Special Needs Educators in Singapore and Abroad

Since research on those who train adults with intellectual disabilities is not significant, this study will examine research involving special needs educators in Singapore and abroad.

Studies on the stress teachers or educators face belong to a larger effort to examine the occupational stress that individuals from various professions struggle with and what the effects of such stress are. Beehr and Newman (1978) describe occupational stress as a condition where factors involving an individual’s job cause disruptions or enhancements to that individual’s normal physical or psychological conditions, leading them to deviate from the way they normally function.

One of the parameters that are considered when it comes to the occupational stress that teachers sometimes face, is within-occupation difference. Within-occupation difference refers to the diverse range of job strains that teachers face that are dependent on their various work titles and assorted job scopes. Teachers can by no means, be classified as a standardised group - there are many teachers who perform different tasks, face varying challenges, demands and rewards that depends on factors such as the school they work at, the student level they teach, whether they teach special needs students, etc. For instance, international studies have found that special education (SE) teachers face high levels of stress regarding a plethora of concerns, ranging from their job responsibilities to SE teacher attrition.

Further, several studies show evidence that the amount of stress experienced by SE teachers varies when compared to the stress regular classroom teachers typically face.

For example, Cherkes and Fimian (1982) found that SE teachers reported higher occupational stress but Kyriacou (1987) and Trendall (1989) concluded that SE teachers reported having lower levels of stress in their working environment when compared to their colleagues in mainstream schools. In their study, Williams and Gersch (2004) did not discover a major difference in the total level of stress SE teachers and regular classroom teachers face.

Research from the United States backs these results, with some researchers finding that SE teachers face more stress while others report the opposite and still others do not detect a difference in the levels of stress SE teachers and teachers in mainstream schools face. These varying results may be caused by the diverse sociocultural and educational contexts and a difference in the measuring instruments and methods of investigation employed in the various studies.

The absence of exact definitions of stress, along with a lack of models of stress processes for SE teachers, is concerning and should not be ignored, although the dearth of these definitions and models could arise from the possibility that stress cannot be formally or comprehensively defined.

While the exact definition of stress is difficult to discern, the literature that was reviewed for this study makes it clear that the terms “stressors,” “stress,” “strain,” and “burnout” are not interchangeable and must be distinguished from one another.

Work-related environmental factors that have the potential to disrupt an individual’s psychological, social, and physiological health is defined in brief as job “stressors”. These stressors can be calculated both subjectively (for instance, through an individual’s perceptions of their working environment) or objectively (for instance, the actual traits of an environment).

The negative social, physical, psychological and behavioural changes that result from the exposure to stressors are defined as “strain”, which is also described as the adverse consequence of stress.

“Burnout” refers to the ultimate response towards continuous and intense periods of stress. Particularly present in jobs in which individuals have to work with others, burnout is described as a negative psychological state that is caused by chronic job-related stress.

Burnout differs from the episodic stress, in that it typically has long-term effects and may carry clinical severity since individuals who experience burnout may possibly fail to recover without assistance.

The literature that was reviewed further provides comprehensive information on factors that contribute to the complexity of SE work environments and the specific conditions that SE teachers have flagged as stressful. Research points to numerous sources of stress SE teachers face, with discipline, parent contact, administration, paperwork, working relationships with fellow teachers, disruptive students and overcrowded classrooms being the most frequently cited sources.

Other factors that contribute to the stress SE teachers face include a lack of equipment necessary to meet the needs of their students and a lack of appropriate professional training for educators who have difficulties in catering to the needs of SEN children. Koeske and Koeske (1993) further classified the sources of stress SE teachers face into four categories: organisational, interpersonal, training, and instructional.

In a comprehensive thematic analysis of research investigating the possible factors that contribute to SE teachers’ attrition and retention, Billingsley (2004), indicated that work environment factors (including poor remuneration, sub-optimal climate, low administrative support and difficulties adapting to their varying job scopes) can cause negative affective reactions such as rising stress levels, poor job satisfaction and decreased organisational and professional commitment in teachers. This could ultimately cause withdrawal, which may eventually lead to attrition.

According to a qualitative study on SE teachers’ intentions to leave, by Morvant, Gersten, Gillman, Keating, and Blake’s (1995), 80 per cent of those who planned on leaving their jobs cited higher levels of stress on a daily or weekly basis as compared to just over 50 per cent of those who stayed at their positions. Those who were planning to leave spoke more frequently about stress and pointed to the diverse range of students’ needs and abilities, bureaucratic demands, and clashing expectations, goals, and instructions as factors that caused them stress.

