di&erential retirement ages among those e9periencing occupational stress. There was no signi>cant ariation in stress

of the teaching career was also a factor' there is a curilinear relationship with the highest stress leels found among newly Kuali>ed teachers and among those working as a teacher for more than 7@ years ,p.@@)( see Figure ))/. rincipal stress leels are lower for those = to )@ years in the 0ob but are broadly stable oer the remainder of the career ,see Figure ))a/.

)> 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

+igure $?% TeachersD Self8Reported Stress by Age .roup: School 1ear )??5)??>

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

% 20-29

30-39

40-49


+igure $?a% PrincipalsD Self8Reported Stress by Age .roup: School 1ear )??5)??>

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

%

30-39 40-49 50-59 >60


>50


+igure $$% +eeling Stressed by ,ength of Teaching Career: Teachers: School 1ear )??5)??>

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

% <1

1-5

5-10

11-20

>20


+igure $$a% +eeling Stressed by ,ength of Ser"ice in the School: Principals: School 1ear )??5)??>

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

% <=3

4-6

7-10

11-15


School and Class Factors

Teachers teaching a multi1grade class report higher stress leels than those teaching a single class group ,6+? and 5)? respectiely reporting feeling of stress/. %s with 0ob satisfaction( there is no clear1cut relationship between siHe of class and stress

>15

leels. Some aspects of control oer the 0ob are associated with stress leels' feeling stressed is more likely among those who hae no or only slight control oer deciding the teaching techniKues used or the approach to discipline than those who report a great deal of control in these areas.

0? 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

+igure $)% +eeling Stressed by 'egree of Control O"er Teaching: School 1ear )??5)??>

ele'ti& year &ro#,

Di'i,lie et!oo

:reat $eal Noli&*t

-ea'*i& te'*i;#e

#!e't 'otet #!e't ele'tio 0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

% stressed Source: Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

+igure $0% +eeling Stressed by Perceptions of Pupils: School 1ear )??5)??>

ell-!e*ave$ i yar$ ear$i& to or it*  e 60.0

*o re,e't 0.0 70.0

/oy '*ool

1%

0.0 1 stressed 0 . S 0o 2 0 . F 0 i 3 0g . u 0r 4 0e . 0) 5+

ar relationship between pupil engagement and behaiour and teacher stress leels. Teachers who report that Lnearly all of the pupils in their school are well1 behaed( rewarding to work with( en0oy school and show respect for their teacher report signi>cantly

lower leels of l stress than othere teachers. Teacher stress leels are e also lower where l they describes pupils in theb school as Lhappier y than those in other schools.t There is noh signi>cant e ariation in stress

parents who attend parent1 teacher meetings but somewhat higher stress leels are reported where attendance by parents at other school meetings is low.

Research Results 6 0$

%mong primary school principals( those who hae teaching responsibilities report higher stress leels ,=5? compared with 8=?/( indicating challenges in combining the two roles. Interestingly( teachers also report signi>cantly higher stress leels in schools where the principal has teaching responsibilities ,65? compared with 5+?/. In contrast to the patterns found in relation to 0ob satisfaction( there is no clear1cut relationship between school facilities and principal stress leels. The e9ception occurs for administratie support( where stress leels are highest for those who report Lpoor administratie support ,<)?/ and lowest for those with Lgood or Le9cellent support ,6=1 6*?/. rincipal stress leels are lower where Lnearly all teachers are open to new deelopments and challenges ,88? compared with <5?/ and where Lnearly all teachers are eager to take part in in1serice training ,8=? compared with =8?/.

20 -(,TI*ARIATE A&A,1SIS Earlier sections of this report presented descriptie analyses of the relationships between indiidual and school characteristics and 0ob satisfaction and stress among principals and teachers. This section will deelop upon these analyses to e9plore the simultaneous impact of indiidual and school factors on these outcomes. Multiariate modelling will allow us to e9plore the underlying reasons for the e&ect of certain characteristics on satisfaction and stress( yielding further insights into the processes at play.

Teacher Stress Table = presents the factors in:uencing teacher stress. % logistic regression model is used because a binary outcome is considered J feeling ery or fairly stressed compared to all others. Teachers of all sampled * year olds were interiewed for the study. %s a result( in medium and large schools( a number of teachers from the same school were interiewed. 4e therefore use multileel modelling to take account of the fact that teachers in the same school are likely to resemble each other in many respects. In looking at the model results( positie coe#cients mean that a factor is associated with a greater chance of feeling stressed while negatie coe#cients mean that a factor is associated with a lower chance of feeling stressed.

between1school ariance is statistically signi>cant( meaning that teachers in some schools hae higher stress leels than those in other schools. Model 7 e9plores the impact of the personal characteristics of teachers. In contrast to the descriptie analysis presented aboe( no signi>cant gender di&erences in stress leels are apparent when we take account of age. Teachers aged in their forties hae higher stress leels than

0) 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

other age1groups. This applies een controlling for number of years teaching in the current school so may re:ect broader issues around work1life balance at this stage. Stress leels appear to dip after the initial ad0ustment to teaching( but after >e years of teaching in the school stress leels tend to increase and more or less plateau thereafter. Quali>cations are not signi>cantly related to stress leels so are not included in the models shown.

Models + to 6 e9amine the impact of working conditions( school characteristics and teacher climate on stress leels. Teachers teaching multi1grade classes hae somewhat higher stress leels than those teaching single1grade classes( re:ecting the comple9ity of the tasks inoled. aing a teaching rather than an administratie principal is associated with higher stress leels among classroom teachers. This is likely to re:ect the reduced capacity of principals to proide day1to1day support to their sta& where they themseles hae a full teaching load and( in such instances( teachers may need to take on administratie and other duties themseles. Teachers report less stress where they feel they hae control oer their day1to1day teaching( particularly if they hae a say in the year group they teach.

There is no signi>cant di&erence in teacher stress leels in schools sering urban( rural or mi9ed catchment areas. School siHe does not hae a net impact( though it is worth noting that smaller schools are more likely to hae multi1grade classes and teaching principals( factors which do e9acerbate stress ,see aboe/. Class siHe does not hae a signi>cant relationship with teacher stress leels. 4hat appears to matter is the composition of the student body. Teacher stress leels are lower where Lnearly all pupils are well1behaed in school and show respect for their teachers. Conersely( teachers in conte9ts where pupil behaiour is challenging hae higher stress leels. arental inolement in the school has an additional impact. %ttendance at parent1 teacher meetings is reported as high by teachers but parental attendance at other meetings organised by the school is more ariable. Teachers in schools where leels of parental attendance at such meetings are lower report higher stress leels. The Kuality of relations with other sta& is also important. Teachers report less stress where they feel that teachers in their school are Lhappier than in other primary schools. eadership appears to set the tone for teacher e9periences of the school setting( with teachers ).5 times more likely to themseles report stress where their principal also reports feeling stressed.

Job Satisfaction Among Teachers Earlier parts of the report indicated the high leels of 0ob satisfaction found among primary school teachers in Ireland. Table < e9plores the factors in:uencing the likelihood of teachers being Lery satis>ed with their 0ob. %s with teacher

Research Results 6 00

stress( leels of 0ob satisfaction ary signi>cantly between schools ,see Model )/. 4hile there are no gender di&erences in stress leels( female teachers hae higher 0ob satisfaction leels than their male counterparts. 3ob satisfaction does not ary by age but does ary by the length of time in the school. Satisfaction leels are higher among recently Kuali>ed teachers but decline after >e years in the school' satisfaction leels rise again after twenty or more years in the school.

