Title: Exploring managerial challenges in managing secondary schoolteachers’ stress: A qualitative analysis
First author: Professor Anna-Marie (A.M.F.) Pelser
Research Professor, North-West University, Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences- Entity Director – GIFT, Mafikeng Campus.
Corresponding author: Professor A.M.F. Pelser: HED (Home Economics, PU for CHE), B Com (UNISA), B Com Hons (PU for CHE), M Com (Industrial Psychology, NWU), PhD (Education Management, NWU)
e-mail: email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org
Co-author: Dr Eben Haeser Swanepoel
Orcid Id: 0000-0003-3205-5244
Postdoctoral Researcher, North-West University, Economic and Management Sciences, GIFT.
PhD: Psychology of Education (UFS), M.Ed Psychology of Education (UFS), Hons Psychology (UNISA), B.Ed FET (UFS)
Ensovoort, volume 41 (2020), number 7: 3
Teacher burnout is a challenge faced globally, impeding optimal teaching-learning from taking place. In this article, teachers’ stress was viewed in terms of its relationship with workplace stressors and through the lenses of organisational and individual management theories, as well as managerial and distributed leadership. Data were collected by means of in-depth semi-structured interviews with managers and teachers; these were audio taped, transcribed and data analysed by coding. Stress was omnipresent in the educational settings and manifested itself as a multi-dimensional phenomenon explained in terms of various leadership theories. Managerial leadership was a problem, where leaders or principals are seen as being commanding, controlling and authoritarian whilst showing an unwillingness to share power. It is evident from this study that teachers don’t take charge of their own stress but depart from this responsibility by keenly empowering the management team to manage their own and the teachers’ stress in both a preventative and corrective manner. Teachers prefer not to be involved with various organisational undertakings due to the presence of unwieldly hindrances in the guise of stressors which inextricably forms part of their professional working life. Distributed leadership is a multifaceted concept of leadership where the principal views it as his obligation to developing leadership aptitude by empowering others to manage their own stress successfully. Results indicated that in building a strong organisational climate, collaboration between employees will be key, shared goals achieved and leadership devolved enabling employees to become one another’s keeper, to foster participation in decision-making. A strong correlation exists between the two leadership theories and the practice of stress management in schools.
teacher stress, stress management; workplace stress; managerial leadership; distributed leadership
The issue of workplace stress has gained prominence in South Africa in the educational sector in recent years (Mapfumo, Chitsiko & Chireshe, 2012). Partially, the rate of stress experiences has been driven by the high rate of systemic changes, job security, performance appraisal and career expectations (Naidoo, et al., 2013; Mushoriwa & Dlamini, 2015). Although school-related stressors should be handled by school staff with managerial responsibilities, teachers themselves should also be involved in the management of their own stress. Coordinated management measures have the potential to minimise stress levels considerably at school level (Robbins et al., 2013). Different leadership theories can be employed to gain insight into the phenomenon of teachers’ stress management.
Even though stress is a universal phenomenon, Werner (2011) accentuated that most stress is experienced in work situations. Demands on educators and schools increase, which in turn leads to the prevalence of stress in the teaching profession. A certain level of stress is necessary for teachers to render an effective and professional service. Counter to this, excessive stress levels may lead to distress, poor teaching, poor decision-making, lowered self-esteem, low job satisfaction and a lack of commitment in terms of remaining in the profession (Grobler, Wärnich, Carrell, Elbert & Hatfield, 2002; Schroeder, Akotia & Apekey, 2001).
Research on stressors globally took place and a number of stressors were found. Bytyqi, Reshani, and Hasani (2010) conducted a general workplace survey in public organizations in Kosovo which examined employees’ levels of work stress, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and the impact these factors had on each other. However, the findings indicate that a satisfied and committed workforce is not a guarantee for having low levels of work stress and vice versa. Examples of stressors include the lack of opportunities for career progress, lack of status or respect at work, work overload, instability, and lack of discipline among students in Macedonia and Turkey (Akhlaq, Amjad, & Mehmood, 2010). In another study, Van Dick and Wagner (2001) tested the theoretical model of teacher stress on a large sample of 356 German teachers using complex structural equation modelling. The results of the study revealed that workload led to stress reactions from the teachers, whereas principal support, beliefs of self-efficacy among participants, and use of appropriate coping strategies reduced their experiences of work-related stress. Other studies have reported stressors such as time constrains (Kyriacou, 1987), poor quality of relationships with colleagues (Troman, 2000), and large numbers of students (Nagel & Brown, 2003). In terms of stressor rankings, student behaviour is reported as the most stressful factor followed by staff support, relationship with parents, personal and professional competences (Paulse, 2005).
In South Africa, several studies have been done and it is evident from all that stress is an obstacle that causes teachers not to perform as effectively as needed (Van Wyk & Pelser, 2016; Jackson & Rothmann, 2006). Venter (2003) performed a study in George and found that low salaries are an indicator of teacher stress. Stressors which surfaced during studies have attributed educator stress to a lack of discipline, unmotivated learners, redeployment and retrenchment of educators, large learner-educator ratios and new curriculum approaches (Saptoe, 2000). Motseke (1998), in the Free State, conducted an investigation of stress among educators in township secondary schools to identify organisational, personal, interpersonal, and environmental stressors; other examples of stressors include role conflict, role ambiguity, discipline problems, time pressure, bad working conditions, self-respect, inadequate support from friends, family and colleagues, and low student motivation. Although much research has been done on stress in South Africa and even in the North West Province, scant research on stress has been done in schools / among teachers in the Mahikeng Area. Research done in the North West Province was done via quantitative research methods, and didn’t give teachers the opportunity to voice the actual stress they are experiencing and the solution to manage the stress they are experiencing.
