Psychology in the Schools, Vol.

54(5), 2017 
C 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
View this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pits DOI: 10.1002/pits.22013

BURNOUT IN SPECIAL NEEDS TEACHERS AT KINDERGARTEN AND PRIMARY

SCHOOL: INVESTIGATING THE ROLE OF PERSONAL RESOURCES AND WORK
WELLBEING
SIMONA DE STASIO, CATERINA FIORILLI, AND PAULA BENEVENE
LUMSA University

LOTTA UUSITALO-MALMIVAARA
University of Helsinki

CARLO DI CHIACCHIO
Invalsi

The purpose of the current study was to examine, within an integrative predictive model, the relative
contributions of sociodemographic variables, personal resources, and work wellbeing to teacher
burnout. The research was conducted with special education teachers at Italian preschools—a con-
text in which few previous studies have been carried out—and primary schools. A cross-sectional
survey-based study with a sample of 194 kindergarten and primary school teachers was conducted.
The results indicated that teachers’ happiness at school and job satisfaction incrementally predicted
variance in personal, work-related, and student-related burnout, even after controlling for the effects
of sociodemographic factors and personal resources. Furthermore, the final integrative predictive
model was similar for both kindergarten and primary teachers.  C 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

I NTRODUCTION
The literature indicates that burnout is extensively experienced among professionals providing
social and human services, including teachers at all levels of education (Benevene, & Fiorilli, 2015;
Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010). The principal risk factors for teachers derive from being required
to cope with learning difficulties and aggressive behavior on the part of their students, conflict
among colleagues, problematic relationships with parents, time pressures, and large classes. Teachers
experiencing high levels of burnout, display less sympathy toward their students, are less tolerant of
disruption in the classroom, and are more likely to experience problems with their health, personal
well-being, and commitment to their work (Fernet, Guay, Senécal, & Austin, 2012; Hakanen, Bakker,
& Schaufeli, 2006; Swider & Zimmerman, 2010).
In relation to special needs teachers in particular, Küçüksüleymanoğlu (2011) analyzed whether
self-reported burnout in Turkish special education teachers working with students affected by men-
tal disability was influenced by gender, family status, years’ teaching experience, educational back-
ground, or school type. They found that these teachers experienced higher levels of burnout, reported
additional stress, and felt more exhausted and depersonalized than their counterparts working in
mainstream classrooms.
More broadly, a review of research conducted between 1979 and 2013 found that the most salient
factors in the burnout reported by special education teachers included teaching experience, student
disability, role conflict, role ambiguity, and lack of administrative support (Brunsting, Sreckovic,
& Lane, 2014). Indeed, the nature of special education teaching is that it requires full use of
specialized skills and resources to cater for different levels of ability and meet increasingly diverse
socioemotional and learning needs on the part of students (De Stasio, Fiorilli, & Di Chiacchio,
2014).

Correspondence to: Simona De Stasio, LUMSA University, P.zza delle Vaschette, 101, 00193 Rome, Italy. E-mail:
[email protected]

472
 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 473

In the Italian education system, children with disabilities are placed in mainstream classes,
and special education teachers co-teach in the classroom with mainstream colleagues. Programs
and strategies for including children with special needs are part of the overall school curriculum.
Integration of disabled children is achieved via projects involving teachers, experts, and practition-
ers. Nevertheless, there are few adequate and well-established trainings for teachers working with
children with special needs to cope with these requirements (De Stasio, Fiorilli, Chiarito, & Uusitalo-
Malmivaara, 2015). It should be noted that in Italy there is no real reward system for teachers. Career
prospects are limited, and all teachers, regardless of whether they teach in a kindergarten or in a high
school, have fixed salary increases, linked only to their seniority. Overall, the salary levels of Italian
teachers are lower than the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
average (OECD, 2013). Recently, two new perspectives have been introduced into the debate on
the multiple sources of teacher burnout syndrome, both of which concern the role of positive and
protective factors in reducing teachers’ risk of burnout syndrome (e.g., Betoret, 2006). The first of
these posits a role for teachers’ personal resources, whereas the second examines the effects of work
well-being (e.g., Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010; Xanthopoulou, Bakker,
Demerouti, & Schaufeli, 2007). Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have analyzed
the predictive role of personal resources and teacher well-being in relation to burnout, in a sample of
kindergarten teachers assigned to children with special needs. Although U.S. teachers in preschool
and Pre-K, after the implementation of the federal government’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Act are experiencing increased pressure to improve student academic performance (Brown, & Lan,
2015), Italian kindergarten teachers are required to nurse and mother their students on top of their
regular behavior management and instructional duties (Bullough, Hall-Kenyon, & MacKay, 2012;
Tsai, Fung, & Chow, 2006).

Teacher Burnout Syndrome: Sociodemographic Variables

Burnout is characterized by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal
accomplishment and caused by long-term occupational stress (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996;
Schaufeli, Leiter, & Maslach, 2008). Kristensen, Borritz, Villadsen, and Christensen (2005) have
conceptualized teacher burnout as a dynamic process affecting personal life, work context, and
relationships with students. Personal burnout is the physical and psychological fatigue and exhaustion
experienced by an individual—regardless of their work or occupational status. Work-related burnout
is defined as the degree of physical and psychological fatigue and exhaustion perceived by the
teacher specifically in relation to his/her work. Finally, student-related burnout refers to the physical
and psychological fatigue and exhaustion that is perceived by the teacher in relation to his/her work
with students.
Since the first study on teachers’ burnout syndrome (Maslach et al., 1996), demographic
variables have emerged as key factors accounting for differences in teachers’ levels of burnout.
Studies on teacher burnout have not offered consistent or conclusive results concerning the role
of gender in relation to either the three subscales or the overall Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI)
(exhaustion, depersonalization, and accomplishment). For example, two different studies (Anderson,
& Iwanicki, 1984; Borg, & Riding, 1991) found that male teachers reported greater stress than
female teachers on all three measures of MBI. On the contrary, Toker (2011) reported no significant
difference between male and female teachers on the dimension of personal accomplishment, whereas
both gender and age were salient differentiating variables for emotional exhaustion. With regard to
other demographic variables, younger teachers have been reported to score significantly higher on
burnout dimensions than older ones (e.g., Maslach et al., 1996). On the other hand, Anderson and
Iwanicki (1984) found no age-related differences in exhaustion and depersonalization, an outcome