Teaching a multi1grade class is associated with greater stress ,see aboe/ but does not impact on oerall 0ob satisfaction. oweer( those in schools with a teaching principal report lower satisfaction leels than those in other schools. Teachers who report haing more control oer their day1to1day teaching( including the year group they teach( the approach to discipline and the sub0ect content taught( are more satis>ed with their 0obs. 3ob satisfaction is somewhat greater in ery large schools ,with more than 5@@ pupils/ but this re:ects the greater satisfaction leels found in urban schools( rather than the e&ect of school siHe per se.

%s with stress leels( class siHe per se is not associated with 0ob satisfaction' the important issue is the composition and climate of their class and school. Teachers are more satis>ed with their 0ob where pupils are well1behaed and where parents are more inoled in the life of the school. They are also more satis>ed where teachers are seen as Lhappier than those in other schools. %s with 0ob stress( leadership is important( with teacher satisfaction being higher where principals are more satis>ed with their 0ob.

Principal Stress Table * shows the factors in:uencing principal stress. rincipal stress does not ary by gender but there is some eidence that stress leels are higher for principals oer 5@ years of age. Stress leels are signi>cantly lower among those who hae preious e9perience as a principal in another school' this e9perience appears to eKuip them for their current role and reduces the stresses inoled. Stress leels are higher for those in the early stages of principalship( then dip after >e years but tend to increase again after ten years in the post. rincipals who hae teaching duties hae somewhat higher stress leels and stress leels are much higher among those who report inadeKuate

administratie support.

%s with teacher stress( school location or siHe is not associated with principal stress leels. rincipals in ery old school buildings hae higher stress leels than

02 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

other principals.)@ %s with teachers( the composition and climate of the school is an important drier of principal stress leels. rincipals in schools where more than a Kuarter of pupils coming into the school hae emotionalbehaioural di#culties report higher stress leels than those in schools where such di#culties are less prealent. Furthermore( current discipline di#culties ,as measured by the freKuency of use of a range of disciplinary measures/ are associated with higher stress leels. rincipals are also more likely to report feeling stressed where they consider that teachers in their school are less open to new deelopments and challenges.

Principal Job Satisfaction %s with teachers( leels of 0ob satisfaction are high among principals in Irish primary schools. ere we focus on identifying the factors associated with principals being Lery satis>ed with their 0ob. In contrast to teachers( 0ob satisfaction does not ary by gender among principals ,Table )@/. 3ob satisfaction does not ary by age but does ary by the length of time in the school. Satisfaction leels are highest among recently appointed principals( decline after three years but recoer somewhat thereafter. 4hile haing preious e9perience as a school principal reduces stress leels( it is associated with lower leels of 0ob satisfaction.

Teaching principals are much less satis>ed with their 0ob than administratie principals( being less than half as likely to describe themseles as Lery satis>ed. aing better administratie support signi>cantly enhances 0ob satisfaction. 3ob satisfaction does not ary by location or school siHe. oweer( it is in:uenced by school facilities( with lower leels of 0ob satisfaction among principals who describe these facilities as Lpoor or only Lfair. %gain the disciplinary climate of the school emerges as important( with lower leels of 0ob satisfaction among those in schools with more discipline problems. rincipals are also less satis>ed with their 0obs where teachers are seen as less open to new deelopments and where teachers proide less help and support to their colleagues.

10 %ge of school building had no signi>cant e&ect on teacher stress leels so was not included in the models reported. It may be that teachers are a&ected by their immediate classroom conditions while( by the nature of their post( principals are more conscious of school facilities in general.

Table 5% +actors Inuencing Teacher Stress @ -ultile"el ,ogistic Regression -odel: School 1ear )??5)??> Fi9ed part $ersonal c"aracteristics Constant Female ,ContrastB Male/ %ge1groupB +@1+* 5@15* 6@V ,ContrastB 7@17*/ Ao. of years teaching in current schoolB 716 81)@ ))17@ 7)V ,ContrastB ) year/ or&ing conditions Teaching multi1grade class ,ContrastB single year class/ 5 3 Teaching principal ,ContrastB administratie principal/ Degree of control oerB $ear group taught Discipline Sub0ects taught Sc"ool conte't ocationB 2rban Mi9ed ,ContrastB Rural/ LAearly all pupils well1behaed in school LAearly all pupils show respect for teachers arental attendance at general school meetingsB More than half ess than half ,ContrastB Aearly all/ eac"er climate rincipal eryfairly stressed Teachers happier than in other schools ,ContrastB %s or less happy/ Random part School1leel ariance

-odel $

-odel )

-odel 0

-odel 2

-odel /

1@.)<+

[email protected]<) @.7@=

).756 @.)*6

).6+@ @.)*5

).@*@ @.)<<

@.77) @.5)*U @.)6<

@.)8* @.+++U @.@==

@.)*7 @.+=@U @.)+@

@.)++ @.+)) @.)+=

[email protected] [email protected] 1@.++) @.@85

1@.+*8U 1@.)<* [email protected]@8 @.)7@

1@.+*7U [email protected]@< [email protected]+7 @.)++

1@.+87U 1@.))< 1@.)** @.7)7

@.78<

@.768

@.7<
@.+58U

@.6@8U

@.+**U

[email protected] 1@.@*+ 1@.@=@U

[email protected])8U 1@.@<8 1@.@<@U

1@.)<+U 1@.@=+ 1@.@<@U

@.@+5 @.777

1@.@<5 @.@*8

[email protected]*
[email protected]=U [email protected]

@.+6=U @.6@6U

@.+55U @.+=)U

@.+5
@.)==U

@.)66

@.)6*

@.@*5

@.)7@


Table >% +actors Inuencing Teacher Satisfaction 9G*ery SatisHedD; @ -ultile"el ,ogistic Regression -odel: School 1ear )??5)??> -odel $ Fi9ed part $ersonal c"aracteristics Constant Female ,ContrastB Male/ %ge1groupB +@1+* 5@15* 6@V ,ContrastB 7@17*/ Ao. of years teaching in current schoolB 716 81)@ ))17@ 7)V ,ContrastB ) year/ or&ing conditions Teaching multi1grade class ,ContrastB single year class/ 6 3 Teaching principal ,ContrastB administratie principal/ Degree of control oerB $ear group taught Discipline Sub0ects taught Sc"ool conte't arge school ,5@@ pupils/ ContrastB all other school siHes ocationB 2rban Mi9ed ,ContrastB Rural/ LAearly all pupils well1behaed in school LAearly all pupils show respect for teachers arental attendance at general school meetingsB More than half ess than half ,ContrastB Aearly all/ eac"er climate rincipal ery satis>ed Teachers happier than in other schools ,ContrastB %s or less happy/ Random part School1leel ariance

@.+65

-odel )

-odel 0

-odel 2

-odel /

@.5)) @.+76U

1).+6) @.++@U

17.@+8 @.+6=U

17.7)6 @.56)U

@.@6+ [email protected]) 1@.@5*

@.@*+ 1@.)<8 1@.@@)

@.@*= 1@.)*+ @.@77

@.)5= 1@.)*) 1@.@+5

[email protected]+8 [email protected]=8U [email protected]=
1@.+@)U [email protected]<@U [email protected] [email protected]

[email protected])8U 1@.=+*U 1@.=5*U [email protected]=U

[email protected]*< 1@.=6@U [email protected]<8U [email protected]))U

1@.@=*

@.@6*

@.@)+

1@.+75U

1@.+6@U

[email protected]=6

@.7=5U @.))6U @.@*@U

@.7)+U @.)7=U @.)@6U

@.)<
@.)@6

@.@<@

@.+))U @.)7<

@.+@5U @.@8)

@.<67U @.+)@U

@.<<5U @.78*

1@.)*+ [email protected]=
1@.@*7 1@.)8)