In view of this conclusion, the question under investigation for this study was: How do teachers in the Mahikeng Area manage stress in their workplace?
In the forthcoming section the theoretical and conceptual framework will be dealt with and the various stress concepts be thoroughly elaborated on. The objectives will be stated and the research design, sampling, data generation and data analysis will be expounded. Trustworthiness and ethical considerations will be addressed. The findings and discussion thereof will be the evidence of rigorous research done on the ailment of stress. Recommendations will be proposed to remedy the current complacent riposte to the immense effect of educator stress.
The conceptual framework aims to define stress, identify various stressors, elaborate on research done on stress by various researchers in several countries and finally address the different perspectives on individual and organisational approaches to stress management.
Conceptualising stress and background context
Stress can be viewed from different angles. It can be a dynamic and complex process that forms part of the interaction between individuals and the activities in their lives (Phindela, Mothibedi & Smith, 2008). Werner (2011), in turn, views it as “the body’s response to anxieties and deviations that require it (the body) to adapt physically, intellectually and expressively”. Stress is prompted when a situation is seen as either a challenge or a risk. Although stress is a universal phenomenon, Werner (2011) emphasises that most stress is experienced in work situations.
Factors initiating stress
Often, stress within teaching is connected with organizational factors related to the way teachers are expected to work. A plethora of organizational factors contribute to stress among teachers: unreasonably set time frames, excessive bureaucracy, unrealistic deadlines and frightening inspection regimes (Montgomery & Rupp, 2005). One may also distinguish between stressors of an educator’s living and working environment, and individual stressors. The working environment entails the most stressors, amongst which are unfavourable working conditions, excessive workloads, organizational problems, and insufficient resources, lack of support and/or autonomy, and decision making. The working environment may also include physical stressors such as high frequency noise associated with teaching assignments, congested classrooms, classroom or school size, erupting violence among learners as well as administrative pressures such as lack of support from managers and the ambiguity of the teaching role. Individual characteristics include the unique traits of teachers such as personality, gender, age, demographics, ability to establish and maintain supportive networks, cognitive evaluation of stressors, coping ability, type of teaching position and work dissatisfaction (Hastings & Bham, 2003; Guglielmi, & Tatrow, 1998). Individual stress can also be linked to the compatibility between personal and educational values, ambition to succeed, the threshold of sensitivity, competitiveness, multiple roles for women teachers (parent, caretaker, housewife and teacher), and perfection (Bachkirova, 2005). One of the few analyses in the field of work-related stress in Macedonia is the comparative study of Eres and Atanasovska that explores the levels of stress among teachers in Turkey and their colleagues in Macedonia. Their findings suggest that working conditions as well as personal and social characteristics have an effect on teacher stress (Eres & Atanasovska, 2011).
Individual and organisational approaches to stress management
The phenomenon of stress is not only visible when viewed in terms of its causes and consequences, but also about the way in which it is managed (Ngidi & Sibaya 2002). Stress compels individuals and organisations to avoid or manage tension in organisations. This should be done by ensuring that organising, planning and decision-making are conducted in such a way that teachers are not subjected to unnecessary stress (Van Wyk & Pelser, 2016). According to Van Deventer and Kruger (2008) the management of stress is an important factor contributing to positive changes at behavioural, psychological, and physiological levels for educators. Bennett (1997) noted that stress is an everyday phenomenon. Nevertheless, certain measures can be taken by organisations to minimise the degrees of stress experienced by their employees. Stress management has both an individual and organisational character and is particularly discernible at school level in the working relations between different stakeholders such as teachers and learners, teachers and management staff, parents and teachers, as well as between departmental officials and school staff. The distinction made by Steyn and Van Niekerk (2012) of two stress management approaches, namely individual stress management and organisational stress management, is followed in this study.
Occupational stress is concerned with the individual and environmental pressures that workers experience with regard to their day-to-day activities in their workplaces (Werner, 2011). Individuals and organisations are compelled to take action, to avoid and to manage these pressures or stressors (Nahavandi, et al., 2015). In a school it is key that a teacher who experiences stress should enter into a relationship with someone like a principal who can assist in confronting his or her perception of the stressful situation.
Individual stress management
Steyn and Van Niekerk (2012) are of the view that stressor elimination in a work environment is in the first place the responsibility of the individuals themselves. Nahavandi et.al. (2015) contend that individual approaches to stress management serve to eliminate and/or modify stressors in the environment by changing perceptions about stressors, time management and planning, aspects of lifestyle and regular practice of relaxation techniques. According to Werner (2011) individual stress management has to do with the fact that we can adapt our perception to certain situations. Through cognitive restructuring, people can prevent irrational and negative thoughts and substitute them with a more positive and a healthy mental approach. This implies that teachers experience stressful situations in different ways and will always attempt to find mechanisms to cope in a stressful situation.
