Teacher Stress in Urban Classrooms:
A Growing Epidemic
Leslie W. Schmidt
The University of North Carolina at
Charlotte
Stephanie Jones-Fosu
The University of North
Carolina at Charlotte
About half of educators in the field have reported experiencing
excessive amounts of stress several days a week, but this issue is even greater
for teachers in urban schools. Urban teacher stress is due to a number of
unique variables such as lack of resources, student behavior and disrespect,
unattainable goals while teaching students below grade level, and lack of
support both financially and emotionally. As a result, teacher stress not only
affects the teachers themselves but also their students in urban settings. This
research paper reveals the cause and effects of 121 urban teachers’ stress,
including student academic performance and behavior, and explores solutions to
help reduce the amount of stress urban teachers endure. In a review of this
correlational study, levels of teacher stress and burnout were identified using
Likert-type scales and their students’ academic achievement in reading and math
were measured with the Woodcock-Johnson III Test of Achievement to determine
the impact of stress. This critical issue in urban education must be brought into
the spotlight soon or students will greatly suffer as our country continues to
lose qualified, motivated novice teachers to stress.
Keywords: urban
schools, Title I, stress, teacher, burnout
Teachers at high-poverty, urban
schools encounter additional stressors that are not commonplace at suburban or
rural schools. Some of these stressors include lack of funding, resources,
heavy workload, poor student attitudes (Thompson, 2017), and student discipline
(Ryan et al., 2017). Unfortunately, stress can result in teachers being less
sympathetic toward students, being less motivated to prepare for class, having
low tolerance for classroom disruption, and feeling less committed and
dedicated to their work (Farber & Miller, 1981). Prolonged stress, while
working with students who live in poverty, can result in teacher burnout.
Thompson
(2017) declared that not only does teacher stress affect teachers, but it may
also negatively affect their students. Teacher stress is defined as conditions
of negative effects that result from aspects of the job that are perceived as a
threat to a teacher’s psychological or physical well-being (Abel & Sewell,
2001) and can especially be a concern for students in urban schools.
Occupational stress among teachers can create physical or psychological absence
from work which leads to less effective behavior management practices and
instruction (Herman, Hickmon-Rosa, & Reinke, 2018). The purpose of this
research paper is to explore the causes of teacher stress in urban classrooms
and the direct effect it has on student performance and behavior and the
community at large through a correlational study. Solutions for recognizing and
reducing teacher stress, to essentially lessen teacher turnover, are also
discussed in this paper.
Literature Review
Causes of Teacher Stress in Urban Schools
High levels of prolonged stress in urban classrooms can be
related to poor working conditions, inordinate time demands, inadequate
collegial relationships, large class sizes, time pressures, lack of resources,
isolation, fear of violence, role ambiguity, limited promotional opportunities,
inadequate salary, lack of support and involvement in decision making, student
behavioral problems (Abel & Sewell, 2001; Eslinger, 2014; Prilleltensky,
Neff, & Bessell, 2016), and negative school climate (Ryan et al., 2017).
Tellenback, Brenner, and Lofgren (1983) revealed that relationships with students
have been suggested as the most important source of stress for teachers.
Furthermore, Tokar and Feitler (1986) found that stress from inadequate
discipline policies, inadequate salary, noisy pupils, and too much work were
the major stress sources for urban teachers. Of the countless factors that
produce teacher stress, research has shown that one factor greatly produces
more teacher turnover than the others.
Several
studies have indicated that disruptive student behavior is consistently, if not
the best, predictor of urban teacher stress (Abel & Sewell, 2001). In
agreement, Tokar and Feitler (1982) and Ouellette et al. (2018) stated that
urban teacher stress was produced more often by one or two students who
chronically misbehave rather than the general lack of discipline or overall
behavior problems in the school. In a study conducted by Haberman and Rickards
(1990), twenty-four teachers who had previously left the teaching profession
altogether indicated that discipline was the primary reason for quitting. In a
separate correlational study conducted by Abel and Sewell (2001), urban school
teachers identified pupil misbehavior and poor working conditions as the best
predictors of burnout.
Teachers
in urban classrooms confront the everyday stress of meeting the challenging
demands originally outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act (Eslinger, 2014).
Urban educators spend large amounts of time on instruction and see
below-average national scores (Thompson, 2017). DiBara (2007) revealed that
when educators work in schools that are often labeled as failing, they try to bring their students’ work up several grade
levels while concurrently inspiring them and supporting their personal growth
and development. Eslinger (2014) suggested that stress and the ultimate exit of
teachers from the field of education is caused by the difficulties teachers
face of confronting the “cultural mismatch that marginalized students face in
school and society and of negotiating the bureaucratic challenges of limited
resources and support” (p. 229).