@.7+8U @.<5*U

@.7@)U

@.7)+U

@.775U

@.)+8

@.)+<


Table 3% +actors Inuencing Principal Stress @ Single8,e"el ,ogistic Regression -odel: School 1ear )??5)??>

3 7

$ersonal c"aracteristics Constant Female ,ContrastB Male/ %ge1groupB 5@15* 6@V ,ContrastB 5@/ Ao. of years principal in current schoolB +18 81)@ )@1)6 )8V ,ContrastB + years/ reious e9perience as principal or&ing conditions Teaching principal ,ContrastB administratie principal/ erceied adeKuacy of administratie support Sc"ool conte't ocationB 2rban Mi9ed ,ContrastB Rural/ %ge of school buildingB Gery old Gery new ,ContrastB all others/ Incidence of emotionalbehaioural di#culties among pupil intake high ,76?/ FreKuency of use of disciplinary measures eac"er climate Teacher less open to new deelopments ,ContrastB nearly all are open/ Source: Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

-odel $

-odel )

-odel 0

-odel 2

@.<)@ 1@.@)=

).56= 1@.@5=

@.7=7 1@.@==

1@.)@+ 1@.@)=

@.+8+ @.+@+

@.678U @.586W

@.5*5W @.5=@W

@.568W @.5))

@.55)W [email protected] 1@.@)6 1@.)<8

@.+75 1@.=@+UU 1@.)57 1@.+85

@.+58 [email protected]=@UU 1@.@55 [email protected]=5

@.+6+ [email protected]*=UU @.@5< 1@.)57

[email protected]+7UUU

[email protected]*U

[email protected])
[email protected]*@UU

@.7@8

@.7=@

@.+<
1@.+86UUU

1@.+*5UUU

1@.+78UUU

@.@66 [email protected]=5

@.@+@ [email protected])

).)*8UU @.578U

).@)8U @.+=7

@.57@W @.6@
@.5+@W @.6)6UU @.*5*UUU

Table $?% +actors Inuencing Principal Satisfaction 9*ery SatisHed; @ Single8,e"el ,ogistic Regression -odel: School 1ear )??5)??>

3 8

$ersonal c"aracteristics Constant Female ,ContrastB Male/ %ge1groupB 5@15* 6@V ,ContrastB 5@/ Ao. of years principal in current schoolB +18 81)@ )@1)6 )8V ,ContrastB + years/ reious e9perience as principal or&ing conditions Teaching principal ,ContrastB administratie principal/ erceied adeKuacy of administratie support Sc"ool conte't ocationB 2rban Mi9ed ,ContrastB Rural/ erceied adeKuacy of school facilities

FreKuency of use of disciplinary measures eac"er climate Teachers less open to new deelopments ,ContrastB nearly all are open/ Teachers less collegial ,ContrastB nearly all o&er support to colleagues/ SourceB Growing Up in Ireland study( * year cohort.

-odel $

-odel )

-odel 0

-odel 2

@.)=* @.@*)

1@.)7@ @.)8)

[email protected])8 @.)+7

@.5=6 @.@*7

@.@)6 @.6=5U

[email protected])5 @.78<

[email protected])5 @.)8+

[email protected])7 @.)75

1).)=7UUU 1@.=8)UUU 1@.=7
1).@@5UUU [email protected] [email protected]==U 1@.)<*

1@.*<
1@.*8@UUU 1@.=77UU [email protected]*5U [email protected]+)

[email protected]*+W

[email protected]

[email protected])=U

[email protected]**

[email protected]*UU

[email protected]

1@.<5*UUU

@.75)UU

@.7))U

[email protected]=7 1@.)@6 @.55*UU 1@.+65U

@.)7)

1@.+86 1@.)*< @.565UU 1@.+*6U

1@.<7+UUU 1).@*
Conclusions and Implications for olicy and ractice 6 03

Chapter / Conclusions and Implications for Policy and Practice /$ +I&'I&.S O+ T#E ST('1 The associations between 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress hae long been established by international research. % considerable amount of literature has emerged in the conte9t of schools and( in particular( teachers. oweer( these processes hae not been inestigated comprehensiely in the conte9t of Irish primary schools in recent years. In iew of ongoing changes in schools and curricula as well as the working conditions of teachers( identifying factors in:uencing 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress is timely as the ability to cope with change has become increasingly important for teachers and principals ,;yriacou( 7@@)/. 3ob satisfaction can be an important policy issue since it is closely associated with teachers work motiation and performance( factors that ultimately a&ect student learning ,"stro&( )**7/. In addition( teacher stress has both economic and personal implications J it can lead to stress1related employee absenteeism and may also result in teacher burnout and a&ect pupil outcomes ,;yriacou( )*<=/. %cknowledging the importance of this issue( many studies hae sought to identify the determinants of teacher stress. %s discussed in section two of this report( these can be personal ,gender( age( e9perience/( school1 leel ,student issues( administrationsta& issues( lack of autonomy/ or system1leel factors ,salary and recognition of teaching profession/. Student behaiour problems hae generally been identi>ed as the greatest source of stress for both primary and secondary teachers ,Oorg et al.( )**)' Chaplain( )**6/. rincipals too play a critical part in creating and sustaining high performing schools ,acey( 7@@+/. %ccording to the author( the areas of strongest dissatisfaction among school principals include the e&ect of the 0ob on their personal life( superision of work( adeKuacy of administratie support and intensity of work. These >ndings suggest that teacher and principal 0ob satisfaction and stress may result from a combination of factors in the work conte9t.

school teachers and principals are satis>ed with their 0obs. oweer( international research has shown that the relationship between 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress in schools can be comple9B Oorg and FalHon ,)*<*/ showed that while many Maltese teachers rated their 0obs as ery stressful( a ma0ority were still satis>ed with teaching. In the same ein( the analysis presented in this study shows that while generally satis>ed with their 0obs( many teachers and principals felt

2? 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

stressed. %dditional analysis reealed that compared to teachers( primary school principals were more likely to e9perience 0ob1 related stress.

International studies hae identi>ed arious micro ,teacher background/ and meso ,school conte9t/ leel factors that impact on 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress. Some international studies show that gender is signi>cantly correlated with 0ob satisfaction and stress ,see Oishay( )**8' Chaplain( )**6/. In this study( we found that while there were no gender di&erences in teacher stress leels( female teachers had higher 0ob satisfaction leels than their male counterparts. In contrast to teachers( 0ob satisfaction did not ary by gender among principals but like teachers( gender did not seem to impact on occupational stress. In addition to gender( age and length of serice hae also been found to impact on 0ob satisfaction and stress. erie and Oaker ,)**=/ in the 2S found that younger and less e9perienced teachers had higher leels of satisfaction than older and more e9perienced colleagues. In this study we found that teacher 0ob satisfaction did not ary by age per se but( rather( by years of serice in the current school. Satisfaction leels were higher among recently Kuali>ed teachers but declined after a couple of years( to rise again later in the career. In the case of principals( no link between 0ob satisfaction and age was found. %s with teachers( principal 0ob satisfaction aried by the length of time in the school' satisfaction leels were highest among recently appointed principals and tended to :uctuate thereafter. Interestingly( we found that while haing preious e9perience as a school principal reduced stress leels( it is associated with lower leels of 0ob satisfaction. For teachers( being in their forties seemed to hae an impact on stress( perhaps re:ecting issues around work1life balance. ength of teaching e9perience seemed to hae some impact with a reduction of stress leels after the initial ad0ustment period( but a rise thereafter.

