IMPLICATIONS OF STRESS AND COPING MECHANISMS IN THE

SUPERINTENDENCY

A Dissertation
presented to
the Faculty of the Graduate School
University of Missouri-Columbia

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirement for the Degree

Doctor of Education

By

Nita C. Hawk, B.S., M.S.

Dr. Barbara N. Martin, Dissertation Supervisor

MAY 2008
The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the
dissertation entitled

IMPLICATIONS OF STRESS AND COPING MECHANISM IN THE

SUPERINTENDENCY

presented by Nita Hawk,

a candidate for the degree of doctor of education, and hereby certify that, in their opinion,
it is worthy of acceptance.

Professor Barbara N. Martin

Professor David Kreiner

Professor Sandy Hutchinson

Professor Mike Jinks

Professor Doug Thomas

 DEDICATION

In honor of my mother, whose loving and encouraging spirit taught me to dream, to set

goals, and to persevere….I miss you everyday!

Effie May Johnson

July 8, 1924 – June 7, 2001

“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change

the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference.”—Serenity Prayer (14th Century)

“The only lifelong reliable motivations are those that come from within, and one of the

strongest of those is the joy and pride that grow from knowing that you’ve just done

something as well as you can do it.”—Lloyd Dobens

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I want to acknowledge my dissertation supervisor, Dr. Barbara Martin, whose

patient guidance, expertise, and encouragement helped pushed me to higher levels. She is

truly dedicated to assisting students reach their goals and helping to realize they can do

more. She is clear in her expectations and has a powerful way of acknowledging you

when you’re just about to give up. I would also like to acknowledge Dr. David Kreiner,

his patience, kindness, and willingness to help me interpret and understand the statistical

methods of this study were reflective of his passion for his profession. I would like to

acknowledge the other members of my dissertation committee: Dr. Sandy Hutchinson,

Dr. Mike Jinks, and Dr. Doug Thomas.

I also want to acknowledge my family. My daughter, Courtney, who is also a

student, understood when I needed to focus on this project. She and my grandson, Shiloh

have offered kind, loving, and patient support. My son Drew and his new bride Mary

Beth have also been extremely supportive. I’ve been blessed with a loving family and

consequently have had tremendous help in accomplishing my educational goals. Thank

you to all of you for always listening to me, supporting me, and being there for me.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................ii

APPENDICES................................................................................................................vi

ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................vii

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1

Background .............................................................................................................1

Conceptual Underpinnings of the Study...................................................................3

Statement of the Problem.........................................................................................5

Purpose of the Study................................................................................................6

Research Questions .................................................................................................7

Limitations and Assumptions...................................................................................8

Design Controls.......................................................................................................9

Definition of Key Terms........................................................................................10

Summary...............................................................................................................12

Chapter

2. LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................13

Introduction ...........................................................................................................13

Public School Superintendents-Leadership Challenges...........................................15

Bureaucracy......................................................................................................15

Money and Mandates........................................................................................16

Overwhelming Workload..................................................................................17

High Turnover ..................................................................................................19

iii
 Gender ...................................................................................................................21

Professional and Self Development ........................................................................23

Coping with Stress—In General ............................................................................25

Occupational Stress ...............................................................................................28

Stress—Corporate Executives and School Superintendents....................................31

Summary ...............................................................................................................32

Chapter

3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY...................................................36

Introduction ...........................................................................................................36

Problem and Purposes Overview ...........................................................................37

Research Questions ...............................................................................................38

Population and Sample ..........................................................................................39

Data Collection and Instrumentation......................................................................41

Data Collection Process .....................................................................................41

Instrumentation ..................................................................................................41

Data Analysis ....................................................................................................44

Researchers Biases and Assumptions .................................................................47

Summary ...........................................................................................................47

Chapter

4. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA...................................................48

Introduction...........................................................................................................48

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................53

Population ........................................................................................................53

iv
 Data Collection Instrumentation ............................................................................53

Survey ..............................................................................................................53

Research Questions: Analysis of Data....................................................................54

Research Question 1 .........................................................................................54

Research Question 2 .........................................................................................57

Research Question 3 .........................................................................................57

Research Question 4 .........................................................................................60

Research Question 5 .........................................................................................61

Research Question 6 .........................................................................................66

Null Hypothesis ................................................................................................67

Summary...............................................................................................................69

Chapter

5. FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, CONCLUSIONS ......................................72

Introduction...........................................................................................................72

Purpose of Study ...................................................................................................73

Design and Procedures ..........................................................................................74

Findings of the Study.............................................................................................75

Discussion of the Findings.....................................................................................78

Finding 1 ..........................................................................................................78

Finding 2 ..........................................................................................................79

Finding 3 ..........................................................................................................80

Finding 4 ..........................................................................................................81

v
 Implications for Practice ........................................................................................82

Limitations for Design Control ..............................................................................83

Recommendations for Future Research..................................................................85

Summary...............................................................................................................87

REFERENCES..............................................................................................................89

APPENDICES

A. Survey Instrument ..................................................................................................99

B. Superintendent or IRB Information Letter............................................................111

C. Informed Consent Form – Survey.........................................................................112

D. IRB Approval form..............................................................................................114

Internal Review Board Approval – University of Missouri, Columbia

VITA...........................................................................................................................115

vi
 ABSTRACT

The study examined in what ways and to what degree, if any, school superintendents

perceive stress and what, if any, coping mechanisms were engaged. Moreover, the study sought

to identify any significant differences between the frequency of stressors by gender and coping

mechanisms utilized by female and male leaders. This study focused on qualities of coping

mechanisms and their effectiveness. Research constructs undergirding the study included: need

for effective stress management skills, need for effective leadership, organizational health,

professional development geared towards developing a stress model, and creating a positive

school culture. The study population consisted of 380 superintendents in the state of Missouri.

All participants were currently employed as superintendents. The mixed design study utilized the

Superintendent Stress and Coping Mechanisms survey to collect pertinent data, as well as

qualitative, open-ended questions.

Study findings revealed that there is a statistical difference between the types of coping

mechanisms utilized and effectiveness between male and female superintendents. While no

significant difference exists between the overall occupational stressors experienced by gender,

the frequency data identified high levels of stress among over 50% of the superintendents.

Superintendents believed that exercise and getting away were most frequently utilized coping

mechanisms, while artificial means was least commonly used. Exercise was identified as the

most effective coping mechanism for both genders; however male utilized getting away more

frequently, while woman used exercise most frequently. Qualitative findings established the

school district personnel provided no known support to superintendents in developing stress

management skills and coping strategies. Other themes that arose from the study included;

barriers in the perception of stress as it relates to gender, inconsistencies in the leader’s ability to

vii
take time off, while superintendents agreed the school board is the predominant influencing

factor, and the need for professional development programs. Implications of this research study

were identified in the areas of leadership preparatory programs, as well as education in stress

management skills reform at the district level.

viii
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION OF THE STUDY

Background

University researchers and school recruiters are finding dramatic changes in the

ability to recruit quality applicants for superintendent positions. The number of applicants

is getting smaller; there are fewer first time candidates; and the quality of those applying

is lower (Public Agenda, 2001). Cooper, Fusarelli, and Carella (2000) conducted a

national survey of superintendents and found that 90% assert the district should give

them, “more help and support to ensure their well-being and job success” (p.8). These

researchers also discovered that 88% of the superintendents who participated in their

survey felt that "The shortage of applicants for the superintendent's job is a serious crisis

in American education. Furthermore, 92% of respondents were concerned that high

turnover in the superintendency means a crisis in keeping strong leaders in the position"

(p. 2). According to Houston (2001), the executive director of the American Association

of School Administrators, individuals who may be considering the superintendency look

at those already in the role, see how unbalanced their lives often are and decide it is not

worth the stress. Researchers have found many reasons for the frustration and imbalance

that affect the leaders in the Superintendent position.