Lifestyle design forms an integral part of individual stress management (Steyn & Van Niekerk, 2012). Teachers have to examine their own lifestyles and be vigilant that their own behaviour and actions do not constitute stress. Aquinas (2009) says contends that time management is critical to subsuming successful stress management techniques. According to Robbins and Judge (2013) teachers should manage their stress levels actively by practising relaxation techniques and doing physical exercises on a regular basis There should always be a balance between work and non-work activities so that employees have either minimal-stress or stress-free lifestyles.
Stress management is also important for individuals because own concerns can be shared in a supportive environment. Steyn and Van Niekerk (2017) note that, “turning to others for support and assistance is one of the critical human responses to stress management”. Robbins and Judge (2013) support the latter view and note that “friends, family or work colleagues can provide an outlet when stress levels become excessive. Expanding your social support network provides someone to hear your problems and offer a more objective perspective on a stressful situation than your own”.
Organisational approaches to stress management
In organisational approaches to stress management emphasis is placed on the fact that stress can and should be managed in institutions by people in the system with managerial responsibilities (Bennett, 1997). Although individuals have to accept responsibility for managing their own stress certain measures should be taken in organisations to minimise the stress experienced by their employees (Robbins et. al., 2013). From an organisational point of view recognising and evaluating how stress is influencing the performance of teachers, is the first step in managing stress (Botha, 2013). Closely linked to recognising and evaluating the influence of stress is the clarification of roles and goal setting (Werner, 2011). Role clarification and goal setting are important in the sense that employees usually have an understanding of what is expected from them; knowing the expectations enables them to commit to the goals as well as to minimize their stress. Robbins and Judge (2013) suggest that organisational communication, redesigning jobs, sabbaticals, organisational culture, goal setting and employee wellness programmes can all be seen as forms of organisational stress management. Robbins and Judge (2013) mention in this regard that individual teachers perform better when they have specific and challenging goals and receive feedback on their progress towards these goals. Role clarification is also important in the sense that it promotes teachers’ understanding of what is expected from them and what management’s expectations are (Aquinas, 2009).
In addition to structural and systemic changes, organisational stress management also deals with the availability of training programmes that can assist employees to cope with “stress by emphasising the importance of happiness and a positive outlook” (Nahavandi et. al., 2015). Robbins and Judge (2013) suggest that stress-reducing or wellness programmes should be offered on a continuous basis to improve teachers’ physical and mental health. Training can also be extended to the whole staff so that they are able to deal with stress positively (Botha, 2013; Steyn & van Niekerk, 2013).
Educational Management and Leadership differentiated
Many researchers in the field of Educational Management and Leadership stress the importance of distinguishing between the concepts of management and leadership (Naidu, et al., 2011; Bush, 2007; Christie, 2010). In this paper the two concepts are however seen in an integrative way and used interchangeably. This is in line with Bush (2007) who observes that the concepts of management and leadership overlap each other and with Fink (2011) who reckons that the term management was given a linguistic makeover and became leadership. We thus applied these terms in a synonymous way, recognising that although the investigation falls in the study field of Educational Management and Leadership the term stress management is generally used in the literature and not stress leadership (Schulze & Steyn, 2007).
Considerable theorising has been conducted in the field of educational leadership in the last decade (Bush, 2007; Crawford, 2012; Christie, 2010; Leithwood & Sun, 2012). Authors seem to embrace diverse views and continually adapt their understanding of how to investigate and explain leadership behaviour in educational institutions (Pelser & Van Wyk, 2015). Leithwood and Sun (2012) say that there has been a change from traditional theories of leadership and management to those that are transformational in nature. Hartley (2010) sees this change as a major paradigm shift from the traditional view of leadership as centred on the role of individual leaders to alternative theories which place the focus on multiple participants.
We examined the potential of a number of theories as basis for interpreting the empirical findings of this study and decided that managerial leadership and distributed leadership are the best-suited theories to deal with stress management in schools.
Managerial leadership is associated with a situation where leaders are seen as being commanding, controlling and authoritarian whilst showing an unwillingness to share power (Dambe & Moorad, 2008). When the above-mentioned aspects are applied to a school, a closed communication system results with a rigid leadership style where the lines of authority from principal to deputy head and then to heads of department are clearly defined with the principal being regarded as occupying the most central position in the school (Naidu, et al., 2011). “Authority and influence are allocated to formal positions, in proportion to the status of those positions in the organisational hierarchy” (Leithwood & Sun, 2012). When this theoretical point of view is applied to the management of stress in schools, prominence is given to the responsibility of the principal and the education department as being responsible for the management of stress. These stakeholders must decide how and by whom stress issues in schools will be handled. In most instances teacher stress would be managed according to existing protocol whereas the social and human relations aspects of stress management are neglected. Naidoo (2011) remarked in this regard that “South Africa’s underperforming schools require a greater emphasis on basic management that involves ensuring regular and timely attendance by learners and educators, maintaining order and discipline in classrooms, and providing adequate resources to enable learning to take place”. Botha (2013) reckons that “even in a decentralised school system principals are required to play strong leadership roles as it prioritises efficient and effective smooth running of schools”.