%nother set of factors that hae been found to impact on 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress relate to the school( teacher and pupilparent domains. 4hile some international studies indicate that there are signi>cant di&erences in the oerall 0ob satisfaction scores of teachers by type of school ,publicpriate( etc./( data on the type of primary school was not aailable in this study.)) Some studies hae found that school location is a predictor of stress in some cases ,see %bel and Sewell( )***( for 2S conte9t/( although the sources of stress seemed to di&er. In

teacher or principal stress leels in schools sering urban( rural or mi9ed catchment areas. There is now a siHeable literature considering the implications of social density ,school and class siHe/. The analysis of teacher and principal data for this study showed that school and class siHe did not hae a straightforward impact on ))

It is worth noting that only one per cent of primary school pupils attend priate schools so this is not an important source of ariation in the Irish conte9t.

Conclusions and Implications for olicy and ractice 6 2$

teacher stress leels. 4hat appeared to matter was the composition of the student body. Seeral e9isting studies hae discussed the importance of Kuality of student1teacher interaction on teacher 0ob satisfaction and stress ,see Oorg et al.( )**)' %bel  Sewell( )***/.Teachers in this study were found to be more satis>ed with their 0ob where pupils are well1behaed and where parents are more inoled in the life of the school. These >ndings are in line with T%IS results for second1leel schools which showed that classroom climate is associated with indiidual teachers 0ob Kuality ,p. )77/. %s with teachers( the composition and climate of the school was an important drier of principal stress leels and 0ob satisfaction.

Aot surprisingly( workplace conditions hae been found to relate to 0ob satisfaction and stress ,see Ma and MacMillan( )***/. In this study we found that principals with teaching responsibilities reported lower leels of 0ob satisfaction and higher leels of stress( consistent with earlier studies in the Irish conte9t. This pattern is likely to re:ect di#culties inoled in balancing the two roles. The dual role of some principals seemed to hae an impact on their teachers' haing a teaching rather than an administratie principal was associated with higher stress leels among classroom teachers. In keeping with international research( adeKuate sta& resources enhanced principal 0ob satisfaction( while poor administratie support was associated with higher stress leels among principals. Aot surprisingly( principals who found school facilities wanting e9perienced lesser 0ob satisfaction.

Teachers teaching multi1grade classes had somewhat higher stress leels than those teaching single1grade classes. Teacher autonomy( that is( haing a sense of control oer their day1to1day teaching( particularly in deciding which year group they teach( is found to enhance 0ob satisfaction and reduce stress. The >ndings of this study indicate that a number of micro and meso leel ariables impact on 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress in Irish primary schools. E9isting research ,see ;yriacou( 7@@)/ has identi>ed a number of ways to preent low leels of satisfaction and high occupational stress. These include creating a positie and supportie school climateethos( an e&ectie approach to management( good communication and sense of collegiality among sta&( whole school policies in place on a number of issues( and adeKuate school facilities and resources. Findings from this study indicate the importance of these factors

in the Irish conte9t( pointing to potential ways to improe leels of 0ob satisfaction and reduce occupational stress leels among teachers and principals' the implications of the study >ndings for policy and practice are considered in the ne9t section.

2) 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

/) I-P,ICATIO&S +OR PO,IC1 A&' PRACTICE The preious section summarised the results of this study( placing them in the conte9t of international research. This section e9plores the implications of the study >ndings for policy and practice.

School Climate School climate was found to hae a strong impact on teacher and principal 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress. In particular( the nature of the student intake ,notably( behaiour di#culties among pupils/ was seen to pose challenges for teachers as well as principals. This pattern points to the need to proide teachers with behaiour management skills through initial and continuing teacher education and to proide principals with appropriate professional deelopment support in fostering a whole1school approach to dealing with pupil misbehaiour. reious research has shown that the Kuality of relations in the school has a signi>cant impact on a range of student outcomes( including engagement( retention and performance ,see Smyth et al.( 7@@=/. This study highlights the importance of day1to1day interaction among the school partners J teachers( pupils( parents J in shaping teachers own e9periences. romoting a positie school climate should therefore be considered a fundamental part of school deelopment planning.

Koring Conditions 3ob satisfaction and occupational stress were also associated with working conditions in the school in terms of 0ob characteristics and adeKuate resources and facilities. %t present( multi1grade classes are Kuite prealent in Irish primary schools but little is known about their e&ect on pupils or teachers. This study points to somewhat higher teacher stress leels in multi1grade conte9ts( highlighting the need to support teachers through professional deelopment in engaging with the comple9ities inoled. In addition( combining teaching with school leadership poses considerable challenges not only for principals but also for classroom teachers in their school( as demonstrated in preious sections of this study. This points to the need for professional deelopment support for school principals but perhaps suggests more fundamental concerns about the long1term iability of this dual role.

haing adeKuate administratie support was crucial in facilitating the principals role. In addition( operating a school in an unsuitable building or one with poor facilities increases the challenges for school leaders( indicating the importance of school design in fostering positie outcomes ,see Darmody( Smyth and Doherty 7@)@/. "n the basis of this study( it is

Conclusions and Implications for olicy and ractice 6 20

recommended that continued attention should be gien to the design of new school buildings and retrospectie refurbishment of older ones. Finally( gien the declining numbers of men in primary teaching( the fact that male teachers are somewhat less satis>ed than female teachers with their 0obs is a matter for concern and merits further inestigation.

In conclusion( this study uses Growing Up in Ireland data to e9plore the factors in:uencing 0ob satisfaction and occupational stress among teachers and principals in Irish primary schools. The study has some limitations. The sample of classroom teachers is con>ned to those teaching * year old children. This has some adantages in proiding a clearer picture of the impact of school and classroom conditions( controlling for pupil age1group. It should be recognised( howeer( that the e9periences of other teachers( most likely those teaching ery young children( may di&er from those of the group considered here. Furthermore( the Growing Up in Ireland study was not designed to measure teacher satisfaction or stress. %s a result( there are some factors which cannot be considered in this study and further research( for e9ample using in1depth interiews with principals and teachers( could shed additional light on the comple9ities of the processes shaping work e9periences. These limitations should not detract from the alue of the study. This is the >rst systematic analysis of the indiidual( classroom and school factors shaping 0ob satisfaction and stress among teachers and principals across ery di&erent primary school settings. The study >ndings proide an important eidence base which can inform policy in order to enhance the working conditions of principals and teachers.

22 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

References %bel( M. .  Sewell( 3. ,)***/( Stress and burnout in rural and urban secondary school teachers( "e ournal o* Educational +esearc"( *7( 6( 7<=17*+. Oishay( %. ,)**8/( Teacher motiation and 0ob satisfactionB a study employing the e9perience sampling method( ournal o* Undergraduate Sciences +( )5=1)65. Oorg( M. !.  FalHon( 3. M. ,)*<*/( Stress and 0ob satisfaction among primary school teachers in Malta( Educational +e,iew ( 5)( + ( 7=) J 7=*. Oorg( M. !.( Riding( R. 3.  FalHon( 3. M. ,)**)/( Stress in teachingB a study of occupational stress and its determinants( 0ob satisfaction and career commitment among primary schoolteachers( Educational $syc"ology ( ))( )( 6*1=6. Carroll( C. ,)**6/( ob satis*action: a comparison o* *ull time teac"ing and non teac"ing principals in a cross section o* sc"ools in IN- .istrict /I ( 2npublished !raduate Diploma in Educational Management( 2niersity of imerick. Carroll( C. ,)**8/( ob stress and burnout: a comparati,e study o* a sample o* teac"ing and non0teac"ing administrati,e principals( 2npublished MEd thesis in Educational Management( 2niersity of imerick. Chaplain( R. ,)**6/( Stress and 0ob satisfactionB a study of English primary school teachers( Educational $syc"ology ( )6( 5( 5=+ J 5<*. Crossman( %.  arris( . ,7@@8/( 3ob satisfaction of secondary school teachers( Educational 1anagement 2dministration 3eaders"ip ( +5( )( 7*158. Darboe( ;. ,7@@+/( 2n empirical study o* t"e social correlates o* 4ob satis*action among plant science graduates o* a 1idwestern Uni,ersity ( anham( MDB 2niersity ress of %merica. Darmody( M.( Smyth( E. and Doherty( C. ,7@)@/( .esigning primary sc"ools *or t"e *uture( ESRI Research series Ao. )8( DublinB ESRI. Department of Education and Skills ,7@)@/( Key statistics( aailable online atB www.education.ie Drudy( S.( Martin( M.( "XFlynn( 3.  4oods( M. ,7@@6/( 1en in t"e classroom: male teac"ers in today5s primary sc"ools ( ondonB RoutledgeFalmer. De Aobile( 3. 3.  McCormick( 3. ,7@@6/( ob satis*action and occupational stress in 6at"olic primary sc"ools( a paper presented at the %nnual Conference of the %ustralian %ssociation for Research in Education( Sydney( Aoember 7=thJ December )st( 7@@6( aailable online atB http%!!!aareeduau?/papden?/)?0pdf Dick( R.  4agner( 2. ,7@@)/( Stress and strain in teachingB a structural eKuation approach( 7ritis" ournal o* Educational $syc"ology ( =)( 7( 75+176*. !ri#th( 3.( Steptoe( %.  Cropley( M. ,)***/( %n inestigation of coping strategies associated with 0ob stress in teachers( 7ritis" ournal o* Educational $syc"ology ( 8*( 5( 6)=16+). oppock( R. ,)*+6/( ob Satis*action( arperB Aew $ork.