The superintendents primary role has transformed from focusing on being a

figurehead to being a facilitator of federal mandates (Glass, Bjork, & Brunner 2000).

Superintendents have found themselves shifting their job duties to satisfy political

agendas. It is more important to influence stakeholders’ decisions rather than making

decisions (Brandt, 1993; Forderaro, 2006; Owen, 2000). Some of the challenges
superintendents face includes pressures caused by lack of adequate funding, competing

community and school groups, employee unions, state legislated mandates, intrusive

board members, and the public’s perceived dissatisfaction with school performance

(Glass, Bjork, & Brunner 2000). Much of the pressure created by these mandates is

caused by the lack of resources needed to address the issues (Public Agenda, 2001).

Superintendents say inadequate resources detract most from their effectiveness (Glass et

al.). Moreover, funding problems in rural schools may increase with the "graying" of

rural America, if retirees on fixed incomes continue to reject higher taxes for education

(Glass et al.). While lack of funding is just one of the stressors that superintendents must

face; conflicts with the school board members is another.

Pressure on school leaders also comes from trying to reconcile the conflicting

expectations of different constituencies (Goens, 1998; Richardson, 1998). Sometimes

superintendents leave one district for another because of conflict with an important

constituency--their school board. In fact, nearly 25 percent of superintendents who leave

small districts report conflict with the school board as their reason for leaving (Glass et

al., 2000).

To be effective in this age of reform and sustaining change, superintendents must

be able to keep balance in their lives. Despite the resurgence in the study of leadership

(Fuller, Campbell, Celio, Harvey, Immerwahr, & Winger 2003) the issue of stress has not

been thoroughly investigated (Cooper, Fusarelli, & Carella, 2000; Glass, et al. 2000;

Houston, 2001). According to literature, there have been a moderate number of studies on

the causes of stress in the superintendency; however, there are limited studies examining

how leaders are managing their stressors. If stress is an integral part of the daily lives of

2
superintendents, then investigating what coping mechanisms are initiated is essential.

With the stressors associated with being a superintendent, how is it that some

superintendents thrive in their careers, are productive, successful, and enjoy their work?

It appears these leaders have developed attitudes and strategies to help them cope and get

through the challenges of the job. How have successful superintendents learned to

withstand the hardships and maintain balance in a world of constant stress? These

questions are addressed, in part, in various studies; however, when viewed collectively,

remain unanswered.

Conceptual Underpinnings of the Study

Four constructs emerged from the review of the literature to demonstrate the need

for investigation of common stressors and coping mechanisms most often utilized to deal

with the occupational stress experienced by superintendents in one Midwestern state.

First, leadership challenges facing today’s superintendents were examined through the

context of various issues such as bureaucracy, money and mandates, overwhelming

workload, and high turnover of superintendent positions. The second construct that

emerged was gender issues as it relates to the predictor of coping skills for occupational

stress. Thirdly, administrator training through preparatory programs, and professional

development were investigated.

Finally, definitions of stress, symptoms, consequences, and recommendations on

how to cope with stress were discussed. Occupational stress was included and reviewed

as to the specific nature of job related stress and the coping mechanisms used to deal with

occupational stress.

3
 Most of the studies related to education have focused on stress experienced by

educational leaders but not on what leaders do to cope with such stress (Brock & Grady,

2002; Queen & Queen, 2004). Although recent literature has addressed the issue of stress

and administrative leadership positions overall there is a lack of research examining

coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents and a lack of emphasis on the importance

of professional development and preparation of administrators on how to deal with these

stressors.

Furthermore, gender differences have not been adequately researched. Nelson and

Burke (2002) stated stress profiles were based on dated information and did not present

an accurate reflection of gender specific stress. Therefore, there is a need for additional

research on gender difference and the effectiveness of self-development programs to aid

female superintendents in developing coping skills.

Some professional conferences have presented the importance of leaders

maintaining a balance in their lives. One such conference was the Association of

California School Administration (2000b), which presented, “balance of work and

family, which rarely, if ever, leaves…. [them] enough time for themselves. By keeping

stress at bay, leaders will be better equipped to do their jobs and communicate their

needs” (p.14). However, there is still a lack of research demonstrating the “how to’s”

needed to manage the predictable stressors in the everyday life and job duties of a

superintendent.

More importantly it is imperative to develop coping strategies to help leaders

manage stress and achieve balance in their lives. This should ultimately enhance the

superintendent’s effectiveness as leaders.

4
 This study was framed through the lenses of perception of common stressors and

the coping mechanisms most often utilized to manage the occupational stress of

superintendents in a Midwestern state. Research and information gained from Farkas,

Johnson, and Duffet (2003) and Glass, Bjork, and Brunner (2000) helped formulate

research questions and guide this study. Data collection and analysis allowed the

researcher to investigate the link between common stressors and coping mechanisms, and

strategies utilized to manage occupational stress. Furthermore, qualitative data gathered

through open-ended questions buttressed the findings gathered from the quantitative data.

Statement of the Problem

“The popular perception of the superintendency is that of an impossible job few

want to undertake in which even the best and the brightest confront escalating and

competing demands…” (Cooper, Fusarelli, & Carella, 2000, p.6). As the demands for

accountability are heightened and job expectations become increasingly unrealistic, job

candidates are less interested in entering the superintendency or remaining in the role.

Work related stress for upper level management and executives are part of the

leadership role; however, the stress level is on the rise (American Management

Association, 1996; Brock & Grady, 2002). The symptoms of stress can surface in many

different forms, including physical disorders, adverse effects on family life, and even

alcoholism (Colgan, 2003; Domenech, 1996). A consistent theme among researchers

regarding superintendent turnover and candidate shortages has been the increased stress

associated with the position.

These challenges have led to a vast shortage of administrative candidates and high

superintendent turnover (Forderaro, 2006; Queen & Queen, 2004). As a result of the

5
present administrative shortages, researchers and writers have significantly added to

literature in the past decade on school administrator stress and burnout (Brock & Grady,

2002; Colgan, 2003; Gates & Gmelch, 1998; Nussebaum, 2007). Lashway (2002)

proclaimed the stress associated with the superintendency not only forced many qualified

leaders to step down but also has deterred many qualified candidates from applying.

Cunningham and Burdick (1999) reported that time and stress ranked second behind only

micromanagement of the school board as the main reason for qualified candidates

deciding not to apply for the district’s top position. Inadequate funding has also been

reported as a problem.