In terms of the managerial-leadership theory leaders like principals have the main responsibility to manage conflict and tension. Staff such as Departmental heads clearly are responsible for stress that emanates from their particular responsibilities. As middle-managers they also have to manage the consequences of stress that stems from personal relationships. These HoDs are also tasked to apply a whole range of stress-management techniques in schools.
The central premise of distributed leadership is that all management activities and processes are spread throughout the organisation. According to Williams (2011) distributed leadership implies that there has been a movement away from an over-reliance on the leader’s influence, to determining relevant variants of leader influence, to arguing for distributive leadership. Building on the ideas of distributed cognition, distributed leadership describes the ways that leadership activities are stretched across different people and positions within organisations and where the result is greater than the sum of the parts. Harris (2004:15) is of the view that the main advantage of this way of doing is that expertise is engaged “wherever it exists within the organisation rather than seeking this only through the formal role”.
The significance of distributed leadership for teachers’ stress is that teachers themselves are involved in the managing thereof (Botha, 2006). This means that the main advantage of distributed leadership in schools is the direct involvement of teachers, and not just their representation, in school matters. Teachers are thus not just there to provide advice but they have the right to make or heavily influence decisions (Somech, 2010). As Wadasengo (2011) explains, teachers are the direct custodians of the curriculum implementation process and that is therefore the correct place where their expertise can be applied. Teachers understand instruction-related issues and work processes better than management staff and their participation ensures that decisions for improved students’ learning will be made (Van Wyk & Pelser, 2015). Potential stressors that are related to teaching such as learner discipline, work allocation and working conditions and curriculum matter will be addressed in a satisfactory way.
Objectives of the study
In view of the above exposition the purpose of the study is to understand how teachers’ stress is managed in the Mahikeng area of the North-West Province. More specifically, the objectives were,
(a) to understand the phenomenon of teachers’ stress through a management lens, (b) to explore the value of different leadership theories for teachers’ stress management, and (c) to examine the manifestation of teachers’ stress in their professional working environment.
A case study design was used for exploring and understanding qualitatively and interpretively (against the backdrop of a theoretical exposition on stress management in education and an application of the principles of two leadership theories to stress management) the perceptions of managers and staff about ways to ensure the improvement of teachers’ stress management in the Mafikeng area of the North-West Province in South Africa
The study was conducted in the Mafikeng area of the North-West Province of South Africa. This area is unique in many ways. In the previous political dispensation it formed part of the Bophuthatswana homeland. During that time a strong infrastructure for government was established in the towns consisting of Mafikeng and Mmabatho. After 1994, Mafikeng was entrenched as the capital city of the North-West province including a wide range of geographical areas from adjacent regions. The city itself is unique in the sense that apart from government, a large number of related industries and businesses were established, mainly by entrepreneurs who reside in Mafikeng.
The schools in and around Mafikeng that are the object of this investigation represent a variety that ranges from primary to secondary schools and from schools with a strong rural background to typical urban schools. The schools can currently be seen as serving a well-established and growing middle and upper class of mainly black people. This investigation deals with teachers who are working or have been employed in secondary schools in the area which constitutes a unique environment with its own sets of demands and challenges. A total of 955 educators are employed in the area. A snowballing sampling was used to select only educators that shared the information that they encounter high levels of stress. Educators were selected to represent all role players in education.
In purposeful sampling, researchers intentionally select individuals and sites to learn or understand the central phenomenon”. Purposeful sampling thus means that participants are selected because of some defining characteristics that make the holders of the data needed for the study. Six participants were accordingly purposively sampled to act as participants in this study. In this study the participants are referred to as managers and teachers. The three who are referred to as managers occupy or were employed as a Departmental Education Specialist, a Principal and a Departmental Head (HoD). Of the three teachers, two are still employed and the third one resigned in 2016. The three managers are anonymously identified as participants A, B and C and the teachers D, E and F.
Six individual teachers took part in semi-structured interviews. The interview schedules for both the managers and staff members consisted of the following five questions which were based on the individual participants’ involvement with stress management;
- Which organisational/administrative arrangements and procedures make a school a stressful workplace?
- Has the school got a responsibility to assist in managing teachers’ personal stress?
- How can stress management in the school, or the lack of it, affect teachers’ stress?
- What kind of leadership style is suitable for the management of teachers’ stress?
- To what degree is teachers’ stress officially identified and handled as such by management staff?
The following six data analysis procedures as described by Creswell (2012) were applied. Firstly the data were read, followed by coding and the searching for themes, reviewing of themes, defining and naming of themes and creating of categories and then the final phase which involves the joining of an analytic narrative and data excerpts, in addition to the contextualisation of the analysis in correlation with existing literature.
To ensure the trustworthiness of the study thorough preparation was done beforehand on the different processes of data collection, analysis and resulting reporting to obtain the suitable, most valid and significant data for the study. During the data collection and analysis stage all participants were probed with the same questions on their involvement with stress management in ‘their’ schools. The data were recorded and transcripts of each interview were done in typed format. Both authors coded certain sections of the data independently and developed categories from the text which were then compared.