;itching( ;. ,7@@*/( Teachers negatie e9periences and e9pressions of emotionB being true to yourself or keeping you in your placeN Iris" Educational Studies ( 7<( 7( )5)1)65. ;itching( ;.( Morgan( M.(  "eary( M. ,7@@*/( Its the little thingsB E9ploring the importance of commonplace eents for early1 career teachers motiation( Teachers and eac"ing: "eory and $ractice( )6( 5+16<

References 6 2/

;lecker( O. M.  oadman( 4. E.( ,)***/( Male elementary school teachers ratings of 0ob satisfaction by years of teaching e9perience( Education( ))*( +( 6@516)+. ;yriacou( C. ,)*<=/( Teacher stress and burnoutB %n international reiew. Educational +esearc"( 7*( )581)67. ;yriacou( C. ,7@@)/( Teacher stressB directions for future research( Educational +e,iew( 6+( )( 7=1+6. ;yriacou( S.  Chien( .1$. ,7@@5/( Teacher stress in Taiwanese primary schools( ournal o* Educational En8uiry ( 6( 7( <81)@5. ;yriacou( S.( ;unc( R.( Stephens( .(  ultgren( %. ,7@@+/( Student teachers e9pectations of teaching as a career in England and Aorway( Educational +e,iew( 66( 766178+. ;yriacou( C.(  Sutcli&e( 3. ,)*=
aughlin( %. ,)*<5/( Teacher stress in an %ustralian settingB The role of biographical mediators( Educational Studies( )@( )( =1 77. ee( M. ,7@@8/( 4hat makes a di&erence between two schoolsN Teacher 0ob satisfaction and educational outcomes( International Education ournal( =( 6( 857186@. Ma( Z.  MacMillan( R. O. ,)***/( In:uences of workplace conditions on teachers 0ob satisfaction( ournal o* Educational +esearc"( *+( )( +*15=. Manthei( R.  !ilmore( %. ,)**8/( Teacher stress in intermediate schools. Educational +esearc"( +<( )( +1)*. Morgan( M.  ;itching( ;. ,7@@=/( Teaching in disadantaged schoolsB 3ob satisfaction of beginning teachers. In !illigan( %..(  Downes( . ,Eds/( Educational .isad,antage in Ireland . ,pp. +8=1+=
Department of Education( aailable online atB http%ncesedgo"pubs353525$pdf Schmidt( S. ,)***/( The relationship between satisfaction with on1the10ob training and oerall 0ob satisfaction( aailable onlineB

2< 6 3ob Satisfaction and "ccupational Stress

httpsBscholarworks.iupui.edubitstreamhandle)<@67=8Sch midt.pdfNse Kuence) Shiel( !.( erkins( R.(  !illeece( . ,7@@*/( 23IS summary report *or Ireland. %ailable online atB httpBwww.ubuntu.iedocuments talisYsummaryYreport7@@*.pdf

Skaalik( E.M.  Skaalik( S. ,7@@*/( Does school conte9t matterN Relationship with teacher burnout and 0ob1satisfaction( eac"ing and eac"er Education ( 76( +( 6)<1675. Smith( M.  Oourke( S. ,7@@7/( Teacher stressB e9amining a model based on conte9t( workload and satisfaction( eac"ing and eac"er Education( <( )( +)158. Smyth( E.( Dunne( %.( Darmody( M.(  McCoy( S. ,7@@=/( Gearing up *or t"e e'am; "e e'periences o* unior 6erti
%ppendi9 6 25

Appendi7

GROW!G "# ! RE$%!& ST('1 L(ESTIO&&AIRES +OR TEAC#ERS A&' PRI&CIPA,S The Economic and Social Research Institute Whitaker Square Sir ohn Rogerson!s "uay Dublin $ %h& '()*+, $''' -a. '()*+, $(''

University of Dublin Trinity College College #reen Dublin $

"UESTI/001IRES -/R W12E ( /- T3E 0I0E)4E1R C/3/RT /-

#R/WI0# U% I0 IRE510D

614 $'('

Teacher)/n)Self "uestionnaire The Economic and Social Research Institute Whitaker Square Sir ohn Rogerson!s "uay Dublin $ %h& '()*+, $''' -a. '()*+, $(''

University of Dublin

Growing Up in Ireland – the national longitudinal study STRICT LY CO!I" #TI$L T#$C#R&O&S#L! 'U#STIO$IR# S(hool I"

S(hool Roll o)

Study Child*s I" within S(hool Tea(her*s I" within S(hool Growing Up in Ireland i a (aor e &over(et t#$y o '*il$re. *e ,#r,oe o) t*e t#$y i to i(,rove o#r #$erta$i& o) all a,e't o) '*il$re a$ t*eir $evelo,(et. t ill ea(ie *o '*il$re $evelo, over ti(e a$ i$eti)y *i'* )a'tor a))e't a '*il$? $evelo,(et a$ (ae )or a *ealt*y a$ *a,,y '*il$*oo$ or )or a le *a,,y oe. *e re#lt o) t*e t#$y ill !e #e$ !y &over(et to $evelo, ,oli'ie a$ itervetio to #,,ort '*il$re a$ t*eir )a(ilie i t*e )#t#re. *e De,art(et o) @ealt*  *il$re i )#$i& t*e t#$y t*ro#&* t*e B))i'e o) t*e iiter )or *il$re B i ao'iatio it* t*e De,art(et o) o'ial  Fa(ily A))air a$ t*e etral tatiti' B))i'e. *e De,art(et o) /$#'atio a$ 'ie'e i re,reete$ o t*e teeri& :ro#, *i'* overee t*e t#$y. A &ro#, o) reear'*er le$ !y t*e /'oo(i'  o'ial eear'* tit#te / a$ *e *il$re? eear'* etre at riity olle&e D#!li

Roll u+,er of Study Child- ____ Date: _______day______ mth

i 'arryi& o#t t*e t#$y. $ll infor+ation provided will ,e treated in the stri(test (onfiden(e) o one. other than the Study Tea+. will see the infor+ation you (o+plete a,out the (hild) This infor+ation will not ,e seen ,y the (hild or ,y his / her parents / guardians) A i)or(atio *eet o#tlii& i (ore $etail t*e o!e'tive o) t*e t#$y a''o(,aie t*i ;#etioaire. 0) $re you +ale or fe+ale1

ale

..........