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

474 De Stasio et al.

confirmed by several recent studies (e.g., Innstrand, Langballe, Falkum, & Aasland, 2011; Zabel
& Zabel, 2001). Marital status and grade taught have also been identified as factors implicated in
teacher burnout (e.g., Russell, Altmaier, & Van Velzen, 1987), with married persons reporting less
exhaustion and depersonalization than single persons, and secondary school teachers perceiving
themselves as more burned out than teachers from elementary schools. Inexperienced teachers,
especially those who have been teaching for 5 years or less, score more highly on the emotional
exhaustion dimension burnout than their more experienced counterparts. Furthermore, some studies
have found that younger teachers are more vulnerable to burnout syndrome and its risk factors (Lau,
Yuen, & Chan, 2005).
Recently, a large-scale survey of 1,494 Italian teachers (De Stasio, Di Chiacchio, Benevene,
Fiorilli, & Iezzi, 2015; Fiorilli et al., 2015) found significant associations between burnout syndrome,
as assessed by the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) (Kristensen et al., 2005), and teachers’
demographic variables. More specifically, teachers with higher levels of burnout syndrome were
older, held a degree, had a longer number of years’ teaching experience, and taught at secondary
schools. Given the mixed results some authors have proposed analyzing other factors such as personal
resources and work well-being (Evers, Tomic, & Brouwers, 2004).

Teachers’ Personal Resources: Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem

Despite the fact that special education teachers are at high risk of burnout syndrome, they may
develop positive attitudes toward their jobs. Personal resources are aspects of the self that are often
linked to resiliency and refer to individuals’ sense of their ability to remain in control, cope with
stressful situations, and contribute successfully to their environment (Cummins, & Nistico, 2002;
De Caroli, & Sagone, 2012). According to Bandura (1989), personal resources also include self-
efficacy and self-esteem, which have been recognized by Hobfoll (2002) as fundamental components
of individual adaptability. More specifically, self-efficacy refers to teachers’ perceptions of their
own competence in carrying out their professional duties and achieving key educational objectives,
such as learning facilitation and student development (Schwarzer, & Hallum, 2008; Skaalvik &
Skaalvik, 2010). Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001) defined three domains of teacher self-efficacy
(TSE): student engagement, which refers to teaching behaviors designed to elicit students’ active
engagement in the learning process; classroom management, which is the teacher’s ability to support
the flow of a class while respecting set learning objectives; and instructional strategies, meaning the
teacher’s competence in deploying appropriate educational skills so as to ensure student learning.
With regard to self-esteem many studies have documented that the association with mental health
problems such as depression and conditions lead to burnout syndrome (Collie, Shapka, & Perry,
2012; Schimmack, & Diener, 2003).
Self-esteem has been found to act as a key resource for coping with the challenges of teaching,
playing both a main and a moderating role in teachers’ well-being (Mäkikangas, & Kinnunen, 2003).
There is broad agreement about the conceptualization of self-efficacy and self-esteem as coping
resources for dealing with workplace stressors (Betoret, 2006; Tsouloupas, Carson, Matthews,
Grawitch, & Barber, 2010). This is particularly true in relation to the teachers of children with
special needs. Low self-perceived efficacy may lead teachers to cut back on their efforts. Inversely,
teachers who believe they have the ability to accomplish tasks and perceive themselves as highly
efficacious are more likely to achieve higher levels of performance (Bandura, 1989).
Overall, in the literature just reviewed, TSE and self-esteem were found to explain a significant
amount of variance in burnout, confirming the idea that they act as protective factors for burnout
syndrome.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 475

Well-Being at Work: Teachers’ Happiness at School and Job Satisfaction

In addition to personal resources, the literature evidenced that well-being at work play an
important role in stress and burnout development. In the case of teachers, well-being may be defined
as their personal sense of wellness, satisfaction, and happiness in relation to their workplace (Chan,
2011).
Based on the literature review, Jennings and Greenberg (2009) concluded that teachers’ well-
being is associated with a positive classroom environment and teachers–student relationships. As
several authors have pointed out, happiness at work and job satisfaction are often associated with one
other and both are good indicators of work-related well-being (Bowling, Eschleman, & Wang, 2010).
Happy people perform better and help their colleagues more often than do their co-workers who
are less happy (Boehm, & Lyubomirsky, 2008; Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005). In addition,
there is a positive association between happiness at work and long-term well-being, both in the
work context itself and in other life domains. Happiness at school predicts well-being, affecting not
only the teacher’s professional career, but also student motivation and the general atmosphere in the
classroom (Duckworth, Quinn, & Seligman, 2009).
The role of job satisfaction in burnout is increasingly acknowledged (Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2009). Job satisfaction may be defined as an overall feeling about one’s job or career or in terms
of specific facets of job or career (e.g., compensation, autonomy, co-workers) that may be related
to specific outcomes such as productivity. Teachers’ job satisfaction has implications for student
learning, in that a satisfied teacher may provide better quality or more consistent instruction to
his/her students. Researchers have also demonstrated that teachers who do not feel supported in their
work may be less motivated to give their best in the classroom (Pillay, Goddard, & Wilss, 2005).
Littrell, Billingsley, and Cross (1994) found out that special and mainstream teachers reporting
higher levels of support from their principals were less stressed and more satisfied with their jobs
than their colleagues receiving less support. Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2009) reported that teachers’
job satisfaction was directly related to burnout syndrome and indirectly related to aspects of the
school context such as supervisory support, time pressure, relations with parents, and autonomy.
Among teachers with similar levels of salary and benefits, workplace conditions were also found
to be related to turnover—with contributing factors including the degree of teaching staff influence
over school policy, control over classroom decisions, and the level of student misbehavior (Foley, &
Murphy, 2015). More in general, overall conditions of workplace have emerged as strongly affecting
the teachers’ well-being and their attachment to their job (Ingersoll, 2001).