Superintendents say inadequate resources detract most from their effectiveness

(Farkas, Johnson, & Duffett, 2003; Glass et al., 2000). Moreover, funding problems in

rural schools may increase with the "graying" of rural America, if retirees on fixed

incomes continue to reject higher taxes for education. Problems with different

constituents presents difficulty for the superintendent position.

Nearly 25 percent of superintendents who leave small districts report conflict with

the school board as the reason for their departure (Glass et al., 2000). Superintendents

deal with conflicting expectations from different school board members, which can lead

to a lot of stress (Goens, 1998). Long hours and low salaries is another stressor often

reported by superintendents (Queen & Queen, 2004).

As such, the problem that will be addressed through this research is the

identification of the processes that superintendents use to find successful strategies in a

stressful environment. This will ultimately lead to more individuals willing and able to

assume the position of superintendent.

6
 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify and assess stressors and coping

mechanisms related to job performance as perceived by superintendents in Missouri.

Lodged between political and bureaucratic accountability, today’s superintendent must

effectively mediate between local interests (school boards, parent advisory councils,

parent-teacher organizations, individual parents, teachers, civic groups) and state and

federal requirements, school accreditation, and state report cards (Queen & Queen, 2004).

In addition to this difficult list, the pressure of personal accountability for

decisions has made the role of the school districts’ chief executive officer increasingly

difficult. Recent studies supported the idea that the role superintendents undertake when

trying to balance educational, managerial, and political leadership to promote school

improvement demonstrated a vast complexity of problems (Howley, Pendarvis, & Gibbs,

2002).

Therefore, a logical question to ask is how does the superintendent carrying out

the duties and the multiplicity of interrelated demands of this position cope with the

stressors of the position? Secondly, the research attempted to determine if there was a

relationship between the coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents and job

performance, maintaining balance, and how the organization prepared them for the stress

of the position. Finally, the investigation will examine gender differences and coping

skills among the participants selected.

Research Questions

The following research questions were addressed within the context of this study:

7
 1. What are the frequencies of common occupational stressors as perceived by

superintendents?

2. Are there differences in occupational stressors between female superintendents

and male superintendents?

3. What are the frequencies of the type of coping mechanisms deployed as

perceived by superintendents, and what type of coping mechanism is most

effective?

4. Do male and female superintendents differ in the type of coping mechanism

they utilize?

5. What are the strategies employed by school district personnel to assist the

superintendents in managing occupational stress?

6. What support did school district personnel provide to enhance the effectiveness

of coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents to manage occupational

stressors?

Limitations and Assumptions

There are limitations involved with all investigations and potential weaknesses in

the design and application (Cresswell & Clark, 2007; Thomas & Brubaker, 2000). The

limitations of this study consisted of the sample for the study, the methodology of the

study, the time limitations of the study, and the use of technology for survey delivery.

Geographically, the population of this study was limited to the state of Missouri and

consisted of a representative sample of the current superintendents in the state. Of these

531 public school districts a representative sample was taken based on geographical

location and gender. While Missouri is a typical state in the career of a superintendent

8
and job stressors, the results of this study cannot be generalized to other states and their

job stressors because the sample selected is not representative of those populations.

This study was primarily a quantitative study utilizing descriptive statistics

gathered by an on-line survey. There are limitations to the use of surveys due to the threat

of validity of the instrumentation process (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). Other issues that

influence the results from the use of survey data is the lack of participation. Fraenkel and

Wallen argued that this lack of participation seems to be “increasing over the recent

years” (p.407).

The use of technology to administer the web-based survey can be viewed both as

a strength and a weakness to the study. It allowed for a more timely development of the

data received, but it limited the subjects to utilizing a computer to answer the questions.

While the questionnaire could be completed at school or at home, which allowed for a

more private and potentially thoughtful completion, it is possible that some participants

may have felt uncomfortable with the technology.

The fourth limitation involved timing of the survey, as stress levels can vary

significantly from day to day and even within a period of a day. The level of perceived

stress affecting each participating superintendent at the time of the survey is completed

may impact the result of the survey. Depending on the individual, it may be more of a

snapshot of the current situation and may not reflect the complete picture of the

superintendent’s job stressors. There could also be some hesitancy on the part of certain

participants in reporting personal feelings related to work induced stress.

Basic assumptions of the study are that the superintendent responding to the

survey honestly and as accurately as possible measured the perceptions of job-related

9
stressors and coping mechanisms. It is also assumed that the individual who is responding

to the survey is the person who belongs to that email address.

Design Controls

A descriptive design was chosen as a means of conducting this study. A survey

was utilized to describe perceptions of members of a target population regarding a

particular phenomenon (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; Thomas & Brubaker, 2000). Survey

instruments have been found to be very effective at describing the characteristics of a

population (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; Thomas & Brubaker, 2000). The purposeful

sample was selected from the 531 currently employed superintendents in a Midwest state.

This descriptive design was employed to collect quantitative data from results of

the questionnaire followed with qualitative data obtained through the open-ended

questions on the on-line survey which provided the researcher to further refine and

triangulate the findings to allow for full investigation of the issue (Creswell & Clark,

2007; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; Thomas & Brubaker, 2000). Thus descriptive research

was used when the researcher wanted to describe a situation in order to understand it

better (Thomas & Brubaker, 2000).

The survey instrument incorporated both a Likert and open-ended question type

that was modified by the researcher to include the most often identified stress factors and

coping mechanisms as identified by previous studies covering stress in the

superintendency. Locating a survey that would adequately measure the perceptions of

stress and coping mechanisms was problematic as there was no such instrument

available. Therefore, a survey was created by the researcher based on variables identified

in the review of the literature. The survey was piloted with a small population of

10
superintendents, all familiar with the occupational stressors of the position, to “reveal

ambiguities, poorly worded questions, questions that are not understood, and unclear

choices, and . . . indicate whether the instructions to the respondents are clear” (Fraenkel

& Wallen, 2003, p. 404). Unclear questions and directions were corrected or eliminated

prior to administration with the sample population.

Definitions of Key Terms

The following terms are important to this study and are defined as follows:

Coping Mechanism: Methods by which administrators cope with the stress

encountered as a result of the school environment and the resulting areas of responsibility

(Queen & Queen, 2004).

District Strategies: Policy utilized by public school district.

Job Performance: That which relates to the functions necessary for performing

the role of the superintendent.

Professional and Self Development: A formal procedure by which a professional

body ensures that its members keep their expertise up to date with current developments.

Stress: The "wear and tear" our bodies experience as we adjust to our continually

changing environment; it has physical and emotional effects on us and can create positive

or negative feelings (Lyles, 2005).

Stressors: The very specific situations or events that evoke the feeling of stress.

Superintendent: Chief executive officer for Pre-Kindergarten-12th and

Kindergarten-8th grade public schools, appointed by a locally elected school board of

trustees.

11
 Summary

Superintendent stress is at a point where there is an urgency to understand how to

cope with the inevitable job stressors. A necessity exists to determine factors that can

help those who are currently serving as superintendents to have a more successful

experience as it relates to managing stress. The information from this study can be useful

for those preparing for the superintendency as well as those who currently serve in this

position. Gmelch (1996) stated…“By shedding greater light on the sources of stress, it

may help superintendents build bridges over the barriers of stress” (p.32).