Meanwhile, factors such as gender or marital status did not appear to affect the stress levels of SE Teachers or their commitment to the field. Research into whether an educator’s training and experience contributed to stress levels turned up ambiguous results.

New SE teachers reported feeling inadequately prepared, frustrated, and exhausted in an interview study conducted by Kilgore and Griffin (1998) that was reported by Rosenberg, O’Shea, and O’Shea (1998). More experienced SE teachers, on the other hand, reported lower stress levels. This may be due to the possibility that they have developed methods to manage and defuse their work frustrations better, in time.

Another study found that teachers who have expectations about their duties and roles that are not fulfilled experience frustration and leave the sector. This observation matches the findings of another study that cites role conflict and role ambiguity as some of the top organisational work conditions that become major sources of stress for SE teachers.

Role conflict occurs when a teacher’s responsibilities clash with the realities of professional life, while role ambiguity refers to a scenario where a teacher has insufficient information to conduct their professional responsibilities adequately.

It is crucial to note that the significance of a potential stressor is dependent on how a teacher personally responds and adapts to the demands of his/her job, not the actual situation that teacher may face itself. Although literature based on the research into stress does not report that SE teachers experience stress levels that are high enough to constitute crises, the population comprising of SE teachers should be continuously monitored given the peaks in the levels of stress these professionals encounter.

The literature also provides detail into inclusive education, which involves all students being taught in the same classroom so that they have access to equal opportunities, regardless of any disabilities some pupils may have.

According to Foreman (2001), inclusive education typically sees students with, or who are at risk for, learning disabilities being taught in the same educational setting as their non-disabled peers. Commonly tagged as “mainstreaming” in Singapore, this strategy involves tweaks to a school’s policies and practices to better meet the needs of all students.

According to one study, inclusive education requires a school-wide if not a nation-wide effort to adapt the general education framework to cater to all students, with a focus on collaboration with both professionals and families of students with special education needs. Moore (2009) further asserts that individual prejudices against those with disabilities must first be abolished for mainstreaming to become a reality. Brophy & Good (1974) add that it is vital for policymakers to recognise the correlation between teachers’ perceptions and attitudes and their pupils’ achievements, behaviours, and self-esteem, especially since teachers are the key to determining the success and failure of such inclusion or mainstreaming efforts.

The literature that has been reviewed provides implications for professional practice, particularly for those who are in charge of developing SE teacher training programmes. Those who develop SE training programmes should take factors - such as performance pressure, pupil supervision and behaviour management matters, and the safety and hygiene of special needs pupils – that may potentially increase the stress levels of SE teachers into account during the planning stage.

Developers who build SE training programmes should also incorporate lessons on

organisational and behaviour management skills, so that SE teachers have the ability and the confidence to support pupils with special educational needs. Armed with a broad range of skills and behaviours that will positively impact their job satisfaction, teachers who receive such training will be more likely to execute their tasks and goals confidently and are more likely to feel a greater sense of professional achievement.

Furthermore, the “shared role” strategy – as suggested by Conderman and Katsiyannis (2002) – may also help decrease the strain SE teachers may face. “Shared role” refers to a strategy in staff like teachers’ assistants are employed to support SE teachers by fulfilling certain non-instructional or instructional responsibilities.

Finally, the literature suggests that increasing teachers’ awareness of the potential stressors of their job and the provision of training that helps them cope with these stressors may strengthen SE teachers’ ability to combat feelings of frustration and disappointment. This is especially possible if SE teachers receive such training prior to entering the field or in their first year in the sector.

There are, however, certain limitations in the literature. For one, the current outcomes that were gathered in the research were based on cross-sectional data. The literature also depended on teachers to self-report about the work-related stress they encounter. While there is evidence that suggests that adults reporting on their well-being in personal interviews are more likely to respond honestly as opposed to a socially desirable way, the results gathered using this method should be treated with caution, given the potential of threats to internal validity and since there was no attempt to check the SE teachers’ working environments. By depending on the SE teachers’ subjective experiences and accounts of stress, the literature makes assumptions that the teachers’ reports are authentic and reflected the perceptions of the SE teachers, which may not necessarily reflect the actual reality of their work environments.

Finally, the fact that the study employed mail survey methodology also casts some doubts on the absolute veracity of the study. While mail survey methodology allows for large amounts of data to be collected, the reliance of the method on volunteers may have possibly impaired the objectiveness of the study.

Despite the shortcomings of this study, the authors advocate that the results found in the literature adds to the existing research on stress among SE teachers.