About this paper symposium

---

Panel information
Panel 8. Education, Schooling

Paper #1
Emotional Labor, Job Stress, and Burnout Among Preschool Teachers: Analysis of Mediators and Moderators
Author information	Role
Runke Huang, School of Humanities and Social Science, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Hong Kong	Presenting author
Deyu Wang, School of Humanities and Social Science, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Hong Kong	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Introduction. Preschool teachers face emotional and psychological challenges due to the nature of their work, which involves regulating emotions to support children's development. Emotional labor can result in job stress and burnout, particularly given the high workloads and social pressures preschool educators face (Jeon & Ardeleanu, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020). However, most research on teacher burnout has focused on middle and secondary school educators (Ma et al., 2021). This study explores the impacts of emotional labor, mediating role of job stress and the moderating role of emotion regulation difficulties in the relationship between emotional labor and burnout among preschool teachers. Hypotheses. • Emotional labor significantly and negatively correlated with job burnout among preschool teachers. • Job stress is expected to increase due to excessive emotional labor and it mediates the associations between emotional labor and job burnout. • Difficulties in emotion regulation are hypothesized to amplify the impact of emotional labor on both job burnout and job stress Study population. The study sample consisted of 393 preschool teachers from mainland China, who voluntarily participated after providing informed consent. The majority of participants were female (n = 380, 96.69%), while 13 participants were male (3.31%). The average age of the participants was 30.84 years (SD = 7.04), and their average length of teaching experience was 8.68 years (SD = 6.75). Methods. This study employed three validated scales to assess preschool teachers' emotional labor, job stress, burnout, and difficulties in emotion regulation. The Emotional Labor Strategies Scale (Diefendorff et al., 2005) measured emotional display and expression efforts (α = 0.90). The Job Stress Scale evaluated stress related to relationships, teaching autonomy, workload, and feedback. The Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) (Maslach et al., 1996) focused on emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment (α = 0.92). The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS-36) (Gratz & Roemer, 2004) assessed emotional regulation difficulties. Data analysis via Mplus Version 8 included descriptive statistics and correlations, a mediation model, and a moderated mediation model to test the moderating role of emotional regulation difficulties. Results. Teachers who reported greater difficulties in emotional regulation exhibited higher levels of both burnout (r = .48, p < .01) and job stress (r = .55, p < .01). Burnout was significantly associated with emotional labor (r = .20, p < .001) and job stress (r = .58, p < .001). The structural equation modeling results confirmed that job stress significantly mediated the relationship between emotional labor and burnout (indirect effect = .12, 95% CI [0.042, 0.231]). Further, the moderated mediation model demonstrated a significant interaction between emotional labor and difficulties in emotional regulation regarding job stress (β = .11, p < .05). Implications. The findings indicate the need for interventions to support preschool teachers' mental health. Since difficulties in emotional regulation intensify the effects of emotional labor on job stress and burnout, providing emotional regulation training could help teachers manage these demands. Additionally, addressing job stress directly through stress management programs may reduce burnout.