In this chapter the research questions were presented, along with the limitations

and design controls for the study. In Chapter Two, a synthesis of related literature is

presented that provided the theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of the study. In

Chapter Three, a description of the research design and methodology utilized in this study

is provided. Presented in Chapter Four are the research analysis and findings. In Chapter

Five, the results of the study, conclusions, implications, and recommendations for further

research are presented.

12
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

School administration is a popular area of study, in particular the school

superintendency (Public Agenda, 2001). However, there has not been a great deal of

study related to stress in the superintendency and the coping mechanisms associated to

the stressors (Brock & Grady, 2002). Stress and superintendency seem to be

synonymous, but the specifics of work related stress in the position and how

superintendents deal with it has been disregarded (Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Queen &

Queen, 2004). The 2007 mid-decade study of the state of the superintendency confirmed,

"An important challenge facing superintendents is how to handle

personal stress in a positive and constructive manner without passing it
on to their staff. Intellectually understanding that stress is a normal
condition of the position is just as important as finding personal coping
mechanisms to reduce its negative effects. Coping, understanding, and
reducing superintendent stress should be a high priority for school
boards and professional associations serving superintendents and
boards" (p.47).

During the last 15 years, the superintendent’s primary role has transformed into

one that focuses more on being a facilitator than a figurehead (Andero, 2000). It has also

become more about influencing stakeholders’ decisions rather than simply making

decisions (Brandt, 1993; Nussbaum 2007). School administrators in the next 15 years will

face even more challenges. Reviewing the second edition of the Handbook of Research

on Educational Research, Fowler (1999) stated, “…superintendents of the next decade

will deal with a society in flux” (p. 594). Glass (2002) agreed superintendent’s roles and

responsibilities have made drastic changes in the past few years. With the fluctuation in

13
expectations, and demands on the superintendent position, a growing problem is

superintendent turnover (Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Nussbaum, 2007).

One reoccurring challenge is getting qualified administrators to take on the

superintendency, and yet another keeping them there (Nussbaum, 2007, Public Agenda,

2001). There are a number of reasons why individuals “step down” from the position of

superintendent. Retirement is the most obvious answer that comes to mind, considering

that stress is cited as one of the most common reason for educators seeking early

retirement (Harrison, 1997; Nussbaum, 2007).

A definite barrier to transformational reform in school systems is the turnover rate

of superintendents and administrators (Brock & Grady, 2002; Mizell, 2000). These

studies proclaimed the absence of longevity by administrators within individual districts

makes it nearly impossible to provide an operating environment that is stable to foster

lasting, systemic reform.

Two serious challenges that the education profession must face are to attract the

best and the brightest educators into superintendent posts and then once attracted, to

retain them. One ex-superintendent who departed the position for a principalship stated

that “the pressure of the superintendent’s position had begun to destroy me from within”

(Osborne, 1996, p.29). Brock and Grady (2002) described the work of the school

administrator as fragmented and overwhelming.

Examined in this study are both stressors and stress coping mechanisms as they

relate to job performance. In order to consider both theory and research relate to stress

and the superintendency, three strands of literature were reviewed. The three strands

included public school superintendents and the leadership challenges they face, stress and

14
coping in general, and occupational stress parallels related to the public school

superintendent and the corporate executive. In addition the issue of gender and how that

might change coping mechanisms was examined. A number of parallels can be drawn

between corporate executives and school administrators. Therefore, the review utilizes

information and studies from both fields.

Public School Superintendents—Leadership Challenges

Bureaucracy

Superintendents agree that being a school leader is an exceptionally challenging

job. They say the ability to manage politics is the key to survival and point to “politics,

and bureaucracy” as one of the reasons colleagues leave the field (Farkas, Johnson, &

Duffet, 2003, p. 15). In addition to managing all that is needed to run their district, they

also juggle complaining parents, difficult special education laws, and uniformed media

coverage (Keedy & Bjork, 2001). After 35 years in the business, one discouraged public

school superintendent said, “I am tired of …dancing around the political games”

(Johnson, 2002, p.26).

Moreover, Howley, Pendarvis, and Gibbs (2002) reported political and

bureaucratic accountability as one of the highest pressures school administers face. More

than half (54 percent) of school superintendents say they need to “work around the

system” to get things done (Public Agenda, 2001, p.16). Recent studies supported the

idea that the role superintendents undertake when trying to balance educational,

managerial, and political leadership to promote school improvement demonstrated a vast

complexity of problems (Howley, Pendarvis, & Gibbs, 2002).

15
Money and Mandates

There are many other challenges that superintendents are faced with in today’s

school system. Superintendents identified insufficient funding as one of the biggest

challenges. Keeping up with local, state and federal mandates takes up too much of their

time and most believe schools are being overregulated and micromanaged (Houston,

2001; Rose & Gallup, 2007). Johnson (2002) reported 88% of the school superintendents

interviewed complained that they receive mandates “without getting the resources

necessary to fill them (p.27)”. According to Simpson, Lacava, and Sampson (2004), the

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and special education are two areas of federal

legislation that create frustration. In the Report to the People (2002) superintendent

William James of the Cherokee County School System, introduced parents to NCLB by

stating that the act brings increases federal involvement in public education at the state

and local levels and increased accountability for states, school districts, and individual

schools (Rose & Gallup, 2003). Since then the public, state, and local educational leaders

have muddled through the complex accountability issues addressed in NCLB. Rose and

Gallup (2003 and 2007), in the 35th and 39th Annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll on the

public’s attitude toward public schools, focused on NCLB strategies using the responses

of over a thousand adults. The most striking results from the 2003 study were that eighty-

three percent of the respondents believed that decisions regarding what is taught in the

public schools should be made at the state or local level and sixty-nine percent of the

respondents reported that they did not know enough about NCLB to state whether they

have a favorable or unfavorable opinion about these federal guidelines (Rose & Gallop,

2003). According to Rose and Gallup (2007) the updated study revealed the public’s

16
knowledge of NCLB had increased, but that as the public knowledge grows, the public’s

view of NCLB becomes less favorable. It is fair to suggest that one of the reasons the

public opinion is increasingly unfavorable with regard to NCLB is because the law has

focused on the wrong standard of school success (Rose and Gallup, 2007). This indicates

a severe discrepancy between the realities of state and federal mandates and the public

understanding of the increased responsibilities of school superintendents. In regard to

NCLB, superintendents have an ambivalent mind set. Although it is clear to

superintendents that the law is here to stay, few think it will work the way it is presently

structured, creating a stressful environment (Rose & Gallup, 2003; 2007). The vision of

the law makes sense, but many superintendents think it needs adjustments in order for it

to work, and many question the political intent behind it. Still, given all the challenges

they face, most superintendents are optimistic about the benefits of NCLB (Farkas,

Johnson, & Duffet, 2003; Rose & Gallup, 2007).