Effects of Teacher Stress in Urban Schools
Teachers who feel emotionally exhausted or experience high
levels of burnout demonstrate lower quality of teaching and impaired
relationships (Herman et al., 2018; Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Eaton,
Anthony, Mandel, and Garrison (1990) stated that teaching is a high-stress
profession and many teachers experience serious emotional problems that are
related to the stress of their job. Furthermore, the stress that teachers
experience can interfere with personal well-being and can weaken their
performance (Folkman, Lazarus, Gruen, & DeLongis, 1986). Possibly the most
harmful effect of teacher stress is that when teachers are stressed and not
coping, the relationships they have with their students are likely to suffer
and lead to negative academic and behavioral outcomes for students (Wentzel,
2010). Reinke, Herman, and Stormont (2013) found that emotional exhaustion was
associated with low levels of positive behavior support as evidenced by high rates
of harsh reprimands.
Persistent
stress can ultimately result in professional burnout (Herman et al., 2018). In
many cases, the teacher stress in low socio-economic schools can be so
significant that teachers leave the profession altogether after just one year
(Thompson, 2017). At the same time, half of the teachers that enter the field
leave within their first five years often as a result of the stress of their
profession (Ingersoll, 2002). As turnover is most likely to occur in poorly
performing urban schools, it leads to long-term destabilization of low-income
neighborhood schools which lose continuity in relationships between students,
teachers, parents, and the community (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2016).
The country also suffers a heavy financial burden when teachers leave the
profession after just a few years. The National Commission on Teaching and
America’s Future estimates that public school teacher turnover costs the U.S.
more than $7.3 billion per year and the cost per teacher is estimated from over
$4,000 in rural areas to over $17,000 in urban districts (Robert Wood Johnson
Foundation, 2016). The causes and effects of teacher stress have been
researched and identified, but how are urban educators coping with them?
Coping with Urban Teacher Stress
According
to Abel and Sewell (2001), “stress depends on an individual’s cognitive
appraisal of events and circumstances and on the ability to cope” (pg. 287).
Coping refers to a person’s behavioral and cognitive efforts to manage the
internal and external demands of their environment (Herman et al., 2018).
Coping strategies are constantly changing to manage the specific demands and as
long as an individual’s coping ability is not exceeded, no long-term stress is
experienced (Abel & Sewell, 2001). Unfortunately, for teachers, coping with
stress in their work environment can be less effective because most of the
stressful situations tend to lie outside of the individual’s control (Abel
& Sewell, 2001). Novice teachers have to be able to multitask and cope with
an endless number of dilemmas that occur in the classroom on a daily basis
(Dias-Lacy & Guirguis, 2017). Furthermore, stress may be so prevalent in
teachers because of the general level of alertness that is required on a daily
basis (Abel & Sewell, 2001). In summation, understanding the patterns of
teacher stress and coping may help provide systems of support or solutions
needed to reduce teacher stress and burnout (Herman et al., 2018).
Methodology
Participants
The purpose of the research presented in Empirically Derived Profiles of Teacher
Stress, Burnout, Self-Efficacy, and Coping and Associated Student Outcomes
by Herman et al. in 2018 was to examine the cause and effect of stress in
elementary teachers in an urban Midwestern school district. The participants
were 121 general education teachers and 1,817 students in kindergarten through
fourth grade from nine elementary schools (Herman et al., 2018). All of the
schools were implementing positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS)
with fidelity at their schools. The basic premise of PBIS is that adults are
responsible for providing effective environments for their students and support
is needed for adults to sustain this implementation (Herman et al., 2018). Of
the teacher participants, 95% were female and 5% were male and the demographics
of the teachers were 76% Caucasian, 22% African American, 1% Asian, and 1%
Other (Herman et al., 2018). The student sample included 52% males, 76% African
American students, and 61% of the students qualified for free or reduced lunch
(Herman et al., 2018).
Procedures
The teachers completed a packet of measures for each
consented student in their class and self-report measures on their levels of
burnout, stress, efficacy, and coping (Herman et al., 2018). Academic achievement
in reading and math were assessed using Woodcock-Johnson
III Test of Achievement (WJ III ACH) administered by trained undergraduate
and graduate students. The Maslach
Burnout Inventory (MBI) was completed by all of the teachers to measure
their levels of burnout. The level of teacher stress and their ability to cope
were identified by their responses on an 11-point Likert-type scale from 0 to
10. The Ohio State Teacher Efficacy Scale
was completed by all of the teachers to measure their teacher self-efficacy.