The Current Study

Although the constructs of personal resources and burnout syndrome as well as demographic
factors have been investigated in a variety of teacher samples (e.g., Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008;
Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007), there is still a lack of research on how these
variables affect special education teachers at the kindergarten and primary school levels. Thus, the
current study was designed to advance understanding of the protective factors for burnout syndrome
with a view to informing training programs designed to enhance teachers’ resilience and prevent
professional dropout. Specifically, the aims of the current study were to explore the relationships
among demographic variables, personal resources, and teachers’ work well-being and to integrate a
novel combination of teachers’ aforementioned dimensions into a predictive model of burnout.
On the basis of the literature, we expected that teachers’ personal resources, happiness at school,
and job satisfaction were inversely correlated to all dimensions of burnout.
We hypothesized that teachers’ happiness at school and job satisfaction would incrementally
predict a significant proportion of variance in all dimensions of burnout, even after controlling for

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

476 De Stasio et al.

the effect of demographic factors and personal resources. We also expected that teachers coming
from different school contexts (kindergarten vs. primary school) might express different level of
burnout. Indeed, the kindergarten environment is more informal than primary school settings, while
the role of kindergarten teachers extends beyond mere teaching as observed earlier. Kindergarten
teachers have additional stressors such as having to deal with parents who treat the school as a
child-minding service and having to perform more nonteaching tasks, such as mothering a sick child
or cleaning up after them. Furthermore, at the level of Italian public awareness, the professionalism
of kindergarten teachers has not been fully determined, and the social recognition of the status, for
example, is lower to that of primary teachers, an additional factor that might predispose kindergarten
teachers to respond differently to primary school teachers in relation to similar stressors (Tsai et al.,
2006).

M ETHOD
Participants and Procedure
Our sample was composed of 194 full-time in-service special education teachers (96.4 female)
from Rome, Italy. Ages ranged from 26 to 52 (M = 40.4 years, SD = 5.29). In terms of marital status,
59.5% were married, 33.0% were single, 7.0 % were separated/divorced, and .5% were widowed.
Sixty-nine percent of participants had children. Length of teaching experience ranged from 1 to
30 years (M = 10.58, SD = 5.06). With regard to level of school, 58.2% of participants taught in
primary schools (for children aged 6–11 years), and 41.8% in kindergartens (for children aged 3–5
years). The study population was a convenience sample and may not be taken as representative of
the entire population of Italian teachers given that all participants were based in Central Italy. The
authors organized plenary assemblies in schools to inform the teachers about the aims of the research
and the procedures for completion of the questionnaires. Participants received written information
on Italian privacy regulations, signed informed consent, and subsequently took part in the study.
The research was conducted following the APA’s ethical principles and code of conduct (American
Psychological Association, 2002). The original versions of questionnaires were initially translated
from English into Italian and then back translated into English to check the alignment with the
original versions.
Measures
Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. The CBI comprises 19 items evaluating three subdimensions
of burnout (Kristensen et al., 2005) (alpha coefficient: .85). We used the Italian adaptation of
the CBI by Fiorilli et al. (2015). The first subscale assesses personal burnout and comprises six
items concerning the physical and psychological fatigue, and overall exhaustion experienced by an
individual. The second subscale, entitled work-related burnout, is made up of seven items concerning
the physical and psychological fatigue experienced by respondents due to their teaching work.
Finally, the third subscale termed client-related burnout is composed of six items evaluating the
physical and psychological fatigue experienced by people in relation to their work with clients, in
our case specifically with students. All items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale with: (1) = almost
never; (2) = rarely; (3) = sometimes; (4) = often; (5) = always.
Teacher Self-Efficacy. We devised a brief ad hoc scale for evaluating teachers’ self-efficacy
(alpha coefficient: .75). The instrument comprised five items constructed following the recommen-
dations of Bandura (1989). Specifically, we used verbs such as “can” or “be able to,” to make it
clear that the item was assessing mastery expectations based on self-perceived personal competence.
Each statement referred to one of the five core components of teacher’s self-efficacy: management
of difficult students; use of new technology; coping with educational challenges; collaboration with

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 477

colleagues; meeting teaching objectives and targets. Responses were given on a 5-point scale ranging
from not at all certain (1) to absolutely certain (5).
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES). The RSES (Rosenberg, 1965) (alpha coefficient: .785)
comprises 10 statements and is commonly adopted as an empirical measure of global self-esteem.
The scale uses a 4-point Likert-like scale response format (from: absolutely disagree to absolutely
agree). Five items are positively worded and five negatively worded. Negatively worded items are
reverse scored.
Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS). The JSS (Spector, 1985) (alpha coefficient: .852) measures
respondents’ perceived satisfaction with their job situation. It comprises 36 items divided into nine
subscales, namely: pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards (satisfaction with
rewards given for good performance), operating procedures (satisfaction with rules and procedures),
co-workers, nature of work (satisfaction with one’s type of work), and communication (satisfaction
with communication within the organization). Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale: (1) = almost
never; (2) = rarely; (3) = sometimes; (4) = often; (5) = always.
Teacher’s Happiness at School. Teacher’s Happiness at School (alpha coefficient: .75) is a
scale designed ad hoc to assess teachers’ happiness at school. It was adapted from the School
Children’s Happiness Inventory (Ivens, 2007) given that—to the best of our knowledge—there were
no existing Italian-language scales for measuring teachers’ happiness at school. The questionnaire
comprises 31 items and offers a simple response format with 18 positive items and 12 negative items
(e.g., “I felt relaxed,” or “I wanted to give up”).
Participants are asked to rate their thoughts and feelings over the past week at school. Each
response is scored from 1 to 4, with four indicating a high level of happiness. The negative items
are reverse scored to yield a total happiness score. The composite score is computed by averaging
all the items.