According to Wallace (2003), school leaders say their challenges are related to

funding and the time it takes to comply with a plethora of local, state, and federal

mandates. Ninety-three percent of superintendents and eighty-eight percent of principals

say their district has experienced a huge increase of responsibilities and mandates without

getting the resources necessary to fulfill them. They feel that some items are well

intended, but most lawmakers do not understand the impact to the organization. Many of

the superintendents feel their workload is overwhelming (Wallace, 2003).

Overwhelming Workload

Superintendents say they face countless daily obstacles in their high-stress, high

visibility position, yet they respond with a “can do” confidence and a willingness to be

17
held accountable for their district’s performance. Superintendents acknowledge that they

put a great deal of energy into managing their school, which can cause an imbalance in

the rest of their life (Olson, 2000).

Lashway (2002) stated school administrators must accept the ultimate

responsibility for district, school, and student achievement. Standards-based

accountability has become a trademark for the superintendent and a minimum

expectation of the job. This trend has created a basis for perceived and experienced stress

for the position (Shipps & Firestone, 2003). Howley, Pendarvis, and Gibbs, (2002)

agreed that today’s superintendents must effectively mediate between local interests, (i.e.

school boards, parent advisory councils, parent-teacher organizations, individual parents,

teachers, civic groups) and state and federal requirements/evaluations, (i.e. NCLB, school

accreditation, and state report cards).

Houston (2001) alluded that the opportunities to be successful as a superintendent

were filled with difficulty that included rapidly changing community demographics.

Keedy and Bjork (2001) agreed that an increase in community political activism and an

increase in accountability measures added to the challenges. Greyser (1999) and Brock

and Grady (2002) also suggested that the role of the superintendent often leads to

isolation as administrators move up the leadership ladder. Additionally, leaders tend to

put unrealistic demands on themselves that they have all the right answers, which adds to

anxiety and stress levels (Queen & Queen, 2004). All of these stressors lead to high

turnover in the school administration (Forderaro, 2006; Nussbaum, 2007; Public Agenda,

2001).

18
High Turnover

The professional literature and the general media have given much attention to

two specific problems in school administration: a) the decreasing pool of administrators,

in particular for school superintendent; and b) the frequent turnover of administrators

(Educational Research Service, 1998; Forderaro, 2006; Nussbaum, 2007; Queen &

Queen, 2004). The marked burnout of superintendents and other administrators has been

reflected in the studies done within the last decade. Accentuating this fact is the number

of studies supported by grants through the State Action for Education Leadership Project

(SAELP). In the spring of 2001, eight million national initiatives supported fifteen states

with 3-year $250,000 grants. These grants have been utilized for policies to attract,

support, and sustain effective superintendents (Bjork, Keedy, Rhinehart, & Winter,

2002). This has been directly related to the need for increased and improved education

and training for administrators to help recruit and retain more qualified leaders (Cooper,

Fusarelli, & Carella, 2000).

Another result of the superintendent shortage has been the recent trend for school

boards opting to use consulting firms to help increase superintendent candidate pools

(Forderaro, 2006). Glass (2000) noted even the use of consulting firms has not

necessarily increased these leadership shortages. Jones (2001) confirmed this when he

noted that 8 years ago a superintendent vacancy would produce an average of two

hundred-fifty applicants while today thirty is the norm. A consistent theme among

researchers and theories behind superintendent turnover has been the increased stress

associated with the position (Queen & Queen, 2004).

19
 In the extensive study of the American superintendency, Glass, Bjork and

Brunner (2000) found that fifty-one percent of superintendents surveyed indicated that

they feel considerable or very great stress in the superintendency and an additional forty-

one percent indicated a moderate level of stress. Because of this perception, many

administrators viewed the superintendency as a burnout position (Queen & Queen, 2004).

Colgan (2003) acknowledged that burnout is characterized by a growing feeling of

helplessness and a sense that tasks are insurmountable. Eventually the stress can lead to

premature superintendent turnover (Educational Research Service, 1998; Forderaro,

2006; Nussbaum, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004).

A survey of retired school superintendents in New York cited stress as the most

common reason for their decision to retire (Goldstien, 1992). Districts that have difficult

political situations, little money, poor staff morale, and poor student achievements are in

especially stressful positions (Brubaker & Coble, 1995; Queen & Queen, 2004). Milstein

(1992) and Nussbaum (2007) concurred that educational administrators believe the main

reason for high turnover rates and unwillingness to fill new superintendent vacancies is

due to the fact that their work is full of stress and that superintendents face situations for

which there are no easy answers.

As the superintendents retire and districts begin to search for candidates to fill

these positions, ninety percent of school district personnel stated it is becoming

increasingly difficult to find qualified candidates (Association of California School

Administration, 2000a). Additionally, the stressful nature of the job and the implications

of stress on the performance of the leaders have also been addressed in the literature.

According to Glass (2000), in a study of The American School Superintendency 2000, it

20
was noted that superintendents under high stress might make decisions without benefit of

reflections and rational thought. When leaders are dealing with high levels of stress, they

suffer in their personal relationships and their organization does not perform well because

of the preoccupation that comes with handling their own stress (Brock & Grady, 2002). If

administrators continue to have difficulties coping with the stresses of their positions, the

end result will be a shortage of educational leaders (Cunningham & Burdick, 1999;

Giugni, 1998; Nussbaum, 2007). An even worse scenario could be if they stay in their

jobs, the potential for fatigue, burnout, and depression, which might result in symptoms

affecting their physical, mental, and emotional health (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, &

Schaufeli, 2001; Gates & Gmelch, 1998; Queen & Queen, 2004; Weber, 1999). Another

related concern in the literature was how gender affected the coping skills of the

superintendents (Gianakos, 2002).

Gender

Gianakos (2002), Nelson and Burke (2002), and Iwasaki, Mackay, and Mactavish

(2005) reported research results have been mixed with gender being a predictor of coping

skills for occupational stress. Women tend to exhibit independence and resilience to cope

under work pressure; even while they risk loss of social support, through isolation and the

possibility of internalizing failures (Bhatnagar, 1988; Long, 1989; Nelson & Burke, 2002;

Taylor, Klein, Gurung, Gruenewald, & Updegraff, 2002). In fact, Gianakos (2002) and

Nelson and Burke (2002) postulated that men, compared to females, perceive greater

support in the workplace. Geller and Hobfoll (1994) agreed social support in the

workplace is comforting and helps with decision making and problem solving. While

men’s support networks were more work-based, women seemed to gain their support

21
from family and friends (Nelson & Burke, 2002; Piltch, Walsh, Mangione, & Jennings,

1994). Gianakos (2002), Iwasaki, Mackay, and Mactavish (2005), and Nelson and Burke

(2002) purported women’s stress may increase due to on-going conflicts of balancing

work and family obligations.

Stress and stress related diseases are on the increase in women as are the number

of women holding superintendent positions (Gmelch, 1996; Nelson & Burke, 2002).

Gmelch (1996) stated that women perceive less stress than their male counterparts when

compared in stress profiles. Iwasaki, et al. (2005); Nelson and Burke (2002); Taylor, et

al, (2002) argued the stress profiles were based on dated information and did not

accurately reflect gender specific stress.