Paper #2
Does Teacher Job Satisfaction Predict Children’s School Functioning in U.S. Early Elementary School
Author information	Role
QINGQING YANG, University At Albany, SUNY, United States	Presenting author
Paul Morgan, University At Albany, SUNY, University At Albany, SUNY	Non-presenting author
Deborah Schussler, University At Albany, SUNY, University At Albany, SUNY	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Introduction Teachers’ efficacy and stress is theorized to negatively impact their students’ school functioning, either indirectly through changing teacher-student interactions or directly via a role-modeling process (Bandura, 1977; Lauermann & Butler, 2021). Yet existing findings are mixed and report positive, null, or negative associations with student functioning (Madigan & Curran, 2021; Zee et al., 2018). One potential reason for the mixed findings is the use of study designs that do not account for time-invariant and -variant potential confounders. Additionally, few studies had explored the heterogeneity in the observed associations. We investigate two questions: (a) Do within-person changes in the efficacy and stress levels of teachers result in changes in their student’s school functioning? (b) Do these associations vary by the students’ skill levels at kindergarten entry? Method We used the kindergarten through second grade data from a nationally representative dataset, Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010-11 (Tourangeau et al., 2019). In the spring of each grade, teachers responded to a 5-point scale measuring their efficacy (12 items) and stress (2 items; α = 0.70-0.83). Student academic achievement (reading, mathematics, and science; α = .90–.94) and executive functioning (cognitive flexibility and working memory; α =.87–.94) were measured using direct assessments. Student sociobehavioral skills (externalizing problems, internalizing problems, interpersonal skills, self-control, and approaches to learning) were measured using teacher-report Social Skills Rating System (α =.79–.88). We first used weighted student fixed effect models also controlled for a set of time-varying covariates to estimate the effects of teacher efficacy and stress in the whole sample. Use of student fixed effects control for time-invariant confounds. We then conducted stratified analyses to estimate the variations by kindergarten score of each outcome variable using the 25% cut-off. Results Table 1 indicates that changes in teacher efficacy led to changes in teacher reported sociobehavioral outcomes, including lower level of externalizing and internalizing problems, higher level of self-control, interpersonal skills, and approach to learning (ES = 0.03-0.10), but not assessed academic achievement and executive functioning. Similar results were also shown for teacher stress, with only effect on sociobehavioral outcomes significant (ES = -0.05 - -0.02; See Table 2) but not for academic achievement and executive functioning. Stratified analyses yielded little evidence that the effect of either teacher efficacy or stress differed for students who displayed high and low levels of academic skills in kindergarten. Discussion The largely null effects on multiple student outcomes are contrary to findings from cross-sectional studies but are consistent with a recent study also using fixed effect modeling (Jerrim et al., 2023). Teacher efficacy appears a stronger predictor of sociobehavioral outcomes than teacher stress. Given significant effects were only observed for teacher-report outcomes, future replication studies are needed to address potential common reporter bias using multiple informants. Overall, our results suggest that teacher stress and efficacy may be related to students’ sociobehavioral functioning but not their academic or executive functioning, suggesting the need for revised theoretical accounts of how teacher stress and efficacy affects students during the primary grades.

Paper #3
Sources of Stress for Special Educators: What Theory Shares and Teachers Say
Author information	Role
Marisa DeCollibus, M.Ed., Penn State University, United States	Presenting author
Deborah Schussler, University at Albany, SUNY, United States	Non-presenting author
Sebrina Doyle Fosco, Penn State University, United States	Non-presenting author
Andrew Roach, Georgia State University, United States	Non-presenting author
Jennifer Frank, Penn State University, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Introduction. Special Education has been identified as a field with severe shortages (Sutcher et al., 2016). Evidence suggests a strong link between stress, burnout, and attrition for many Special Education Teachers (SETs). To understand SETs’ experiences with stress and burnout, the current study draws from Billingsley and Bettini’s (2017) “conditions of service” theorized to influence SET motivation to continue in the profession, SET burnout, and SET ability to implement apt instruction. This study examines how SET working conditions and reported stressors at the start of their academic year relate to reported levels of stress and burnout. Hypothesis. • Do SETs who report poorer conditions of service, endorse higher levels of stress and burnout at the start of the academic year? • Of the conditions of service identified by Billingsley and Bettini (2017) and measured in the current study, are some more aligned with burnout and stress than others? Methods. Data was collected from SETs in a district located in the southeastern region of the United States across three cohorts of teachers at the start of the academic year (2021-2022, 2022-2023, & 2023-2024). A subsample of pre intervention interviews were completed for qualitative analysis. Primary Quantitative outcomes were examined using the following: the PROMIS Sleep Disturbance Questionnaire (PROMIS; Buysse et al., 2010; α=0.87); emotional exhaustion subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory: Educator Survey (MBI; Maslach, 1997; α=0.89), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item Scale (GAD-7; Spitzer et al., 2006; α=0.91), The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4; Cohen et al., 1983; α=0.70), and the Primary Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8; Kroenke et al., 2008; α=0.87). Conditions of Service were garnered from: the curricular resources subscale of the Intent to Continue Teaching Special Education Scale (Bettini et al., 2020; α=0.48-), Teacher and Principal Trust Scales (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; α=0.90-0.92), subscales from the Time Urgency Scale (Conte et al., 2001; α=0.44-0.89), and the Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Questionnaire (Schwab, 1982; Rizzo, 1970; α=0.89-0.90). Qualitative data was examined using a codebook developed to understand SET stress, well-being, and school/classroom climate. Results. Results from the quantitative data showed teacher reports of role conflict (i.e., incompatibility with the position of SET) to be significantly correlated with perceived stress (τb = .359, p = .01) and emotional exhaustion (τb = .34, p = .012). Interestingly, both dimensions of burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalization) were significantly correlated with role problems (i.e., unpredictable outcomes in response to behavior and behavioral requirements; τb = .295,.326, p = .024, .016). Lastly, higher ratings of material resources (including quality and access) were significantly inversely correlated with teacher’s perceived stress (τb = -.292, p = .038). Implications. Understanding the relationship between conditions of service as theorized by Billingsley and Bettini (2017) and SETs’ stress is important for both informing interventions and contextualizing the current state of SETs’ retention and quality. Ultimately, SET stress, situated within conditions of service for SETs, has broad-reaching implications for equitably serving students in special education settings.