Data Analyses
Bivariate correlations between the study variables were assessed by calculating the Pearson
correlation coefficient, with a number of significant correlations identified. To gain further under-
standing of the relationships between the independent and dependent variables, multiple regressions
were used. Three separate multiple regression analyses were conducted by regressing each of the
dimensions of burnout in turn onto the correlated independent variables. These multiple regressions
were hierarchical, with sociodemographic variables (namely age, seniority, marital status, and chil-
dren) entered first, followed by personal resources (namely self-efficacy and self-esteem), and finally
by work well-being (namely teacher happiness, job satisfaction, and school). The increase in R2 was
computed to compare the relative contributions of each set of variables to the model. The assump-
tions of linearity, normality, independence of observations, multicollinearity, and homoscedasticity
were assessed for each of the regression models and deemed to have been satisfactorily met.

R ESULTS
Bivariate Analyses
Bivariate correlations among the studied variables are presented in Tables 1 and 2. In the kinder-
garten teachers subsample (Table 1), personal burnout was significantly correlated with teacher’s
happiness at school (r = –.63), with self-esteem (r = –.44) and job satisfaction (r = –.41). Work-
related burnout was significantly correlated with teachers’ happiness at school (r = –.56) and job
satisfaction (r = –.52). The third dimension of burnout, or student-related burnout, was significantly

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

478 De Stasio et al.

Table 1
Bivariate Correlations between Variables in the Kindergarten Teachers Sample

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. Age – .22** –.01 .22 .32** .05 –.06 –.07 –.02 –.1 .13
2. Seniority – –.12 .06 .02 .09 –.08 .12 .11 .1 –.01
3. Marital status – .36* –.17 .04 .03 .1 –.02 –.04 0
4. Children – –.07 .08 –.14 .01 –.05 –.09 .12
5. Self-efficacy – .28** .06 –.21 –.12 –.15 .14
6. Self-esteem – .38* –.44** –.38* –.41** .21
7. Teacher happiness – –.63** –.56** –.48** –.45**
8. Personal burnout – .64** .76** –.41**
9. Work-related B. – .54** –.52*
10. Burnout with St. – –.35**
11. Job satisfaction –

* Correlation is significant at the .05 level (two-tailed).

** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (two-tailed).

Table 2
Bivariate Correlations between Variables in Primary Teachers Sample

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. Age – .39** .22** .33** –.01 –.07 –.07 .02 .19 .15 –.05
2. Seniority – .19** .22** .12 .12 .12 –.05 .08 .07 –.22**
3. Marital status – .41** .13 .2** .21 –.17 –.03 –.23** .23**
4. Children – .07 .21** .27 –.3** –.08 –.20** .09
5. Self-efficacy – .32** .28 –.19* –.15 –.28** –.08
6. Self-esteem – .47** –.47** –.4** –.46** .11
7. Teacher happiness – –.62** –.62** –.56** –.4**
8. Personal burnout – .65** .71** –.34**
9. Work-related B. – .65** –.4**
10. Burnout with St. – –.46**
11. Job satisfaction –

* Correlation is significant at the .05 level (two-tailed).

** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (two-tailed).

correlated with a large number of variables, most notably teacher happiness at school (r = –.48) and
self-esteem (r = –.41). In the primary school teachers’ subsample (Table 2), personal burnout was
significantly correlated with several variables, especially teacher’s happiness at school (r = –.62)
and self-esteem (r = –.47).
Working burnout was significantly correlated with personal resources and teachers’ work
well-being, most notably teachers’ happiness at school (r = –.59), self-esteem (r = –.46), and
job satisfaction (r = –.40). The third dimension of burnout, or student-related burnout, was also
significantly correlated with a large number of variables, most notably teacher happiness at school
(r = –.56), self-esteem (r = –.46), and job satisfaction (r = –.40).

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 479

Table 3
Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Personal Burnout

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Variables B SE β p B SE β p B SE β p

Age .03 .06 .04 .56 .03 .05 .04 .55 .05 .04 .07 .25
Seniority –.01 .06 –.01 .87 .01 .05 .02 .76 –.03 .04 –.04 .47
Children 1.42 .72 .16 .05 .86 .64 .1 .18 .66 .57 .07 .25
Marital status –.55 .56 –.08 .33 –.56 .49 –.08 .25 –.25 .43 –.03 .56
Self-efficacy –.16 .09 –.12 .07 –.11 .08 –.08 .16
Self-esteem –.36 .05 –.45 0 –.2 .05 –.25 0
Teacher happiness –.09 .01 –.39 0
Job satisfaction –.03 .01 –.16 .01
School –.16 .48 –.02 .74
R .19 .53 .69
R2 .03 .28 .47
R2 .25 .19

Table 4
Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Work-Related Burnout

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Variables B SE β p B SE β p B SE β p

Age .08 .05 .12 .13 .08 .05 .11 .12 .1 .04 .14 .02
Seniority .04 .05 .06 .4 .06 .05 .09 .2 0 .04 0 .89
Children 1.23 .67 .15 .07 .78 .63 .09 .22 .35 .54 –.04 .51
Marital status .03 .52 0 .94 0 .48 0 .98 .32 .41 .05 .43
Self-efficacy –.1 .09 –.08 .26 –.07 .08 –.06 .34
Self-esteem –.28 .05 –.37 0 –.11 .05 –.15 .02
Teacher happiness –.09 .01 –.41 0
Job satisfaction –.04 .01 –.25 0
School .44 .46 .06 .33
R .18 .44 .67
R2 .03 .19 .45
R2 .16 .26

Multivariate Analyses
Three separate multiple regression analyses were conducted to further investigate the contri-
butions of the relevant, correlated independent variables to variance in the dimensions of burnout
syndrome. Hierarchical multiple regression was performed to separately assess the contributions of
each variable. In line with the literature reviewed in the Introduction, sociodemographic variables
were block-entered at the first step, followed by personal resource variables at the second step,
and work well-being variables at the third. The results of the regression analyses are presented in
Tables 3–5.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