1

Fe(ale

.........

2

2) To whi(h age group do you ,elong1 20 - 29 yr .....

30 - 39 yr..

1

2

3. ow +any years have you ,een tea(hing at pri+ary s(hool level1 .............._____ years

4. ow long have you ,een tea(hing in this s(hool1 ................. CCCCC year 3) 4hi(h of the following 5ualifi(ations do you hold1 Please tick all that apply E

1 2 3

A ,ri(ary '*ool tea'*i& 4 $i,lo(a or 'erti)i'ate or ot*er 5 ,ri(ary '*ool ;#ali)i'atio....... 6 A ,ri(ary $e&ree i e$#'atio 7 "./$......................................... 8 .......................................... 9 A ,ri(ary $e&ree i aot*er #!e't........................................ ............................................. A ,ot&ra$#ate $i,lo(a i e$#'atio ................................... ................................................ A ;#ali)i'atio i leari& #,,ort ,e'ial e$#'atio or reo#r'e tea'*i&......................... A *i&*er $e&ree i e$#'atio *D ater et'............................................. .................... A *i&*er $e&ree i aot*er #!e't *D ater et'............................................. ........... No ;#ali)i'atio ............................... ................................................... ................................... Bt*er ,leae ,e'i)yE CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCC

40 - 49 yr .

3

50 - 59 yr .

4

60

6) 4ithin your regular (lassroo+. how +any (hildren are there in ea(h year group1 If you do not tea(h a parti(ular year group. write 7none* in the total row)

Class

8unior Senior Infants Infants u+,er of pupils

!irst Class

Se(ond Class

Third Class

!ourth Class

!ifth Class

9oys Girls Total B= I tea(h a parti(ular su,:e(t;s< and do not have a regular (lassroo+ ...........................

55

=a) "id you do any professional training. in(luding in&servi(e training. in the last 02 +onths1 .........Ge

1

No

=,) ow +any days training did you do1

..........

2

_______________ days

>) In your opinion. how +any (hildren in your (lassroo+ ;in(luding the Study Child if relevant< have any of the following long&ter+ pro,le+s1 o(e '*il$re (ay !elo& to (ore t*a oe 'ate&ory a. A li(ite$ o6le$&e o) t*e (ai la&#a&e o) itr#'tio .................................

CCCCCC '*il$re

!. A e(otioal or !e*avio#ral ,ro!le( ..............................................................

CCCCCC '*il$re

'. A leari&  itelle't#al $ia!ility ......................................................................

CCCCCC '*il$re

$. A ,*yi'al  eory $ia!ility ...........................................................................

CCCCCC '*il$re

?) In a typi(al wee@. would you have an y Spe(ial eeds $ssistants wor@ing with you in the Study Child*s (lassroo+1 Ge......... No .......... 2 1

10.!or approAi+ately how +any hours per wee@1 - ______________ hours 7er 8eek 11. $pproAi+ately how +any hours per wee@ does the Study Child*s (lass spend on ea(h of the following su,:e(ts. within nor+al s(hool hours1 Your ,est esti+ate is fine) If the (lass does not re(eive instru(tion in a su,:e(t. please write 7none*) Su,:e(t /&li* :aeil&e at* @itory :eo&ra,*y 'ie'e eli&io #i'

o) of hours per wee@ *r *r *r *r *r *r *r *r

Su,:e(t o'ial eroal @ealt* /$#'atio @/ *yi'al /$#'atio Dra(a Vi#al Art Bt*er 1 ,e'i)y Bt*er 2 ,e'i)y Bt*er 3 ,e'i)y Bt*er 4 ,e'i)y

o) of hours per wee@ *r *r *r *r *r *r *r *r

02) 9elow we have a nu+,er of state+ents a,out tea(hing) Blease indi(ate how fre5uently the following things happen in the Study Child*s (lass ever or al+ost never

#,il 'o,y ote )ro( t*e !oar$ i 'la #,il or i ,air #,il or i$ivi$#ally i 'la #i& t*eir tet!oo or or*eet @o(eor i '*e'e$ i 'la @o(eor i tae #, )or 'orre'tio #,il or i &ro#, i 'la Go# a ,#,il ;#etio i 'la #,il a yo# ;#etio i 'la #,il a ea'* ot*er ;#etio i 'la Go# rea$ alo#$ to ,#,il #,il #&&et #!e't or to,i' to !e 'overe$ i 'la #,il are e'o#ra&e$ to )i$ t*i& o#t )or t*e(elve Go# #e vi$eo  DVD or a#$iota,e  D i 'la Go# #e ,lay to )a'ilitate ,#,il leari& #,il #e 'o(,#ter )a'ilitie i 'la Go# ,rovi$e $i))eretiate$ a'tivitie a a,,ro,riate to ,#,il #,il &et t*e o,,ort#ity to e&a&e i *a$-o a'tivitie *e ,#,il? e,erie'e a$ t*eir eviro(et i t*e tar ti& ,oit )or leari& Go# tea'* ,#,il a a *ole 'la

So+e days

ost days

#very day

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

0Da) ow often do the (hildren in the Study Child*s (lass use a (o+puter;s< in the s(hool1 Never

B'e a (ot* or le

1

-6o or t*ree ti(e a (ot*

2

B'e or t6i'e a 6ee

3

*ree or )o#r ti(e a ee

4

Daily

5

0D,) "o the (hildren in the Study Child*s (lass have use of a (o+puter in their (lassroo+1 Ge ............

1

No ..............

2

0E) "o the (hildren in the Study Child*s (lass use a (o+puter to a((ess t he Internet1 Ge ............

1

No ..............

2

03) On average. how +any nights per wee@ do you set ho+ewor@ for the (hildren in the Study Child*s (lass1 CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCi&*t

16. On a typi(al evening during the wee@. how +u(h ti+e do you eApe(t (hildren in the Study Child*s (lass to spend on ho+ewor@1 1

Noe............................................................... 15 (i or le.H .......................................... 16-30 (i .....................................................

2 3

3 ore t*a 1*r 30 1 (iHHHH................. 1 .....

e. Are ell !e*ave$ i t*e ,lay&ro#$'*ool yar$ 0=a) ow often would you assess your pupil*s progress usingF

20.In

ea'*er o!ervatio ea'*er-$ei&e$ ta a$ tet or a(,le ,ort)olio or ,roe't ea'*er? ;#etio

general. what proporti on of parents attend

1) pa

re nt te a( he Ge ............ r + s(hool over the following areasF 0>) ow +u(h (ontrol do you feel you have in your ee tin gs a. ele'ti& #!e't to !e ta#&*t an !. $e'i$i& a!o#t t*e 'otet o) #!9e't to !e ta#&*t d '. $e'i$i& a!o#t tea'*i& te'*i;#e... .......................... ot $. '*ooi& tet!oo a$ ot*er leari& (aterial2) ......... e. $i'i,lii& '*il$re............................ ..........................he r ). ele'ti& t*e year &ro#, yo# tea'*..... ..........................+ ee tin 0?) 9elow we have list of gs state+ents a,out pupils) Blease or ga indi(ate if you feel ea(h is true of ni nearly all. +ore than half. less than se half. or only a few pupils in the d s(hool) ,y th e Bupils. in generalF s( a. /oy !ei& at '*ool ho !. Are ell-!e*ave$ i 'la ol '. *o re,e't )or t*eir tea'*er 1 $. Are rear$i& to or it* 0=,) "o you use the results of this assess+ent in the planning of your tea(hing1

6

Nearly All a) Barent&tea(her +eetings ,) Other +eetings organised ,y the s(hool

ore t*a *al)

+e t*a *al)

Bly a )e

Not A,,li'a!le

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

20) 4hat proportion of parents would approa(h you infor+ally to dis(uss their (hild*s progress1 Nearly All

ore t*a *al) 1

2

+e t*a *al)

Bly a )e6

3

4

22) Co+pared with other Bri+ary S(hools of your sie would you say that . in general. the environ+ent in your s(hool is happier. as happy or less happy for ;a< pupils and ;,< tea(hers as in other Bri+ary S(hools1 @a,,ier

A *a,,y

+e *a,,y

a. #,il

1..............................