Findings for the levels of stress were presented in four subgroups:
Stressed/Low Coping, Stressed/Moderate Coping, Stressed/High Coping, and Well
Adjusted (Herman et al., 2018). To report student behavior, the teachers completed
the 54-item Teacher Observation of
Classroom Adaptation Checklist (TOCA-C) that included seven subscales:
Concentration Problems, Disruptive Behavior, Prosocial Behavior, Emotional
Regulation, Internalizing Problems, Family Problems, and Family Involvement. Finally,
student achievement was measured by conducting the six subtests of the WJ III
ACH in reading and math.
Results
Findings
from this study indicated that nearly all teachers (93%) fell into classes that
were characterized by high levels of stress and only 7% of the teachers were
well-adjusted (Herman et al., 2018). The Stressed/Low Coping class presented
the highest rates of student behavior problems and lowest academic achievement
(Herman et al., 2018). Further, the Stressed/Low Coping class had a
significantly lower mean score on prosocial behavior while the Well Adjusted
class had a higher mean score for prosocial behavior. The Stressed/Low Coping
class had significantly higher disruptive behavior mean scores than the Well
Adjusted class, Stressed/High Coping, and the Stressed/Moderate Coping class.
Additionally, the Stressed/Not Coping class had the highest means for student
concentration problems and teacher burnout. Among math achievement, the
students of the teachers in the Stressed/Not Coping class had lower mean scores
than their counterparts. However, there was no significant differences between
classes on reading achievement scores as reported by Herman et al. (2018).
Discussion
The profiles of the teachers were significantly related to
the student behavior outcomes in ways the authors expected, supporting the
validity of the profiles in this sample of elementary school teachers (Herman
et al., 2018). The high stress levels of nearly all of the teacher participants
in this study confirmed evidence suggesting that teaching is a stressful
profession. Herman et al. also stated that it is no surprise that teachers
report higher than average levels of mental health and physical problems and
below average levels of job satisfaction when compared with individuals in
other occupations. Ultimately, the Stressed/Low Coping teacher profiles were
associated with the worst student outcomes which included higher disruptive
behaviors and lower student adaptive behaviors and math achievement (Herman et
al., 2018).
The identified study implications
that can be used to address stress in teachers in urban classrooms across the
country. First, their study revealed that screening teachers based on their
levels of stress, coping, and burnout may identify those in need of support.
Voluntary or self-screening could be tied to building initiatives such as
health promotion and mental health awareness. Second, teachers who report high
levels of stress and low coping skills should be offered supportive services
that focus on equipping adults with strategies for promoting adaptive thinking
and adaptive behavior. Third, Herman et al. suggested ecological manipulations
that include fostering nurturing environments at school, not only for the
students but also for the teachers that work there. Finally, teachers should
also be better prepared to enter the field of education. Teacher preparation
programs should pay more attention to classroom management and psychological
techniques to cope with stress (Prilleltensky et al., 2017). Further, teacher
candidates should be challenged to “gain skills in critical reflection and
critical consciousness in an effort to deconstruct the existing social order”
(Allen, Hancock, Starker-Glass, & Lewis, 2017, p. 14) to teach their
ever-growing diverse population of students
Overall,
their findings suggested that investing in resources that support teacher
adaptation may improve not only their well-being but also the well-being and
functioning of their students (Herman et al., 2018). The authors summarized
their study by reminding the audience of the fact that teacher stress and
burnout are significant problems that affect our urban schools and that there
is a need to find impactful and innovative ways to support teachers and, in
return, improve outcomes for students. The findings of this article support the
literature that exists in education that teachers are dealing with stress on a
daily basis and this affects not only themselves, but also their disadvantaged
students. Potential solutions to urban teacher stress include identifying those
suffering from high stress and intervening, building strong mentor/mentee
relationships, providing teachers with four mental health days per school year,
and placing emphasis on culturally relevant pedagogy in teacher education
programs and professional development.
While
a great deal of research exists in regards to urban teacher stress, very few
solutions and their effectiveness have been reported. Herman et al. (2018)
revealed that current research on teacher burnout indicates that teachers may
benefit from additional support in classroom management, but future research
will need to determine if these interventions move teachers into more adaptive
stress profiles. Current solutions include additional training for teachers,
improving teacher preparation programs, ongoing professional development
(DiBara, 2007), and improving the conditions of work (Haberman & Rickards,
1990). Again, no data has been revealed to present the success of these
solutions. Future implications of this research paper could include
incorporating the solutions presented and conducting a longitudinal study on
the effectiveness.