Paper #4
Examining How School Leaders Support Teachers’ Efficacy for SEL Instruction
Author information	Role
Dr. Sebrina L. Doyle Fosco, The Pennsylvania State University, United States	Presenting author
Tara Hofkens, University of Virginia, United States	Non-presenting author
Mark Greenberg, Penn State University, United States	Non-presenting author
Patricia Jennings, University of Virginia, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Introduction: When considering teacher efficacy for implementation of student social and emotional learning (SEL) in schools and districts, recent research has indicated the importance of considering the upstream or systemic factors that may be influential (e.g., Frazier & Doyle Fosco, 2024; Doyle Fosco et al., under review). School leadership for SEL is a crucial piece to this system of support (Mahfouz et al, 2018; NAESP, 2019). Research questions: In this exploratory analysis, we examined upstream factors that may affect teacher efficacy in delivering social and emotional learning (SEL) curricula to students. This study looks at educational leaders’ reports of their school-level commitment to SEL, how they may (or may not) lead by example, and what challenges they were experiencing related to SEL program implementation. These factors can influence teachers in their ability to successfully lead SEL with students. Study population: School leaders (n = 48) whose teachers were participating in a randomized controlled trial focusing on implementation of the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) student-focused SEL program completed baseline surveys. Methods: Exploratory descriptive analyses were conducted to examine the extent to which educational leaders were endorsing particular factors related to commitment to SEL and personal leadership practices that set an example regarding the importance of SEL programs and practices. We also examined SEL program implementation challenges endorsed by school leaders. Results: For school leaders who participated in baseline data collection, over 50% ranked “promoting social and emotional development” in their top two most important educational goals alongside “building basic literacy skills” (51%). When asked, almost all agreed or strongly agreed that they have made a public commitment to support SEL as a school priority (94%) and that they expect teachers to use PATHS regularly (100%); 91% also said that they were committed to supporting SEL among teachers. However, there was less confidence when asked about school resources to support teachers’ SEL; only 64% of school leaders agreed that they had what they needed. Further, in terms of leadership by example, there was less support. For example, only about half (55%) said that they encourage teachers to use PATHS techniques in staff meetings. Less than half of leaders reported having received support themselves on how to lead PATHS, and only 42% indicated that they modeled practices, used program materials, or referenced the program. If SEL is siloed to the classroom, there are many opportunities missed to support efficacy around the use of practices. In terms of SEL implementation challenges reported by school leaders, the top two were related to teacher training and parental support for SEL skills; two-thirds of school leaders indicated that “teachers needing more training to support SEL” and “lack of reinforcement of SEL skills at home” were big problems. Lack of funding and teacher lack of time for SEL were reported by about one-third of respondents as a big problem; an additional third reported it was “somewhat” of a problem. Lack of teacher consensus that SEL should be taught was reported by about 25% of school leaders.

⇦ Back to session