Since all the participants were either involved in sensitive negotiations with the Education Department or felt that they could be seriously disadvantaged if their names were attached to the findings, they were assured of their anonymity and each one was given an opportunity to read his/her completed transcript submitted to verify whether the information shared with the researcher was correctly reported. The researcher also took all necessary steps to treat all the information received from the participants confidentially and ensured that it was safely stored.
Permission to perform this study was granted to the researcher from the Central District of the Department of Basic Education in Mafikeng. The study was also ethically cleared by the university under whose auspices it was done.
All ethical considerations such as permission to perform interviews, briefing of respondents regarding the purpose of the interview and the study and assurance that their inputs would remain confidential, were adhered to.
The following findings are based on the interview questions that were asked during the interviews.
Which organisational/administrative arrangements and procedures make a school a stressful workplace?
All participants indicated that they understood that there were certain systemic or organisational arrangements, policies and procedures present in all schools that caused stress. They realised that a professional organisation had to be governed by policies as well as rules and regulations and that the Department of Basic Education and the North West Provincial Education Department had an important role to play in this regard. Inconsistency in application was however pinpointed as the main reason why teachers experienced stress about these official procedures. Participant A mentioned that the Department did not act in terms of the so-called Post Provisioning Model (PPM). This lead to overcrowded classrooms, unfair job distribution and sluggishness of the Department (HR) to fill vacant positions. In addition it was stated that learners were promoted without deserving it; harassment of teachers by the Department of Basic Education; muddled communication from the Department’s side; inferior salaries; teachers pulled in all directions by role players in education; subject advisors not knowledgeable due to nepotism; corruption with textbooks and material; frequent change of assessment weighting; beginner teachers not willing to be taught anything and no housing allowance (Participant B). B also referred to the block-creeping phenomenon where beginner teachers’ salaries were the same as those of life-long teachers in education and the small difference between posts.
Generally, the responses showed that teachers appreciated the fact that the education profession had a comprehensive organisational structure. In so far as this study is concerned, their concerns had to do with the degree to which the implementation of a wide range of policies might increase the stress levels of teachers.
Has the school got a responsibility to assist in managing teachers’ personal stress?
The responses to this question indicate that teachers thought that it was not correct to make a strict distinction between “personal stress” and “school stresses”. Teachers believe that they suffer from “work stress” which includes aspects of personal stress and the stress that are the result of school challenges. Participant C even said they were all suffering from a number of symptoms and effects of stress. Teachers feel that like most other people they are affected by stress in their personal lives. In their case however their personal stress increases in their school lives. In the strict sense of the word the school should thus accept responsibility for managing all teachers’ stress. According to participant F this position makes sense since the school would otherwise have irritable teachers who can’t cope with stress, become irritable, assault learners, do not teach, become negligent, use anti-depressants, do not submit marks, are absent on a regular basis and sometimes even resign.
An interesting remark made by Participant C about accepting responsibility for stress management in a school is that everybody experienced stress and charity began at home. There is strength in unity and teachers act like they are another’s keepers. Another participant referred in this regard to a support system according to which teachers’ use of a “Buddy System” through which support groups assist each another, especially newly appointed teachers (Respondent B). Respondent D also commented that stress was handled in groups and that teachers did Pilates exercises together and then went for tea to a nearby coffee shop.
Generally, the responses showed that teachers’ stress should be seen and dealt with in the educational sector as one concept and must not be divided into personal stress and work stress. Schools, the department and management staff are therefore accordingly responsible to deal with all the stress that teachers experience.
How can stress management in the school, or the lack of it, affect teachers’ stress?
The responses revealed that all participants felt that an important part of teachers’ stress was caused by the actions or inactions of management staff. It was indicated that these staff members were in a position to control stressors that emanated from factors such as the introduction of new teaching and assessment methods, financial mismanagement, poor working conditions and pupil misbehaviour. Two participants added that there were also a number of day-to-day managerial issues that were created through inefficient management. Participant F and D mentioned the following, time-wasters, including holding and attending poorly managed meetings, allowing interruptions, not planning properly, not communicating effectively, and allowing paperwork to pile up so that time was wasted by looking for important documents.
The participants further agreed that those in managerial positions were partially to blame for teachers’ stress. Participant C was in fact very severe in her criticism of principals by remarking that some principals were ignorant people with manhandling attitudes and escalating and cascading corruption and paltry salaries. Participant F was more specific in criticising principals personally for teachers’ stress, explaining that some principals were absent, bullying and corrupt leaders who had no vision and were involved in uneven distribution of duties, unnecessary paperwork as well as in unfair promotions of learners.
It is clear that there was a strong view amongst participants that the role that principals played in stress management was at best minimal because they had not been trained to perform it and that some principals did not seem to be interested in applying themselves to perform this function.
What kind of leadership style is suitable for the management of teachers’ stress?
In analysing the responses it became clear that the participants saw stress management from different angles. The views of teachers and managers differed noticeably regarding a suitable leadership style for teachers’ stress management. Teachers emphasised the importance of the direct involvement of those in leadership positions by indicating that their first port of call when their stress problems started, was the principal. It seems as if they depended heavily on those in managerial positions to solve their anxieties. Participant F reported however stress concerns were referred to the HOD, the Deputy Principal and the Principal to resolve, but they could not assist. Participant F mentioned that her health was suffering due to the stress she had undergone and not a single member of the School Management Team (SMT) could be of any help. It thus seemed that they felt principals should be efficient leaders whereas the ones that they knew could be described as “weak leaders” (Participant C).