Implications
More attention needs to be placed on the growing epidemic of
teacher stress to reduce the consequences stress has on teachers, their
students, and the community. First of all, attention needs to be placed on
helping teachers cope with stress to help prevent them from experiencing
work-related burnout and turnover (Thompson, 2017). Prior to providing support
for teachers suffering from teacher stress, a survey must be conducted to identify
the teachers that need additional support. Tokar and Feitler (1982) agree that
schools need to identify the stress levels of staff, especially new teachers,
and provide them with more supervision and coping skills. A team of trained
professionals would provide coping skills and interventions such as relaxation
training as a free, voluntary service for state educators with intense needs
(Herman et al., 2018).
As
several studies have revealed that teacher turnover typically occurs within the
first five years of a teacher’s career at an urban school (Eslinger, 2014;
Haberman & Rickards, 1990; Ingersoll, 2002; Prilleltensky et al., 2016;
Ryan et al., 2017; Thompson, 2017), a strong mentor/mentee relationship must be
developed with consistent, meaningful meetings. The administrators of the
school would choose strong mentors who will then receive relevant training and
a monetary incentive for their additional time and support. This relationship
would continue for at least three years or until the novice teacher feels
comfortable and competent in the classroom as evidence of observations,
discussions, and self-reflection. Haberman and Rickards (1990) pointed out that
it takes approximately three years for teachers to become competent in urban
classrooms, therefore urban schools may be losing teachers at the point they
become effective professionals.
To
help reduce teacher stress, one mental health day would be provided per quarter
for each educator. This time would be given in addition to sick and personal days
each academic year, but would not require a doctor’s note or written excuse.
These mental health days would provide additional time for teachers to take
care of themselves, regroup, or do something they enjoy. Eslinger (2014)
acknowledged that teachers are often buried in paperwork which includes
classwork to grade and lesson plans to write. This mental health day could also
be used to catch up on the abundant amounts of work that hang over a teacher’s
head, daily.
Ultimately,
scholars agree that urban students do not perform well academically or
behaviorally because of the cultural mismatch between their school and home
(Eslinger, 2014). This can result in discipline problems and failing school
grades. To help dissolve the Eurocentric norms (Eslinger, 2014) in urban
classrooms, a culturally relevant teaching (CRT) course must become required in
all education course loads. It is hopeful that discipline and the difficulties
of working with underachieving students of various cultural backgrounds will be
improved if teacher education programs are required to include instruction on
culturally relevant pedagogy (Allen et al., 2017; Haberman & Rickards,
1990). In agreement, Allen et al. (2017) have proposed a critical framework
that integrates culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) into teacher education
programs that incorporates social justice, critical reflection, and critical
questions for teacher candidates that are 82% White female. Allen et al. (2017)
declared that program development is imperative in teacher education and should
be grounded in a social justice mission.
One
semester long course of CRT would include teaching preservice teachers how to
engage their students of different cultures and backgrounds (Ladson-Billings,
2011). These preservice teachers would need to learn how to deconstruct the
curriculum to expose its weaknesses, construct or build the curriculum, and
reconstruct or rebuild the curriculum to help students make sense of it
(Ladson-Billings, 2011). This course would be required by all students pursuing
a degree in education across the country. Gloria Ladson-Billings (2011)
revealed that after observing preservice teachers, they began to see
multicultural education and teaching for social justice as an ethical position
they need to take in order to ensure that students are getting the education they
are entitled to. Further, all preservice teachers should experience an urban
classroom setting, at least once, prior to receiving their educational degree.
As most current educators have not received
culturally relevant training, a required professional development training would
occur throughout one full school year to educate teachers on the aspects,
importance, and tools for implementing culturally relevant training. This
professional development would need to be ongoing for at least one school year
in order for teachers to buy into the importance of this teaching model.
Teacher performance on this standard would be evaluated yearly by
administrators. Overall, teachers need to understand that they will not be
given additional work and that CRP is simply a different way of thinking and
teaching their diverse learners.
Conclusion
In
summation, it is crucial that professionals in the field of education not only
address the issue and innumerable causes of teacher stress but also find
strategies to help teachers cope with work-related stress. While small steps
can be taken to reduce teacher stress it is believed that the best way to
approach the largest factor of teacher stress in urban classrooms, which is
student discipline, is by requiring all preservice teachers pursuing their
degree in education to take at least one CRT course in college and experience
an urban classroom setting. All other current teachers will earn credentials by
attending and participating in a year of professional development. If this
growing epidemic is not addressed, the average turnover rates among new
teachers will continue to rapidly increase, particularly in low-income schools.