2 ......................................................

3

!. -ea'*er ....................................

1..............................

2 ......................................................

3

2D)In general ter+s ;a< how stressed do you feel ,y your :o, and ;,< how sat isfied do you feel with your :o,1 Very

Not Very

Fairly

Not At All

a. @o stressed $o yo# )eel !y yo#r o!

1

2 .....................

3 ..........................

4

!. @o6 satisfied $o yo# )eel 6it* yo#r 9o! .......

1 ................. 2 .....................

3 ..........................

4

.................

Than@ you very +u(h for having (o+pleted this part of Growing Up In Ireland 4e would now li@e you to (o+plete a 5uestionnaire ;one of the green ones< in respe(t of ea(h Study Child who has ,een sele(ted fro+ your (lass;es< for in(lusion in the pro:e(t

%rinci7al!s "uestionnaire The Economic and Social Research Institute Whitaker Square Sir ohn Rogerson!s "uay Dublin $ %h& '()*+, $''' -a. '()*+, $''(

Growing Up in Ireland – the national longitudinal study of children S T R I C T L Y C O  ! I " #  T I $ L BR

I CI B$ L* S ' U# ST IO  $I R# S(hool I"

S(hool Roll o)

Roll u+,er of Study Child-

Study Child*s I" within S(hool Tea(her*s I" within S(hool

Date: _______day______ mth

Growing Up in Ireland i a (aor e &over(et t#$y o '*il$re. *e ,#r,oe o) t*e t#$y i to i(,rove o#r #$erta$i& o) all a,e't o) '*il$re a$ t*eir $evelo,(et. t ill ea(ie *o '*il$re $evelo, over ti(e a$ i$eti)y *i'* )a'tor a))e't a '*il$? $evelo,(et a$ (ae )or a *ealt*y a$ *a,,y '*il$*oo$ or )or a le *a,,y oe. *e re#lt o) t*e t#$y ill !e #e$ !y &over(et to $evelo, ,oli'ie a$ itervetio to #,,ort '*il$re a$ t*eir )a(ilie i t*e )#t#re. *e De,art(et o) @ealt*  *il$re i )#$i& t*e t#$y t*ro#&* t*e B))i'e o) t*e iiter )or *il$re B i ao'iatio it* t*e De,art(et o) o'ial  Fa(ily A))air a$ t*e etral tatiti' B))i'e. *e De,art(et o) /$#'atio a$ 'ie'e i re,reete$ o t*e teeri& :ro#, *i'* overee t*e t#$y. A &ro#, o) reear'*er le$ !y t*e /'oo(i'  o'ial eear'* tit#te / a$ *e *il$re? eear'* etre at riity olle&e D#!li i 'arryi& o#t t*e t#$y. Go#r '*ool i oe o) t*oe ra$o(ly ele'te$ to ,arti'i,ate i t*e t#$y. $ll infor+ation provided will ,e treated in the stri(test (onfiden(e) A i)or(atio *eet o#tlii& i (ore $etail t*e o!e'tive o) t*e t#$y a''o(,aie t*i ;#etioaire. 0) $re you +ale or fe+ale1

ale ...........

1

Fe(ale

.....

2

40 - 49 yr .

3

2) To whi(h age group do you ,elong1 20 - 29 yr .....

1

30 - 39 yr..

2

D) !or how +any years have you ,een Brin(ipalF

50 - 59 yr .

4

60

;a< in this s(hool1

............................

CCCCCCCyear

;,< in other Bri+ary S(hools

E) ow +any ,oys and how +any girls are enrolled in the s(hool1 "oy CCCCCCCCCC

:irl CCCCCCCCCC

otal #,il CCCCC

3) In addition to your duties as Brin(ipal. do you have a tea(hing (lass assigned to you1 Ge ...... ...... . 1 No. ...... .... 2

6) ow +any full-time and part-time tea(hers wor@ in this s(hool1 Blease indi(ate how +any are +ale and how +any are fe+ale) Teachers ale Fe(ale otal

Full-time

=) #A(luding yourself. how +any full- time and part-time ad+inistrative staff wor@ in your s(hool1 !ull&ti+e ad+in) staff --------------- Bart&ti+e ad+in) staff--------------- ) oe ,leae rite oe. Do ot leave !laE >) $pproAi+ately how +any staff does your s(hool (urrently have in the following (apa(ities1 Blease indi(ate the nu+,er e+ployed on a full&ti+e and part&ti+e ,asis) F#ll-ti(e ti(e +eari& #,,ort  reo#r'e tea'*er +a&#a&e #,,ort tea'*er ,e'ial ee$ aitat Bt*er tea'*i& aitat

art-

?) ow +any roo+s ;in(luding prefa,s et()< are used as (lassroo+s in the s(hool1 CCCCCC 'laroo( 0H) Of these. how +any porta,le (lassroo+s ;prefa,s< are there in the s(hool1

CCCCCC ,orta!le 'laroo(

00) ow +any (lasses ;a(ross all year&groups< are there in t he s(hool1

CCCCCC 'lae

02) $pproAi+ately how +any pupils is the s(hool designed for1 ................ ------ '*il$re 0D) In whi(h year was the s(hool ,uilt1 ........................................................... GearCCCCCCCCCC

14. Co+pared to other Bri+ary S(hools in the (ountry how ade5uate to the needs of the s(hool and the pupils are the s(hool*s resour(es in ea(h of the following areas1 Fair oor a. N#(!er o) tea'*er ................................................ 1..................... 2 .......................... !. N#(!er o) 'laroo(............................................ 1..................... 2 .......................... '. "oo a$ or*eet............................................ 1..................... 2 .......................... $. o(,#ti& )a'ilitie................................................. 1..................... 2 .......................... e. Art a$ 'ra)t )a'ilitie........................................... 1..................... 2 .......................... ). ,ort )a'ilitie........................................................ 1..................... 2 .......................... &. #i' )a'ilitie......................................................... 1..................... 2 .......................... *. lay&ro#$.............................................................. 1..................... 2 .......................... i. at*e(ati' reo#r'e  )a'ilitie ........................... 1..................... 2 .......................... . +i!rary  (e$ia 'etre .......... .............. ............. ........ 1..................... 2 .......................... . ta)) roo(................................................................ 1..................... 2 .......................... l. oilet )a'ilitie.......................................................... 1..................... 2 .......................... (. +eari& #,,ort ,roviio..................................... 1..................... 2 .......................... . A)ter-'*ool )a'ilitie e.&. *o(eor 'l#! ......... 1..................... 2 .......................... o. A$(iitrative #,,ort ............................................ 1..................... 2 .......................... ,. o$itio o) t*e '*ool !#il$i& 'laroo( et'.... 1..................... 2 .......................... ;. Fa'ilitie )or '*il$re it* $ia!ilitie ..................... 03) "oes the s(hool provide a< a 7,rea@fast (lu,*

1.....................

1

Ge every $ay.....

,< free s(hool +eals at lun(hti+e Ge every $ay.....

06) $pproAi+ately how +any (o+puters in total does the s(hool have1 ------------ 'o(,#ter

17. Of these. how +any (an ,e used by the pupils. i)e eA(luding those used solely ,y ad+inistrative or tea(hing staffF

1

2 ..........................