According to Nelson and Burke (2002), men and women differ in their choices of

coping strategies. Men use "problem-focused" coping strategies: planned and rational

actions, humor, and fantasy (p. 87). However, when education, occupation, and position

are comparable, both men and women use "problem-focused" coping. (p. 87). Nelson and

Burke added in a less selected sample, women used "emotion-focused" strategies:

expression of emotions, social support, self-blame, denial, and avoidance (p. 7). Iwasaki,

et al. (2005), Nelson and Burke (2002), and Taylor, et al. (2002) reported women's

coping style is likely to be "tend and befriend," that is, to nurture and form relationships

with others. Thus women's health is related to the number and quality of their supportive

relationships (Nelson & Burke, 2002).

Nelson and Burke (2002) reported conflict between the demands of work and

family is another source of stress that varies by gender. Women continue to carry the bulk

of family responsibilities, even when they work long hours (Nelson & Burke, 2002).

22
However, the amount of time spent on work and family does not predict stress level;

rather the conflict between work and family roles heightens stress (Iwasaki, et al., 2005;

Nelson & Burke, 2002). Women, especially mothers, are more likely to report conflict

between the demands of work and home (Fielden & Davidson, 2001; Shields, 2003).

Both men and women who are managers, but especially women, experience internal

work-family conflict. In turn, work-family conflict is associated with depression, anxiety,

poor physical health, and alcohol use among both men and women (Nelson & Burke,

2002; Shields, 2003). Within corporations and institutions, the management of work

stress is still generally considered to be an individual problem. Work settings may offer

"family friendly" options and wellness centers, but the use of these benefits is by

individual choice (Iwasaki et al, 2005). Overall, these constructs demonstrated the need

for additional research regarding the effectiveness of self-development programs in

aiding female superintendents in developing coping skills to guide them toward a focus

on improved stress management.

Professional and Self Development

In the past, most of the professional development courses have focused on

technical skills and knowledge required of administrative leadership positions (Brock &

Grady, 2002). In the mid-nineties there was an increase in the preparation programs that

address the personal dimensions of a leader. They focus on values, ethics, integrity,

fairness, personal belief systems, and ethics of educational leaders (Beck, 1994; Brock &

Grady, 2002)). With the increasing demands of the superintendency position there is an

obvious need to focus on the self development programs for the administrative leader.

Literature from other disciplines, such as the psychology and corporate business arena,

23
show a strong correlation between self/personal development and finding meaning in

one’s work (Briskin, 1996; Walsh, 1999). More writers are venturing into this arena

because they have recognized the important relationship of the leader’s self-development

to organizational success. According to Bolman and Deal (1997), it is important to

include matters of the heart, soul, and spirit into the workplace of educational leaders,

“in the workplace, all of us need a language of moral discourse that

permits discussion of ethical and spiritual issues, connecting them
to images of leadership….Heart, hope, and faith, rooted in soul and
spirit are necessary for today’s managers to become tomorrow’s
leaders, for today’s sterile bureaucracies to become tomorrow’s
communities of meaning, and for our society to rediscover its
ethical and spiritual center” (p.2).

Johnson (2002) reported eight-nine percent of superintendents believe leadership

programs in graduate schools of education are “out of touch” with the realities of running

schools today. One of the superintendents interviewed in the Public Agenda (2001) stated

that too much of the professional development that is offered is “impractical and focuses

on the wrong things” (p.28).

Houston (2001) asked the question: “How will we find leaders who can act as

courageous champions for children and who are willing and able to change the status

quo, while acting as collaborative catalysts and working with others to make that

happen?” (p. 432). We must look hard to find a source for this kind of leader. As Houston

goes on to say, there are four primary problems with the current leadership system: “the

job is impossible, the expectations are inappropriate, the training is inadequate, and the

pipeline is inverted” (p.432). On a positive note, he adds the superintendency is not so

much of a job, as a calling. It chooses you in as much as you choose it; you are

summoned. Part of the responsibility of the current generation of superintendents is to

24
summon the next generation to duty. The superintendency is a very challenging job with

many frustrations and perils. It is also a job with many rewards. Superintendents have the

chance to reshape the lives of children in amazing ways, and they can create a sense of

community where none exists (Nussbaum, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004).

Thus there is no escaping the amount of stress in an administrative position;

however how stress is managed can have a direct impact on the effectiveness of the

leader and the success of the organization (Queen & Queen, 2004). Many

superintendents still find the job exhilarating and challenging, and many who leave the

job actually come back. They cite reasons such as wanting to work in a job that offers

opportunities to change the direction of children’s lives, alter the behavior of an

organization, and expand the possibilities of whole communities (Houston, 2001).

Patterson (2000) noted that the superintendency is not just a job, but a lifestyle filled with

important professional and personal accomplishments. It is an opportunity to do difficult

and valuable work and to overcome challenges. Through professional reflection, many

long time superintendents have been able to deal with hard questions and come up with

the answers, thus contributing to their decision to stay in their career field (Kearns &

Harvey, 2001). Although stress is a part of the administrator’s job, understanding stress

and how to cope with it is an important part of this discussion.

Coping with Stress—In General

Under normal circumstances, people should be able to find new balances and

responses in their reactions to new situations (Queen & Queen, 2004). Stress is not

necessarily a negative phenomenon and it would therefore be a mistake to concentrate

only on its pathological effects. A moderate level of stress can be an important

25
motivational factor and can be instrumental in achieving a dynamic adaptation to new

situations (Lyles, 2005).

If health is considered as a dynamic equilibrium, stress is part of it (Lyles, 2005).

There is no health without interaction with other people and with the environment. Only

excesses of stress are pathological (Lyles, 2005). Some stress is therefore normal and

necessary, at work and outside it. But if stress is intense, continuous or repeated, if a

person is unable to cope, or if support is lacking, stress then becomes a negative

phenomenon which can lead to physical illness and psychological disorders (Lyles,

2005). In a work context, it often results in inadequate adaptation to situations and people

and failure to perform at an optimal level. Work related stress is defined by the

Occupation Health Safety Organization (2006) as "…the harmful physical and emotional

responses that occur when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities,

resources, or needs of the worker. Job stress can lead to poor health and even injury”

(p.1).

Stress, according to Buhler (1993), Queen and Queen (2004), and Brock and

Grady (2002), is the body’s non-specific response to stressors in the environment. Lyles

(2005) concurred and reported stress is the mental and physical wear and tear that we

experience as we live our lives. In no more than hundredth of a millisecond, the

individual prepares themselves for fight or flight. This reaction evokes a series of

complex autonomic and endocrine changes that provide much of our ability to survive.

Lehrer and Woolfolk (1993) and Demerouti, [Link] (2001) agreed that prolonged reaction

beyond the emergency stage results in a chronic state of over tension of the body’s

26
system, which is directly linked to disease states, i.e. hypertension, high blood

cholesterol, and obesity.

Therefore, according to Brock and Grady (2002), Buhler (1993), Lyles (2005),

and Queen and Queen (2004) not all tension is necessarily bad or unhealthy. The negative

or unhealthy stress is referred to as distress and the stress that is considered positive and

healthy is known as eustress. The body’s response to stress is similar in both distress and

eustress. The heart rate and perspiration increases, but with eustress the effects are

temporary. Lyles (2005) purported when the body is under distress, adverse effects are

produced in the body because of the repeated sounding of the physiological stress alarms.

