Teacher stress and burnout in Australia: examining the role of intrapersonal and environmental factors.

Concerns regarding high rates of teacher stress and burnout are present globally. Yet there is limited current data regarding the severity of stress, or the role of intrapersonal and environmental factors in relation to teacher stress and burnout within the Australian context. The present study, conducted over an 18-month period, prior to the COVID pandemic, surveyed 749 Australian teachers to explore their experience of work-related stress and burnout; differences in stress and burnout across different demographic groups within the profession; as well as the contributing role of intrapersonal and environmental factors, particularly, emotion regulation, subjective well-being, and workload. Results showed over half of the sample reported being very or extremely stressed and were considering leaving the profession, with early career teachers, primary teachers, and teachers working in rural and remote areas reporting the highest stress and burnout levels. Conditional process analyses highlighted the importance of emotion regulation, workload and subjective well-being in the development of teacher stress and some forms of burnout. Implications for educational practice are discussed.

The Downstream Effects of Teacher Well-Being Programs: Improvements in Teachers' Stress, Cognition and Well-Being Benefit Their Students.

Quality interventions addressing the important issue of teacher stress and burnout have shown promising outcomes for participating teachers in terms of decreased distress, improved well-being and increased commitment to their jobs. Less is known however about whether such interventions also benefit students. The present study investigated the downstream effects for a completer sample of 226 primary and high school students after their teachers (n = 17) completed one of two 8-week stress reduction interventions. The relationships between change in teacher self-reported distress and burnout after completing the interventions, and change in students' self-reported well-being, academic self-perceptions, and perceptions of classroom environment were explored. A secondary aim of this study was to assess whether changes in teachers' cognitive flexibility mediated the relationship between teacher and student self-report outcomes. Results of correlational and multi-level mediation analyses showed that changes to teachers' self-reported distress and burnout affected multiple facets of students' well-being and the academic environment. Specifically, reductions in teachers' self-reported distress and burnout were related to students' improved perceptions of their teachers' support in the classroom. Reductions in teachers' personal and work-related burnout correlated with greater increases of academic self-perception in students. Contrary to predictions, cognitive flexibility in teachers did not mediate the relationship between these student and teacher measures. These findings indicate important downstream benefits for students and highlight the broader value of stress-reduction and well-being programs for teachers.

Reactive and proactive aggression as meaningful distinctions at the variable and person level in primary school-aged children.

Reactive and proactive aggression is a dichotomous classification of aggression in adults and children. This distinction has been supported by a number of variable-based and factor analytic studies. Due to high inter-correlations, however, the reactive-proactive aggression distinction may not be entirely useful for understanding how group or individual aggressive behavior varies in children and adolescents. Drawing on a sample of primary school-aged children (N = 242) aged 7-12 years, this study sought to determine whether reactive and proactive aggression could be distinguished at the variable-level and the person-level in children. Exploratory Factor Analysis of data from an aggression instrument measuring both functions and forms of aggression, found a two-factor construct of aggression constituted by a reactive and proactive aggression factor. A person-based analysis was then conducted after classifying children according to the presence of reactive and/or proactive aggression. Discriminant function analysis was used to discern whether classifications on the basis of aggression function produced meaningful distinctions in terms of antisocial traits and emotional valence and intensity measures. Two functions were identified which distinguished children with different combinations of reactive and proactive aggression. Reactive-only aggressive children were defined primarily by high levels of impulsivity, while proactive-only children were defined primarily by higher levels of antisocial traits. Children high in both types of aggression exhibited both the presence of antisocial traits and impulsivity. Contrary to recent findings, this suggests that differences in aggression functions remain meaningful at the person level in children. Implications for interventions are discussed.