The participants who had experience of senior management responsibilities understood that managerial staff were directly responsible for a whole array of leadership and management tasks. They thought that the leadership style of principals was directly influenced by factors that could in broad terms be described as “departmental-inefficiencies”. If this view point is related to the management of teachers’ stress, attention should be paid to the words of Participant C who saw principals as bossy principals who adhered to the public or to the political rulers and were responsible for stress by introducing incompatible policies and using unfair practical measures.
All participants further agreed that teachers should not be seen as keen and willing to participate in a wide variety of school-wide management activities since there were already a whole range of stressors that influenced their professional working life and that they would therefore not like to be involved in too many additional managerial activities (Participant D). Learners’ behaviour and attitude, coupled with teaching, were seen as a big responsibility. An exception to this rule was teachers’ involvement in managerial activities that were linked to the instructional programmes. As direct custodians of the curriculum process teachers saw themselves as more knowledgeable than management staff on instructional matters.
In general terms, it seems as if the participants thought that a kind of combined leadership style was the most suitable for managing teachers’ stress. This style entails that principals should on the one hand be “father-like” figures who can address their stress issues in a top-down and very effective fashion. On the other hand they also expect principals to allow them to have the main say in curricular and teaching matters because they are “more knowledgeable than management staff on instructional matters”.
To what degree is teachers’ stress officially identified and handled as such by management staff?
The responses of the two groups varied slightly on this question. As described in the previous category the teachers felt that there was very little evidence of any effort from principals to manage stress in schools. Participant E mentioned in a somewhat conciliatory fashion that the principal was kindly disposed towards the staff, but there did not appear to be any internal “support” mechanisms to help her manage stress problems.
The managers accepted that there were no official stress management programmes in schools mainly because no training on how to handle stress related issues was available. They however felt that some effort was made in schools to manage teachers’ stress. One of the managers said that even though stress was not officially recognised as a situation or condition that had to be managed in a school, they had worked out their own methods or routines to cope with stressful situations (Participant B). Respondent A also said that she had never received any training in the management of stress but was overly sensitive to recognising stress symptoms and supported colleagues purely for common humanity reasons. Participant B added that teachers did not just approach you and told you they had stress. It was important for a senior manager to recognise stress symptoms in a school.
It thus seems that even though there are no official programmes available for stress management in schools, an effort is made to support teachers in a way that their stress levels can be reduced.
In broad terms the results of this study indicated an awareness amongst all participants that stress was present in their day-to-day operation in school and that it should be handled or managed, although it was not viewed as a life-threatening quiescent condition that necessitated urgent intervention. It seemed as if the effects of stress were underestimated and negated. From the responses it was clear that not only principals, but the whole School Management Team (SMT), were in some way or another involved with the managing of stress and tried their utmost to manage factors causing stress (Bennett, 1997). Being in a senior position necessitates that one has to notice the mien of stress, but it often went by unseen and was managed by all involved in their own manner. Due to the severity of unattended stress, a teacher eventually resigns or collapses as teachers frequently don’t reveal their stress condition (Motshekga, 2013). Some managers handle stress management on a laity level, and none of the participants were ever trained in this regard. To have had Psychology as a subject whilst being trained to become a teacher might be useful in the management of stress.
The results further indicate the danger of reducing the stress management simplistically to specific interventions that must be undertaken under certain circumstances to prevent or correct undesired results. Stress management is not measurable as a single factor and does not exist in a single definable situation. Instead, it should be viewed because of a transaction between an individual and peers or superiors (Van Wyk & Pelser, 2016). It is therefore not possible to do a situational or needs analysis with the idea to establish identifiable shortcomings for which specific stress-management remedies can be applied. The reality of stress management in educational institutions displays itself as a multi-dimensional phenomenon that cannot be practised in a piecemeal way by linking specific issues such as conflict and the presence of bureaucratic school structures with stress-management actions. These and other issues should rather be seen as part of a whole range of interwoven stressors that form part of a complex work environment that necessitates a combination of different stress-management techniques and approaches that should be applied in an integrative manner. The integrated nature of stress management is also evident from the fact that it manifests itself as being both pro-active and re-active. Pro-active stress management in a school is conducted with the idea to “increase the level of awareness of the negative consequences of stress and help educators to identify the symptoms of stress” (Steyn and van Niekerk, 2012: 224). Re-active stress has to do with corrective measures or the application of traditional management actions such as the provision of good leadership where the existence of stress levels is very high. Re-active stress management deals with the application of sound organisational and managerial principles in stressful relationships between teachers-and-teachers and between teachers-and-managers.