480 De Stasio et al.

Table 5
Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Burnout with Students

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Variables B SE β p B SE β p B SE β p

Age .13 .06 .18 .02 .14 .05 .19 0 .15 .04 .2 0
Seniority .03 .05 .04 .6 .05 .05 .07 .26 0 .04 0 .93
Children 1.69 .7 .2 .01 1.28 .63 .15 .04 –.84 .58 .1 .15
Marital status –.57 .55 –.08 .3 –.54 .48 –.08 .26 –.36 .43 –.05 .41
Self-efficacy –.24 .09 –.18 0 –.23 .08 –.17 0
Self-esteem –.31 .05 –.39 0 –.19 .05 –.24 0
Teacher happiness –.05 .01 –.22 0
Job satisfaction –.05 .01 –.27 0
School .44 .49 .05 .37
R .27 .54 .66
R2 .07 .3 .44
R2 .23 .14

Personal Burnout
Hierarchical multiple regression revealed that the sociodemographic variables entered at Step
1 explained 3%, F(4,166) = 1.4; p > .05 of the variance in personal burnout and were not significant.
When personal resources variables were included at Step 2, the total variance in personal burnout
explained by the model was 28%, F(7, 159) = 11.23, p < .001 (F-change = 28.36; p < .001). Finally,
when the work-related well-being variables were added at Step 3, the model as a whole accounted
for 47% of the variance in personal burnout, F(10, 156) = 15.28, p < .001 (F-change = 18.82; p <
.001). In the final model, the best predictors were: teacher well-being at school (β = − .40, p <
.001; sr2 = .10) and self-esteem (β = –.24, p < .001; sr2 = .05).

Work-Related Burnout
As far as work-related burnout is concerned, the sociodemographic variables entered at Step 1,
explained .3% of the variance, and the model was not statistically significant. The personal resources
variables included at Step 2 explained an additional 16% of the variance (F(7,159) = 6.76; p < .001;
F-change = 16.80; p < .001). Finally, at Step 3 work well-being variables were included, with the
final model explaining 45% of the variance in work-related burnout (F(10, 156) = 13.66, p < .001;
F-change = 25.02; p < .001). In the final model, teacher happiness at school, job satisfaction, and
self-esteem all negatively predicted work-related burnout (β = − .41, p < .001; sr2 = .10), (β = −
.25, p < .001; sr2 = .05), (β = − .16, p < .001; sr2 = .02). Finally, age was a significant positive
predictor (β = .14, p < .001; sr2 = .02) of work-related burnout.

Student-Related Burnout
A final hierarchical multiple regression was used to assess the independent variables’ contri-
bution to variance in student-related burnout. The sociodemographic variables entered at Step 1
accounted for 7% of variance (F(4,166) = 3.19; p < .05). When the personal resource variables were
entered at Step 2, the model explained 30% of the variance (F(7,159) = 11.53; p < .001; F-change =
26.28; p < .001). The final model including both personal resources and work well-being variables

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 481

(Step 3) explained 44% of the variance in student-related burnout (F(10, 156) = 12.5, p < .001; F-
change = 14.29; p < .001). More specifically, four variables were found to be significant predictors
of student-related burnout. These were teacher’s job satisfaction (β = − .26, p < .001; sr2 = .06),
teacher happiness at school (β = − .22, p < .001; sr2 = .03), self-esteem (β = − .24, p < .001;
sr2 = .04), and self-efficacy (β = −.17, p < .001; sr2 = .03), all of which negatively predicted
student-related burnout. Finally, age (β = .20, p < .001; sr2 = .04) was a significant and positive
predictor of student-associated burnout.

D ISCUSSION
The main aim of the current study was to explore within an integrative model the contributions
of three sets of teacher characteristics, which we may label as sociodemographic, personal resource,
and work well-being variables, respectively, in predicting each of the three dimensions of burnout
measured by the CBI. As we expected, the results confirmed what previous research evidenced:
teachers’ personal resources, happiness at school, and job satisfaction were inversely correlated to
all dimensions of burnout in both school contexts. Furthermore, the results of our study showed
that both teachers’ happiness at school and their job satisfaction incrementally predicted variance
in the dimensions of burnout, even when controlling for the effect of sociodemographic factors
and personal resources. Contrary to our hypothesis teachers coming from different school contexts
(kindergarten vs. primary school) did not express different level of burnout.
Interestingly, this unexpected result that is in contrast with previous studies (e.g., Tsai et al.,
2006), leads future research with special education teachers to differently consider the kindergarten
environment supposed to be more demanding in terms of emotional labor compared with primary
teachers experience. Furthermore, in line with previous research (Toker, 2011; Zhao, & Bi, 2003),
teachers’ sociodemographic variables were found to slightly predict each of the CBI burnout sub-
scales. Consequently to several findings (e.g., Anderson & Iwanicki, 1984; Borg & Riding, 1991;
Innstrand et al., 2011; Toker, 2011; Zabel, & Zabel, 2001) our study confirms the contradictory
role played by teachers’ background dimensions (e.g., age, marital status) on their burnout levels.
Accordingly with some scholars’ arguments (e.g., Cherniss, 1995; Hakanen et al., 2006) teachers’
burnout levels should be read in light of their personal traits and organizational variables able to
deeply explain differences among employees in dealing with job stressors. Indeed our results sug-
gest that the factors accounting for most variance in teachers’ levels of burnout were their personal
resources and work-related variables.
Overall, teachers’ happiness and job satisfaction proved to be the variables with the strongest
potential to prevent burnout syndrome, while controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and
personal resources. Below we discuss our findings and their implications for the dimensions of the
CBI.