When the body perceives a threat, a fire alarm is pulled in our system.

The same stimulus may result in good stress for one person and bad stress for

another. Buhler (1993) provided the example of waiting until the night before a deadline

to complete a major project or assignment. One individual may consider this a great

motivator because they believe they work and perform better under pressure. Impending

deadlines may produce traumatic results in another individual because of a tendency to

panic under pressure. Each individual handles stress differently and every person has a

different threshold (Brock & Grady, 2002; Buhler, 1993; Queen & Queen, 2004).

Lyles (2005) noted, “Understand your body’s response to stress and you will

know how to navigate any of life’s storms” (p. 3). Stress is a natural part of life and will

be induced in both good and bad situations. Lyles (2005) agreed stress is the stimulus for

action and growth. Individuals with too little stress may not put their best foot forward or

perform to their potential. On the other hand, too much stress can lead to a loss of focus

and lack of efficiency and the inability to be effective as a leader (Brock & Grady, 2002;

27
Crampton, Hodge, Mishra, & Price, 1995). Brock and Grady and Lyles concurred, the

major difference between eustress and distress is the damaging effects to the body. The

body’s emergency system is easily triggered by a threat and must be regulated, or

problems related to overall health will continue to increase throughout life. When the fire

alarm is constantly activated day after day, week after week, a person is living in a

chronic state of tenseness (Lyles).

Coping is essentially the way people manage those life conditions that are

stressful. Stress and coping can be considered to be reciprocals of each other (Lyles,

2005). When the coping behavior is effective, the level of stress tends to be low or on the

decline. However, if the individual has ineffective coping skills, there is a tendency for

stress to be high or continue to increase (Lazarus, 1999; Queen & Queen, 2004).

Greenburg (1980) and Lyles discussed the use of Large Muscle Activity (LMA) as

potentially the most effective coping technique available. The urge to fight or flee are

primary sub-conscious reactions to stress and are characterized by acceleration of the

heart, mobilization of sugar from the liver, a rise of blood pressure, and other

physiological reactions. Both of those urges require LMA; therefore by preparing the

body to move, it should move (Lyles, 2005). LMA such as walking, running, or

exercising is the natural way of allowing the body to respond to the stressor, and that in

effect is the quickest way to lower stress and the accompanying physiological symptoms.

In short, if you are exercising and moving on a regular basis, you are training your body

how to handle eustress. If your physiological pathways are set for eustress, then it will be

easier for your body to handle distress (Lyles, 2005). Stress in general is directly related

to how well the occupational stress is managed.

28
Occupational Stress

The theory that every disease is conditioned by a specific and clearly defined

cause was formulated in the late 1800s by a German pathologist, Rudolph Virchow

(Lyles, 2005). Selye (1976), Lyles and Queen and Queen (2004) translated this cause

effect relationship to workplace stress. They hypothesized that a wide variety of

workplace stressors and their interactions could lead to patterns of functionality changes

in organs and organ systems. Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, and Schaufeli (2001)

concurred that the negative effects of workplace stress need to be identified to prevent

causing disease, accelerating the course of disease, and triggering disease symptoms. Of

equal importance is the need to identify and promote positive system components that

contribute to the promotion of health and well-being (Levi, 2001; Queen & Queen, 2004).

While the impact of workplace stress varies from one person to the next,

mounting evidence shows that stress can cause some very specific adverse health effects

(Lyles, 2005). Seyle (1976) and Lyles explained signs and symptoms of occupational

stress that can be categorized into physical or psychological. Some physical signs are

migraine headaches, ulcers, heart attacks, high blood pressure, anxiety and sleeplessness.

Also, some psychological symptoms include changes in temperament, irritability, lack of

concentration, and becoming overly argumentative. There can also be a tendency to be

late or absent from work for unexplained reasons. Typically these symptoms are seen by

the co-workers before they are recognized by the stressed individual (Armitage, 1998;

Queen & Queen, 2004).

In some extreme cases, stress may lead to various forms of paranoia (Fisher,

1997; Lyles, 2005). It is characterized by fear of a chronic nature based on real events.

29
On the other hand, passivity can be fatal and will lead to more helplessness. Fisher and

Lyle’s recommendation is to rationalize work toward those goals. This is one of the most

productive methods of taking hold and directing a positive path for stress management

(Queen & Queen, 2004).

Burnout is the long-term effect of unresolved occupational stress (Brock & Grady,

2002; Demerouti et al, 2001; Zemke, 1991). A 1991 report based on a questionnaire of

600 full-time employees conducted by Northwestern National Life Insurance Company

found the following: One in three American workers say that job stress is the single

greatest stress in their lives. Seventy percent of workers said job stress lowers their

productivity and results in frequent health ailments. Burnout was highest in companies

that cut employee benefits, changed ownership, or required frequent overtime (Zemke,

1991).

Individuals must, to some extent, find methods for dealing with stress in their own

way. There is a tendency toward similarities in methods used to increase the ability to

cope with stress. Crampton, Hodge, Mishra and Price (1995) and Lyles (2005) identified

techniques that received the highest level of agreement in a study of school

administrators. Techniques identified included healthy attitudes, proper nutrition,

exercise, relaxation/sleeping/taking breaks, meeting the source of stress head on, set

limit/goals/priorities, increase qualifications/skills, and building a strong family life.

However, only seventeen percent of the respondents felt the responsibility for stress

management lies with the individual rather than the organization (Crampton, et al, 2005).

Travers (2001) reported that the concepts of teaching and stress are closely

synonymous. Traditionally researchers have had difficulty obtaining information on

30
teacher stress because the reporting of stress is often related to a sign of weakness in the

teaching profession (Queen & Queen, 2004). Various reports suggest that thirty to ninety

percent of teachers report a high level of stress (Educational Research Service, 1998).

Borg and Riding (1993) and Queen and Queen (2004) stated teacher burnout is an

extreme reaction to stress, which raises additional concerns relating to the adverse affect

on the learning environment and student achievement. Travers (2001) agreed and

discussed the role that personality plays on teacher stress. The term “de-stressors” was

introduced as stress reducers that include collegial support, praise, and recognition

(Domenech, 1996). Thus the importance of organizational stress management

interventions was presented as an area of need for additional study.

Additionally, Wolfe (1986) explained the first step in developing stress

management programs is to develop or acquire educational materials designed to increase

the general understanding of workplace stress and how it can affect both job performance

and employee health. Lyles (2005) agreed information of this nature is critical for upper

level decision-makers so they may decide to what level they are willing to support stress

management education for their employees. Brock and Grady (2002) and Wolfe, (1986)

went on to say the next step is to examine the needs of the organization against the needs

of the individual teacher in developing stress reduction and stress management programs.

A primary barrier is a management paradigm in which pressure or stress is valued as a

motivator. Executive commitment to stress reduction and management is critical. Without

this level of support, the programs are doomed from the start (Travers, 2001). Moreover,

stress can be felt at all levels of the workplace, but the corporate executives and school

superintendents have even more pressures (Brock & Grady, 2002).