:oo$

/'ellet

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

3 ..........................

4

G e G e

2 2

N No. o ...... ....

3

3

CCCCCCCC #e$ !y t*e ,#,il 0>) "oes the s(hool have a dedi(ated (o+puter roo+ for pupils1

Ge

.........

0?) In your opinion. how i+portant is ea(h of the f ollowing to the ethos of the s(hool1 Fairly Not Not Very #re i(,ortat i(,ortat i(,ortat a. ,ort............................................................ 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 !. eli&io ......................................................... 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 '. #i'............................................................. 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 $. Dra(a ........................................................... 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 e. >volve(et 6it* t*e 'o((#ity................... 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 ). >volve(et 6it* ,aret  &#ar$ia ........... 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 &. o'ial 9#ti'e  'o'er )or $ia$vata&e$ ... 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 *. /viro(etal a6aree............................. 1 ................. 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. . 4 i. >ri* la&#a&e a$ '#lt#re..............................

1 .................

2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .

3 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .

4

1

No ...........

2

20.$re the s(hool ,uildings and other fa(ilities ;playing fields et() if relevant< open to the lo(al (o++unity (1) in the evenings during the wee@ ;,< at wee@ends or ;(< out of ter+ ti+e1 1

a< in the evenings during the wee@ Ge ......... ,< at wee@ends Ge ......... (< out of ter+ ti+e Ge .........

N o

1 1

N o

No .. ........ ...

2

2

2

20) $pproAi+ately how +any of ea(h of the following groups of pupils do you have in your s(hool1 If none. please write 7O#* – do not leave ,lan@) – the sa+e (hild (an ,e re(orded +ore than on(e) Forei&-atioal ,#,il..................................................... ................................................ (Number) CCCCCCCCC #,il o) )a(ilie )ro( t*e ravelli& o((#ity............................................ ................ (Number) CCCCCCCCC #,il it* la&#a&e $i))i'#ltie *ere ative la&#a&e i ot*er t*a /&li*  ri* ... (Number) CCCCCCCCC #,il it* ,*yi'al  eory $ia!ilitie ............................................. ........................... (Number) CCCCCCCCC #,il it* leari&  itelle't#al $ia!ilitie. ................. .......................... ....................... (Number) CCCCCCCCC 22) $pproAi+ately. what is the Average Daily Attendance for your s(hool this year ;2HH6 / 2HH=<1 CCCCCCCC% Avera&e Daily Atte$a'e OR CCCCCCCCAvera&e #(!er atte$i& $aily

2D) 4hat per(entage of pupils +issed 2H days or +ore in the 2HH3 / 2HH6 a(ade+i( year ;as per the #49 figures<

i n v o l v e d i n s u p p o r t i n g ( h i l d r e n w i t h

23) Blease indi(ate whi(h of the following get

Bt *er ta )) (e (! er 4

-------e %

2E) $pproAi+ately what per(entage of the pupils in your s(hool would you say (o+e fro+ the i++ediate area. that is. live within a,out 2H +inutes wal@ing distan(e of the s(hool1

CCCCCCC a onal&,ehavioural diffi(ulties as to CCCCCCC CCCCCCC adversely i+pa(t on their v CCCCCC edu(ational develop+ent1 Blease ri 'i . ti(@ one ,oA on ea(h line to indi(ate approAi+ate per(entage) ,al 26) 1 Appro I Noe la n 40% r y .......... a +itera'y ro!le( ............................... 1 oo o ! N#(era'y ro!le(............................ 1 .............. 2 ..... u ( e r ' /(otioal  "e*avio#ral ,ro!le(....... 1 .............. 2 ..... a' a *er s 2=) "oes the s(hool have a o+e&S(hool Co++unity Liais 2 s 2>) Over the past five years. has the nu+,er of pupils (o+ e e(ai +e s De'rea e$ )airl ar s 'reae$..... .................. e$........... ta!le 1 2 i& + # e 2?) $re all ,, n of the ort t. pupils  re a who apply o#r p to this 'e p s(hool tea r '* o generally a((epted er A 1 GeH 1 :o to I.31 No.. 2 :o to I.30 i 3

+ o t i o n a l / CCCCCCCC , % e h

/t er al a ita ' e ,l ea e , e'i) yE CCCC CCCC

+ a t e l y w h a t p r o p o r ti o n o f p

DH) 4hat (riteria are used to ad+it pupils leae ti' all t*at a,,lyEJ roi(ity to t*e '*ool 1

Bt*er i!li& i t*e '*ool 2

aret atte$e$ t*e '*ool 3

er)or(a'e o tet 4

Date o) a,,li'atio 5

D0) $re there any other lo(al s(hools to whi(h pupils in your s(hool +ight go1 Ge .........

1

No........

2

D2) In general. do +ore pupils apply to (o+e to this s(hool than there are pla(es availa,le1

Ge ...............

1

No..................

2

DD) If there is +ore than 0 (lass in any year&group. on what ,asis are pupils in the s(hool allo(ated to (lasses1 3 B)te a$o(ly  al,*a!eti'ally.............................. 1 a. #,eio.......................................................... 4 ...........................Bly1'la,eryear-&ro#, 2 !. /,#lio  ,er(aet e'l#io ........................... 2 '. /tra 'laor .................................................... DE) "oes the s(hool hold for+al parent&tea(her +eetings at least on(e per year1 $. /tra *o(eor ................................................... 35.$pproAi+ately what per(entage of parents e. riti& o) Llie? .................................................... attend parent&tea(her +eetings1 CCCCCCCC,er ). Detetio .............................................................. 'et &. /'l#io )ro( ,ort or ot*er ,o,#lar a'tivitie ..... 36.ow i+portant is ea(h of the following in the *. Ver!al ,*oe or ot*erie re,ort to ,aret......... i. ritte re,ort to ,aret......................................... s(hool as a curricular a(tivity1 . a'ellatio o) ,o,#lar leo e.&. art .................... Very i(,ortat . ari& 'ar$ yte( ............................................ a. *yi'al /$#'atio 3 ,ort............... 1 .............................. .............................. l. Bt*er ,e'i)y CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC !. #i'................................................ 1

.............................. D?) "oes the s(hool have a written dis(ipline poli(y1 1 .............................. EH) To what eAtent were the following involved 1 .............................. in developing this poli(y1 ). 'ieti)i' e$#'atio........................... 1 .............................. -o a &reat etet -o o(e etet a. ea'*er 1 .............................................. D=) $nd how i+portant is ea(h of the following in the s(hool as an !. aret................................... 1 .............................................. Very i(,ortat '. #,il...................................... 1 .............................................. a. *yi'al /$#'atio  ,ort 1 .............................. $. "oar$ o) a%a&e(e%t ........... 1 .............................................. !. #i'................................................ 1 .............................. E0) To what eAtent is ,ullying a pro,le+ in your '. ,ee'* a$ Dra(a .......................... 1 .............................. s(hool1 $. /viro(etal A6aree ............... 1 .............................. A (aor ,ro!le(............. ......... A (ior ,ro!le( .............. 1 e. A6aree o) o'ial K#ti'e ............ 1 .............................. E2) "oes your s(hool have an eApli(it anti&,ullying strategy1 ). 'ieti)i' e$#'atio........................... 1 ..............................

'. ,ee'* a$ Dra(a .......................... $. /viro(etal A6aree ............... e. A6aree o) o'ial K#ti'e ............

1

D>) To what eAtent are the following for+s of dis(ipline used in your s(hoolF

ED)

"oes your s(hool have a written poli(y on ,ullying1

Teacher Satisfaction and Stress

Recommend Documents