Predictors of Personal Burnout

Personal burnout, as defined by Kristensen et al. (2005), refers to the feelings of physical and
psychological fatigue and exhaustion experienced by an individual. The personal burnout subscale of
the CBI is entirely focused on general life context (Kristensen et al., 2005). Conversely, the Teachers’
Happiness at School and Job Satisfaction scales mainly assess teachers’ well-being and satisfaction
in relation to their work experience. From our results, it emerged that among the variables included
in the model, teachers’ happiness at school, self-esteem, and job satisfaction played the strongest
predictive effect on personal burnout. Indeed, it is to be expected that teachers with a low level of
happiness at school and poor job satisfaction will display a higher risk of developing burnout in their
personal lives, and not just in relation to their work context. This is in line with Seligman’s theory

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

482 De Stasio et al.

(2012) that experiencing positive emotions enables individuals to develop additional resources in
four main spheres: intellectual (developing problem-solving skills), physical (developing physical
strength and cardiovascular health), social (facilitating quality and quantity in friendships and other
relationships and connections), and psychological (developing resilience and optimism). From our
data, job satisfaction also emerged as a key factor in reducing teachers’ personal burnout. It is well
known in the literature that teachers with high levels of job satisfaction display a strong sense of
commitment both in life and in their work, a strong belief in control and a greater openness to
change and challenges in life (e.g., Wangari, & Orodho, 2014). Overall, self-esteem, happiness, and
job satisfaction at school appear to improve teachers’ resilience (Buragohain & Hazarika, 2015),
better equipping them to manage the kind of critical events and stressful situations to which special
needs teachers are often exposed.

Predictors of Work-Related Burnout

Work-related burnout was defined by Kristensen (Kristensen et al., 2005) as the degree of
physical and psychological fatigue and exhaustion perceived by a person that can be related to
his/her work. The corresponding scale is designed to explore the individual’s own attribution of
symptoms to her/his work, rather than assess this dimension in terms of causality. This dimension is
context related, unlike the personal burnout dimension. Previous research has already found burnout
to be indirectly related to school context variables (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2009). Our results showed
work-related burnout to be strongly predicted by teachers’ happiness at school, job satisfaction,
and self-esteem. Teachers who are less likely to report higher levels of work burnout are those
who report more happiness with their daily work, more satisfaction with their job, and higher self-
esteem. To fully understand these findings and explain the relationship between teacher happiness,
job satisfaction, and self-esteem on the one hand, and work burnout on the other, it is crucial to
examine the structure and nature of these constructs. As scholars have demonstrated, a teacher’s
working environment may not only represent a source of burnout, but may also provide a resource
for dealing with issues such as workload, students, administrative, and educational tasks (Foley &
Murphy, 2015; Pyhältö, Pietarinen, & Salmela-Aro, 2011). Wang and Xu (2008) for instance found
that the level of organizational support perceived by teachers was positively correlated with the
dimensions of happiness and negatively correlated with burnout. Moreover, factors associated with
work, such as recognition, acknowledgment, development, as well as achievement or advancement,
may generate job satisfaction (Buragohain & Hazarika, 2015). Vice versa, the strong relationship
between teacher burnout and psychological well-being enables teachers with positive emotions to
cope better with stressful events at school (Pillay et al., 2005). Poor job satisfaction among teachers
has emerged as directly related to dimensions of burnout, namely emotional exhaustion and feelings
of reduced personal accomplishment (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2009). Finally, teachers’ happiness at
school, as measured in the current study, focused on the joy of teaching, in terms of experiencing
positive thoughts and emotions while engaged in teaching-related tasks, and on the opportunity to
enjoy positive relationships with colleagues, parents, and students.
Albeit contributing less than work-related factors, one of the personal resource variables was
found to be a significant predictor of burnout: self-esteem. This result is in line with the existing
literature on the role of individual difference in coping with stress and burnout (Halbesleben &
Buckley, 2004). In fact, there is a large corpus of research indicating that self-esteem is negatively
correlated with teacher burnout (Xu, Zhu, & Huang, 2005), as well as playing a mediating role
between organizational determinants (such as role conflict, work overload, classroom atmosphere,
decision making, and peer support) and teacher burnout syndrome.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 483

Predictors of Student-Related Burnout

Student-related burnout is a dimension of burnout that concerns the physical and psychological
fatigue and exhaustion that is perceived by a teacher to be related to his/her work with students
specifically. This subscale is designed to evaluate the extent to which respondents subjectively
attribute their fatigue to their work with their pupils, rather than objectively assess how their levels
of exhaustion are impacted by working with students.
In the current study, student-related burnout was significantly predicted by a combination of
teachers’ personal resources and their perceptions of their work environment. In terms of individual
resources, as expected, self-efficacy and self-esteem were negative predictors of student-related
burnout. In other words, teachers with a positive view of their own teaching capabilities were more
likely to positively rate their personal accomplishments with their students. This is in keeping with
numerous earlier studies of teacher burnout (Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008; Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2009). In terms of work well-being, teachers’ happiness at school and job satisfaction were found
to significantly and negatively predict student-related burnout. Bassi, Bacher, Negri, and Delle Fave
(2013) reported that participants who were happy at work experienced higher mastery in dealing
with the environment. Teachers’ happiness at school, as measured in the current study, mainly
consisted of the joy of teaching, in terms of experiencing positive emotions and thoughts while
engaged in teaching-related tasks and of enjoying positive relationships with colleagues, parents, and
students.
Interpersonal relationships play a key role in the work of teachers, especially in the case
of special education teachers who are required to interact with, and are made accountable to,
an increasing number of actors. They must maintain relationships not only with their students,
but also with colleagues, supervisors, parents, and experts. Not surprisingly, then, previous re-
search has revealed that positive interpersonal relationships at school can act as a buffer against
the risk of burnout (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2009; Van Droogenbroeck, Spruyt, & Vanroelen, 2014).
Overall, the findings of the current study support the hypothesis that teachers’ perceptions of
their work environment in terms of happiness at school and job satisfaction are key protective
factors for burnout risk in the area of special needs education. Teachers with a positive view
of their work and positive relationships with their colleagues, students, and students’ families
are more likely to report high levels of personal accomplishment in relation to their work with
students.