Results further show that there is a strong correlation between the tenets of the two leadership theories and the practice of stress management in schools. The way in which teachers expect their stress to be handled shows parallels with the authority allocated to principals in managerial leadership in terms of their official positions in the hierarchical organisation structure (Leithwood & Sun, 2012). Teachers not only accept that principals are responsible for all day-to-day managerial issues, which include the handling of stress, but expect them to manage their stress in both a preventative and corrective manner. Distributed leadership on the other hand fosters participation in decision-making (Bush 2007). Teachers themselves should be involved in taking decisions about their own stress (Botha, 2006). In the study there is however little evidence of teachers being willing to be involved in the management of their own stress. All participants agree that teachers should not be seen as keen and willing to participate in a wide variety of school-wide management activities since they feel that there are already a whole range of stressors that influenced their professional working life and that they would therefore not like to be involved in any additional stressful managerial activities. Although managers pointed out that there were a number of stress-reducing mechanisms available in schools and at the offices of the Education Department, teachers are hesitant to accept these opportunities, but prefer to be involved in informal stress management with other teachers. Another angle showed that teachers had an attraction for a particular aspect of distributed leadership. They see themselves as the direct custodians of the curriculum=implementation process. This view is clearly based on their perceived expertise in teaching and learning matters. Teachers should be regarded as specialists in the field of teaching and in managing and organising their classrooms (Wadesango, 2011). They even regard themselves as “more knowledgeable than management staff on instructional matters”. Ironically the teaching-learning situation is inherently the bearer of most teachers’ stress. The classroom is the engine room of school stressors such as disciplinary problems, assessment methods and pupil misbehaviour.
In view of the above the following suggestions are made:
Specific proactive steps can be taken by introducing programmes that are aimed at stress prevention.
- Holistic stress relief is a program followed to reduce and alleviate chronic and acute stress at the physical, mental or spiritual levels. Easing in one area, impacts positively on another level. This approach impacts your mind, body and spirit in a powerful way and will lead to a continuum of health and illness as it increases your self-awareness and gives you a way in which you can develop inner peace and better physical health. Of the essence here is your mental, physical and emotional habits which either enhances or negates your health and moves you along the continuum. Once you are aware of the real problems causing physical and mental distress, the natural stress relievers that will help you will become obvious.
- Mindfulness means the building of self-awareness and frustration tolerance in stressful conditions. Exercises on how to stay calm in a daring classroom situation, noticing, accepting and letting go of negative thoughts. Practise breathing and self-awareness techniques in the classroom, relaxing the tensions by implementing relaxation techniques in class. Use mindful walking, drawing and listening.
- Cognisance of the role of thoughts, feelings, body and behaviour in stress response, the exploring of the internal world in stressful conditions — understanding “self-developed individual patterns” — the role of thoughts, feelings, body and behaviour in stress response, team teaching, regular feedback and workload division and by just being aware of stress indicators such as teacher absenteeism, missing deadlines and making careless mistakes.
- The viewing of stress from the learners angle — building sustainable stress management capabilities for students in the classroom (helping to gain insights into “the teacher’s self-developed individual patterns”, calming the body, clearing the mind, maintaining emotional balance, building and nurturing kind connections). Supporting students when dealing with stressful (exams, public speaking) and traumatic experience (accidents, losses, violence). Self-reflection as a protective factor of self-care.
- Maintaining newly-learned skills in stress management, review key learning points, personal action plan, action plan for classroom, feedback to the trainer using creativity technique. Celebrate teachers at regular meetings to create a win-win feeling in the school; regular staff meetings should be held to give teachers an opportunity to air their views; management to have an open-door policy for discussions with individual staff members; utilizing of social media such as WhatsApp and Facebook should be available for communication between teachers and management; provision should be made for teachers to get involved in informal stress-reducing methods such as exercises and clubs; teachers are free to enrol as individuals in the official departmental stress-support programmes.
The information acquired indicates that management of stress is of significance to prevent it from escalating and forcing teachers out of the system. There is an urgent need to support managers and individual teachers with stress-management skills. The Provincial Department of Education and School Management Teams have to be made aware of the role it should play in managing teachers’ stress.
List of references
Aquinas, P.G. 2009. Organizational Behaviour; concepts, realities, applicants and challenges. New Delhi: Excel Books.
Bachkirova, T. 2005. Teacher stress and personal values: An exploratory study. School Psychology International. 26(3):340–352.
Banerjee, S. & Mehta, P. 2016. Determining the antecedents of job stress and their impact on job performance: A study among faculty members. IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior, XV: 2.
Bennet, R. 1997. Organisational Behaviour, Third Edition. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Botha, R.J. (Nico). 2013. The Effective Management of a School towards Quality Outcomes. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Botha, R.J. (Nico). 2006. Leadership in school-based management: a case study in selected schools. SA Journal of Education, Vol 26, No 3.
Bush, T. 2007. Educational Leadership and Management: Theory, Policy and Practice. South African Journal of Education, 27(3):391-406.
Chireshe, R. & Chireshe, E. 2010. Student teachers’ perceptions towards teaching practice assessment. South African Journal of Higher Education, 24: 511-524.
Christie, P. 2010. Landscapes of Leadership in South African Schools: Mapping the changes. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 38:694-711.
Crawford, M. 2012. Solo and distributed leadership: Definitions and dilemmas, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 40:610-620.
Cresswell, J.W. 2012. Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson: New York.
Dambe, M. & Moorad, F. 2008. From power to empowerment: A paradigm shift in leadership, South African Journal of Higher Education, 22:575-587.
Department of Education. 1996. Changing Management to Manage Change in Education. Report of the Task Team on Education Management Development. Pretoria, South Africa.