References
Abel, M. H., & Sewell, J.
(2001). Stress and burnout in rural and urban secondary school teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(5), 287-293.
Allen, A., Hancock, S. D.,
Starker-Glass, T., & Lewis, C. W. (2017). Mapping culturally relevant
pedagogy into teacher education programs: A critical framework. Teachers
College Record, 119(1), 1-26.
Dias-Lacy, S. L., & Guirguis, R.
V. (2017). Challenges for new teachers and ways of coping with them. Journal
of Education and Learning, 6(3), 265–272.doi:10.5539/jel.v6n3p265.
DiBara, J. A. (2007). Responsible to
the kids: The goals and struggles of urban high school teachers. The New Educator, 3(1), 11-30.
Eaton, W. W., Anthony, J. C.,
Mandel, W., & Garrison, R. (1990). Occupations and the prevalence of major depressive
disorder. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Medicine. 32,
1079-1087.
Eslinger, J. C. (2014). Navigating
between a rock and a hard place: Lessons from an urban school teacher. Education and Urban Society, 46(2), 209-233.
Farber, B. A., & Miller, J.
(1981). Teacher burnout: A psychoeducational perspective. Teachers College Record, 83(2),
235-43.
Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Gruen,
R. J., & DeLongis, A. (1986). Appraisal, coping, health status, and
psychological symptoms. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 50,
571-579.
Haberman, M., & Rickards, W. H.
(1990). Urban teachers who quit: Why they leave and what they do. Urban
Education, 25(3), 297-303.
Herman, K.C., Hickmon-Rosa, J.,
& Reinke, W. M. (2018). Empirically derived profiles of teacher stress,
burnout, self-efficacy, and coping with associated student outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
20(20), 90-100. doi:
10.1177/1098300717732066
Ingersoll, R. M. (2002, August 15).
High turnover plagues schools. USA Today. Retrieved from
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1130&context=gse_pubs
Ladson-Billings, G. (2011). “Yes,
but how do we do it?”: Practicing culturally relevant pedagogy. In Landsman,
J.G., & Lewis, C.W. (Eds.), White
teachers/diverse classrooms: Creating inclusive schools, building on students’
diversity, and providing true educational equity (2nd Ed., pp.
33-46). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E.
(1981). MBI: Maslach burnout inventory.
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Ouellette, R. R., Frazier, S. L.,
Shernoff, E. S., Cappella, E., Mehta, T. G., Marinez-Lora, A.,
Prilleltensky, I., Neff, M., &
Bessell, A. (2016). Teacher stress: What it is, why it’s important, how it can
be alleviated. Theory Into Practice, 55(2), 104–111.
doi: 10.1080/00405841.2016.1148986
Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., &
Stormont, M. (2013). Classroom-level positive behavior supports in schools
implementing SW-PBIS: Identifying areas for enhancement. Journal of Positive
Behavior Interventions, 15, 39–50.
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
(September 2016). Teacher stress and health: Effects on teachers, students, and
schools. Retrieved from
https://www.earlychildhoodwebinars.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Teacher-Stress-and-Health-PENNSTATE-2016.pdf
Ryan, S. V., von der Embse, N. P.,
Pendergast, L. L., Saeki, E., Segool, N., & Schwing, S. (2017). Leaving the
teaching profession: The role of teacher stress and educational accountability
policies on turnover intent. Teaching and
Teacher Education. 66. 1-11. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.016.
Tellenback, S., Brenner, S., &
Lofgren, H. (1983). Teacher stress: Exploratory model building. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 56,
19-33.
Thompson, K. (2017). Elementary Title I teachers perception of
stress, burnout and the impact on retention. (Ed.D. Dissertations). 71. Retrieved from
https://commons.cu-portland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1111&context=edudissertations
Tokar, E., & Feitler, F. C.
(1982). Getting a handle on teacher stress: How bad is the problem? Educational Leadership, 39(6), 456-58.
Tokar, E., & Feitler, F. C.
(1986). A comparative study of teacher stress in American and British middle
schools. Journal of Early Adolescence,
6(1), 77-82.
Wentzel, K.R. (2010). Students’
relationships with teachers. In J.L. Meece & J.S. Eccles (Eds.), Handbook of research on schools, schooling,
and human development (pp. 75-91). New York, NY: Routledge.