Limitations
Our study presents limitations that will need to be addressed in future research. First, given that
all our participants came from Central Italy, they cannot be considered representative of the Italian
teacher population, and future research should have the aim of replicating the present findings with
a nationally representative, and larger, sample. Further research should also involve teachers from
countries other than Italy, to assess whether and to what extent the present findings also pertain to
other educational systems, especially those in which children with special needs are not included in
mainstream classes.
A second limitation concerns the Teachers Happiness at School scale. Given that it was adapted
from the School Children Happiness Inventory (Ivens, 2007) for the purposes of this study, it is
not yet a validated instrument. Finally, although the instruments worked well from a psychometric
point of view, an in-depth qualitative analysis of teacher reports concerning self-perceived personal
resources, subjective well-being and subjective perception of the risk of burnout might shed light
on why teachers think in a particular way and what kind of dynamics might be shaped by this
thinking.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

484 De Stasio et al.

Concluding Remarks and Implications for Practice

Among the main outcomes of our study, it emerged that self-esteem, teachers’ happiness at
school, and job satisfaction were the factors that most strongly predicted personal, work-related,
and student-related burnout. From these preliminary findings, it is possible to draw some practical
guidelines for improving rates of teacher retention. First, focused teacher training is critical to
promoting teachers’ well-being and longevity. A number of studies have found that well-designed
mentoring programs improve retention and also lead to gains in teachers’ attitudes, feelings of
efficacy, and instructional skills. There is much evidence that teacher retention rates improve when
effective principals are actively involved in teacher induction, providing “professional socialization”
in the form of frequent discussion, monitoring, and feedback (Billingsley, 2004; Krasnoff, 2015).
Furthermore, school principals may reduce the risk of burnout syndrome by adopting a more
collaborative leadership style that promotes and supports teachers. Sharing the challenges faced by
the teachers of children with special needs and reducing conflicting work demands are both possible
approaches that school principals may be able to implement with a view to reducing the risk of
burnout.
A second key finding to be noted is that the final integrative predictive model for burnout
was similar for both the kindergarten and primary subsamples. In other words, for the purposes
for our study, being a kindergarten or a primary school teacher did not make any difference.
Rather, our data show that both groups of teachers are more inclined to defend their well-being by
drawing on positive, context-related relationships than by relying on their individual and professional
characteristics. Ultimately, our findings suggest the importance of investing in the quality of the
working environment. Positive interpersonal relationships experienced in the school context can
protect teachers from the risk of work-related burnout.
Based on these findings, we strongly advocate that educational policy makers and head teachers
pay close attention to the areas of personal resources and work-related well-being, with a view to
effectively addressing stress and burnout among special needs teachers.

R EFERENCES
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist,
57, 1060–1073.
Anderson, M. B. G., & Iwanicki, E. F. (1984). Teacher motivation and its relationship to burnout. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 20, 109–132.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175.
Bassi, M., Bacher, G., Negri, L., & Delle Fave, A. (2013). The contribution of job happiness and job meaning to the well-being
of workers from thriving and failing companies. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 8, 427–448.
Benevene, P., & Fiorilli, C. (2015). Burnout syndrome at school: A comparison study with lay and consecrated Italian
teachers. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 501–506.
Betoret, F. D. (2006). Stressors, self-efficacy, coping resources, and burnout among secondary school teachers in Spain.
Educational Psychology, 26, 519–539.
Billingsley, B. S. (2004). Special education teacher retention and attrition a critical analysis of the research literature. Journal
of Special Education, 38, 39–55.
Boehm, J. K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). Does happiness promote career success? Journal of Career Assessment, 16,
101–116.
Borg, M. G., & Riding, R. J. (1991). Occupational stress and satisfaction in teaching. British Educational Research Journal,
17, 263–281.
Bowling, N. A., Eschleman, K. J., & Wang, Q. (2010). A meta analytic examination of the relationship between job satisfaction
and subjective well being. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 915–934.
Brown, C. P., & Lan, Y. C. (2015). A qualitative metasynthesis comparing US teachers’ conceptions of school readiness prior
to and after the implementation of NCLB. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 1–13.
Brunsting, N. C., Sreckovic, M. A., & Lane, K. L. (2014). Special education teacher burnout: A synthesis of research from
1979 to 2013. Education and Treatment of Children, 37, 681–711.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