Emekako, R. M. 2018. A Framework for the improvement of the professional working conditions of teachers in South African Secondary Schools. PhD-thesis, North-West University, Mahikeng.
Eres, F. Atanasovska, T. 2011. Occupational Stress of Teachers: A Comparative Study between Turkey and Macedonia. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(7):59–65.
Fink, D. 2011. Pipelines, pools and reservoirs: Building leadership capacity for sustained improvement, Journal of Educational Administration, 49:670-684.
Guglielmi, R. Tatrow, K. 1998. Occupational stress, burnout, and health in teachers: A methodological and theoretical analysis. Review of Educational Research, 68(1):61–99.
Hall, E.A.M., Nkomo, N., Peltzer, K. & Zuma, K. 2005. Potential attrition in education: The
impact of job satisfaction, morale, workload and HIV/AIDS. Cape Town: HSRC
Harris, A. 2004. Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or misleading, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 32:11-24.
Hartley, D. 2010. Paradigms: How far does research in distributed leadership stretch? Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 38:271-285.
Hastings, R. & Bham, M. 2003. The relationship between student behaviour patterns and teacher burnout. School Psychology International, 24(1):115–127.
Leithwood, K. & Sun, J. 2012. The nature and effects of transformational school leadership: a meta-analytic review of unpublished research, Educational administration quarterly 48:387-423.
Montgomery, C. & Rupp, A.A. 2005. A meta-analysis for exploring the diverse causes and effects of stress in teachers. Canadian Journal of Education. 2005:28(3):458–486.
Mapfumo, J.S., Chitsiko, N. & Cherishe, R. 2012. Teaching Practice Generated Stressors and Coping Mechanisms among Student Teachers in Zimbabwe. South African Journal of Education, 32:155-166.
Masombuka, S. 2015. Teachers Resigning in Masse over Pension Reforms. Times Life, 10 February.
Mushoriwa, T.D. & Dlamini, N.R. 2015. School headship and occupational stress: The case of primary school heads. Journal of Psychology, 6(1): 41-48
Nahavandi, A., Denhardt R.B., Denhardt J.V. & Aristigueta M.P. 2015. Organizational Behaviour. California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Naidoo, K. 2011. Stress management and its impact on work performance of educators in public schools in KwaZulu-Natal. PhD-thesis, North-West University. Potchefstroom.
Naidoo, K., Botha, C. J. & Bisschoff, C. A. 2013. Causes of Stress in Public Schools and its Impact on Work Performance of Educators, Journal of Social Sciences, 34(2):177-190.
Naidu, A., Joubert, R,Mestry, R. & Mosoge, J. 2011. Education Management and Leadership. Oxford Press, Cape Town.
Ngidi, D.P. & Sibaya P.T. 2002. Black Teachers Personality Dimensions and Work-Related Stress Factors. South African Journal of Psychology, 32 (3).
Pelser, A.M.F. & Van Wyk, C. 2015. Teacher participation in stress management through different theoretical lenses: A study conducted in the Mafikeng Area. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 12(1-2):1-9.
Pelser, A.M.F. & Van Wyk.2016. Stressors in the Lives of Teachers in the Mahikeng Area, South Africa. Journal of Psychology, 7(2): 128-136 (2016)
Ramokgopa, M.S. 2013. The impact of the National Curriculum Statement principle in teaching of Physical science in Grade 10 to 12 around Sekhukhune District. Masters dissertation. Unpublished.
Rasumba, 2015. 900 Teachers left NW schools – ‘it’s not a crisis’. Platinum weekly. p. 1. 19 Aug 2015.
Republic of South Africa. 2007. National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa. 4 May 2007, Vol 503, No 29868. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Robbins, S.P., Judge T.A. & Campbell, T. 2013. Organizational Behaviour Edition. Edinburg: Pearson Education Limited.
Schulze, S. & Steyn, T. 2007. Stressors in the professional lives of South Africa secondary school teachers. South African Journal of Education, 27:691-697.
Steyn, G. M. 2011. Determining guidelines for professional development: a qualitative study Journal of Educational Studies Volume 10 (1):1-30.
Steyn, G.M. & Van Niekerk, E.J. 2013. Human Resources Management in Education Third Edition. Pretoria: Unisa Pretoria.
Somech, A. 2010. Participative decision making in schools: a mediating-moderating analytical framework for understanding school and teacher outcomes. Educational administration quarterly, 46:174-209.
South Africa (SA). 2013. South African Council of Educators (SACE): The CPTD Management System Handbook. Pretoria: Government Printer
South Africa (SA). 2016. National Education Policy Act, 1996 (Act of 27 of 1996) Policy on the South Africa Standard for Principals, 2016 (Notice 323) Government gazette, 39827:4, 18 March.
Van Wyk, C. & Pelser, A.M. 2016. The Implementation of Stress Management Strategies in Schools, Journal of Psychology, 7(2): 119-127.
Wadasengo, N. 2011. Strategies of teacher participation in decision-making in schools: A case study of Gweru district secondary schools in Zimbabwe, Journal of Social sciences, 27:85-94.
Werner, A. 2011. Organisational Behaviour: A Contemporary South African perspective. Third Edition. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Williams, C.G. 2011. Distributed leadership in South African Schools: Possibilities and constraints, South African Journal of Education, 31: 190-200.