 Burnout in Special Needs Teachers 485

Bullough, R. V., Jr., Hall-Kenyon, K. M., & MacKay, K. L. (2012). Head Start teacher well-being: Implications for policy
and practice. Early Childhood Education Journal, 40, 323–331.
Buragohain, P., & Hazarika, M. (2015). Happiness level of the secondary school teachers. International Journal of Innovation
Sciences and Research, 4, 199–205.
Chan, D. W. (2011). Burnout and life satisfaction: Does gratitude intervention make a difference among Chinese school
teachers in Hong Kong? Educational Psychology, 31, 809–823.
Cherniss, C. (1995). Beyond burnout: Helping teachers, nurses, therapists, and lawyers recover from stress and disillusionment.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2012). School climate and social–emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress,
job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 1189–1204.
Cummins, R. A., & Nistico, H. (2002). Maintaining life satisfaction: The role of positive cognitive bias. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 3, 37–69.
De Caroli, M. E., & Sagone, E. (2012). Professional self representation and risk of burnout in school teachers. Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5509–5515.
De Stasio, S., Di Chiacchio, C., Benevene, P., Fiorilli, C., & Iezzi, F. D. (2015). Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI):
Proprietà psicometriche e scoring. In C. Fiorilli, S. De Stasio, S. P. Benevene, L. Cianfriglia, & R. Serpieri (Eds.), Salute
e benessere degli insegnanti italiani (pp. 97–105). Roma: Franco Angeli.
De Stasio, S., Fiorilli, C., & Di Chiacchio, C. (2014). Effects of verbal ability and fluid intelligence on children’s emotion
understanding. International Journal of Psychology, 49, 409–414.
De Stasio, S., Fiorilli, C., Chiarito, G., & Uusitalo-Malmivaara, L. (2015). Fattori predittivi nel burnout degli insegnanti di
sostegno della scuola primaria e secondaria (Predictive factors of burnout in special education teachers of primary and
secondary school). Psicologia dell’educazione, 2, 113–132.
Duckworth, A. L., Quinn, P. D., & Seligman, M. E. (2009). Positive predictors of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Positive
Psychology, 4, 540–547.
Evers, W. J., Tomic, W., & Brouwers, A. (2004). Burnout among teachers students’ and teachers’ perceptions compared.
School Psychology International, 25, 131–148.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., Senécal, C., & Austin, S. (2012). Predicting intra individual changes in teacher burnout: The role of
perceived school environment and motivational factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 514–525.
Fiorilli, C., De Stasio, S., Benevene, P., Iezzi, M. S., Pepe, A., & Albanese, O. (2015). Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI):
A validation study in the Italian teacher population. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 22,
537–551.
Foley, C., & Murphy, M. (2015). Burnout in Irish teachers: Investigating the role of individual differences, work environment
and coping factors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 50, 46–55.
Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among teachers. Journal of School
Psychology, 43, 495–513.
Halbesleben, J. R., & Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of Management, 30, 859–879.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6, 307–324.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research
Journal, 38, 3, 499–534.
Innstrand, S. T., Langballe, E. M., Falkum, E., & Aasland, O. G. (2011). Exploring within-and between-gender differences
in burnout: 8 different occupational groups. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 84,
813–824.
Ivens, J. (2007). The development of a happiness measure for school children. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23,
221–239.
Jennings, P. A., & Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher social and emotional competence in relation
to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79, 491–525.
Krasnoff, B. (2015). What the research says about class size, professional development, and recruitment, induction, and
retention of highly qualified teachers: A compendium of the evidence on title II, part A, program-funded strategies.
Northwest Center Comprehensive.
Kristensen, T. S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. B. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool
for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19, 192–207.
Küçüksüleymanoğlu, R. (2011). Burnout syndrome levels of teachers in special education schools in Turkey. International
Journal of Special Education, 26, 53–63.
Lau, P. S. Y., Yuen, M. T., & Chan, R. M. C. (2005). Do demographic characteristics make a difference to burnout among
Hong Kong secondary school teachers? Social Indicators Research, 71, 491–516.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

486 De Stasio et al.

Littrell, P. C., Billingsley, B. S., & Cross, L. H. (1994). The effects of principal support on special and general educators’
stress, job satisfaction, school commitment, health, and intent to stay in teaching. Journal for Special Educators, 15, 5,
297–310.
Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success?
Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855.
Mäkikangas, A., & Kinnunen, U. (2003). Psychosocial work stressors and well-being: Self-esteem and optimism as moderators
in a one-year longitudinal sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 537–557.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). Education at a glance 2013; OECD indicators.
Paris: OECD Publishing.
Pillay, H. K., Goddard, R., & Wilss, L. A. (2005). Well-being, burnout and competence: Implications for teachers. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 30, 22–33.
Pyhältö, K., Pietarinen, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2011). Teacher–working-environment fit as a framework for burnout experi-
enced by Finnish teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 1101–1110.
Rosenberg, E. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Russell, D. W., Altmaier, E., & Van Velzen, D. (1987). Job-related stress, social support, and burnout among classroom
teachers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 2, 269–274.
Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (2008). Burnout: 35 Years of research and practice. Career Development
International, 14, 204–220.
Schimmack, U., & Diener, E. (2003). Predictive validity of explicit and implicit self-esteem for subjective well-being. Journal
of Research in Personality, 37, 100–106.
Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation
analyses. Applied Psychology, 57, 152–171.
Seligman, M. E. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2009). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teaching
Education, 30, 1–11.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations
with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teaching Education, 27, 1029–1038.
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the job satisfaction survey. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 693–713.
Swider, B. W., & Zimmerman, R. D. (2010). Born to burnout: A meta-analytic path model of personality, job burnout, and
work outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 487–506.
Toker, B. (2011). Job satisfaction of academic staff: An empirical study on Turkey. Quality Assurance in Education, 19,
156–169.
Tsai, E., Fung, L., & Chow, L. (2006). Sources and manifestations of stress in female kindergarten teachers. International
Education Journal, 7, 364–370.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 17, 783–805.
Tsouloupas, C. N., Carson, R. L., Matthews, R., Grawitch, M. J., & Barber, L. K. (2010). Examining teachers’ emotional
regulation strategies as mediators between student disruptive behaviour and teacher burnout. Educational Psychology,
30, 173–189.
Van Droogenbroeck, F., Spruyt, B., & Vanroelen, C. (2014). Burnout among senior teachers: Investigating the role of workload
and interpersonal relationships at work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, 99–109.
Wang, L. H., & Xu, C. J. (2008). Impact of primary and secondary school teachers’ perceived organizational support on their
happiness and job burnout. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 16, 574–578.
Wangari, N. S., & Orodho, J. A. (2014). Determinants of job satisfaction and retention of special education teachers in
primary schools in Nairobi County. Journal of Humanities And Social Science, 19, 126–133.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2007). The role of personal resources in the job
demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 14, 121–142.
Xu, F., Zhu, C., & Huang, W. (2005). Teachers’ job burnout and related factors in primary and secondary schools. Chinese
Mental Health Journal, 19, 324–326.
Zabel, R. H., & Zabel, M. K. (2001). Revisiting burnout among special education teachers: Do age, experience, and preparation
still matter? Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 128–139.
Zhao, Y., & Bi, C. (2003). Job burnout and the factors related to it among middle school teachers. Psychological Development
and Education, 1, 80–84.

Psychology in the Schools DOI: 10.1002/pits

Copyright of Psychology in the Schools is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.