31
Stress—Corporate Executives and School Superintendents

According to Marino (1997) the mark of a great CEO is how they cope with and

manage stress. He offered signs and signals of stress including restlessness, irritability,

prolonged fatigue, difficulty concentrating, lack of interest in recreation, anxiety,

excessive work hours, taking excessive work home, increased smoking and or drinking,

and loss of perspective. Lyles (2005) agreed and offered the following advice: stay

healthy, eat nutritiously, exercise, find work you enjoy, lead instead of manage, prioritize,

listen and learn, communicate clearly, be flexible and manage change (p. 18). Marino

(1997) and Lyles (2005) concurred not all stress is bad; it can force positive change, and

is the basic ingredient of competition. The key is to recognize the right balance of stress

and stress management skills needed to perform optimally.

Common myths regarding school superintendent stress are that all stress is

harmful, that stress should be avoided, that the higher up in the organization, the greater

stress, that stress is a male dominated phenomenon, that superintendents experience

excessive stress, and that there is only one right way to cope with stress (Gates &

Gmelch, 1998). The realities, according to Gates and Gmelch (1998) and Lyles (2005)

are that some stress is positive and necessary. Stress is a way of life and is an important

step in rising to the challenges of a leadership position. On the other hand, occupational

stress can lead to loss of job satisfaction and ultimately looking for other work (Brock &

Grady, 2002).

However, as a result of occupational stress, a number of superintendents are

choosing to leave the superintendency for lesser positions within the school system while

some are choosing to leave the position entirely (Brock & Grady, 2002; Glass et al,

32
2000). In many cases these are the most talented and passionate superintendents in the

business of education. The reasons for the exodus include deterioration of physical

health, excessive politics, over tasking, and the separation of children from education

(Brock & Grady, 2002; Lyles, 2005). More often than not the departure is a consequence

of shattered vision (Brock & Grady, 2002; Gmelch, 1996). Ultimately the outcome

causes a declining pool of qualified applicants for superintendent positions across the

country (Nussbaum, 2007; Public Agenda 2001).

Summary

The review of literature began with an explanation of the pressures created in

meeting current leadership challenges in the position of superintendent and how it has

resulted in a diminished pool of individuals willing to enter, or remain in the

superintendent positions (Nussbaum, 2007; Public Agenda 2001; Queen & Queen, 2004).

The phenomenon can be attributed to occupational stressors. The research indicated that

superintendents have cited stress as a primary reason for leaving the position or avoiding

it as a career altogether (Nussbaum, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004; Wallace, 2003). Stress

related to mental and physical illness among superintendents has been identified within

the research literature (Brock & Grady, 2002; Lyles, 2005). This has resulted in low

numbers of superintendent applicants for high stressful jobs and early retirements among

superintendents already in the profession (Hammond, Muffs, & Sciascia, 2001). Also the

issue of gender and how female and male superintendents dealt with stress was examined.

The research on the issue of gender was inconclusive.

Next the review of literature examined the need for professional development as it

relates to stress and coping mechanisms. The administrative leader is faced with

33
increasing demands which leads to the need for self development programs to assist them

in managing the inevitable occupational stressors they will face (Queen & Queen, 2004).

Walsh (1999) argued there is a profound relationship between self/personal development

and finding meaning in one’s work. The success of the organization can be directly

related to the leader’s self-development (Bolman & Deal, 1997; Briskin, 1996). The

research was void of any possible professional development programs that the

organization could implement to help the superintendent position with the inevitable

doom of stress.

Finally, the review of literature provided a review of stress and coping in general

including definitions of stress, symptoms, consequences, and recommendations on how

to cope with stress (Lyles, 2005). Occupational stress was reviewed as to the specific

nature of job related stress and the coping mechanisms used to deal with occupational

stress (Lyles, 2005). Corporate executives and school superintendents deal with similar

issues relating to stress and coping (Queen & Queen, 2004). The research did not reveal a

strategy for superintendents to assess their stress level or provide a model in which to

handle burnout for school leaders.

The literature reviewed each of the four strands of stress and suggested a need for

the study of occupational stress experienced and the coping mechanisms used to deal

with stress for superintendents (Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004).

Identification of stressors and coping techniques for this group could help make the

superintendent position a more positive experience and ultimately recruit and retain more

candidates.

34
 Since stress and coping are considered key determinants of health and life quality,

stress-coping research has important theoretical and practical implications (Folkman &

Moskowitz, 2000a). Examining the ways in which people cope with stress in their lives

can help facilitate understanding of the processes and mechanisms by which coping

strategies counteract the negative impact of stress on health and well-being (Somerfield

& McCrae, 2000). This knowledge could also be useful in the development of effective

health-related policies and programs to prevent stress-induced illnesses, reduce health

service costs, and promote population health (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000b).

Thus, a necessity exists to determine strategies that can help those who are

currently employed as superintendents to have a more successful experience as it relates

to managing stress. The information from this study can be useful for those preparing for

the superintendency as well as those who currently hold the position. “By shedding

greater light on the sources of stress, it may help superintendents build bridges over the

barrier of stress” (Gmelch, 1996, p. 32).

In Chapter Three, a description of the research design and methodology utilized in

this study is presented. The design, a mixed design is described. Data collection and

instrumentation are explained, along with the resulting methods of data analysis. Included

in Chapter Four is the presentation of the data and analyses of the findings. In Chapter

Five, the results of the study are summarized and implications for further research are

presented.

35
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The challenges faced by school superintendents have soared in recent years. The

research indicated the demands and pressures are caused by lack of funding for state

legislated mandates such as NCLB, competing community and school groups, politics

and bureaucracy, and the public’s perceived dissatisfaction with school performance, to

name a few (Glass, Bjork, & Brunner 2000). All these stressors lead to high turnover and

a decreasing pool of qualified candidates (Educational Research Service, 1998;

Forderaro, 2006; Nussbaum, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004). Unexamined, heretofore,

have been specific stressors, coping mechanisms, and strategies used by superintendents

to manage occupational stress. Therefore, this study was undertaken to explore the job

related occupational stressors and coping mechanisms as perceived by the public school

superintendents in the state of Missouri. The researcher examined superintendent work

related stressors, coping mechanisms, the issue of gender and how it is related to coping

mechanisms and strategies used to maintain balance in the superintendents personal and

professional life. The inquiry will also attempt to determine if there was a relationship

between the type of stressor and the type of coping mechanism utilized by the selected

population. Additionally, the investigation was also used to determine if a stress

management model could be constructed that might assist superintendents and people in

leadership roles manage their stress.

In Chapter Three the rationale for the study’s design and methodology is

presented. Essential design elements were selected to address the query how do

36
administrators cope with the daily occupational stressors? An initial review of the study’s

problems and purposes provided background for the stated research questions. Following

this information the study population and sampling procedures are detailed and grounded

in established research techniques. Procedures employed for data collection,

instrumentation, and data analysis are specified in sufficient detail to strengthen analysis

and facilitate replication.

Problems and Purposes Overview

Increased accountability standards and ever changing demands placed on today’s

school administrators have created the distinct need for a stress management model to

facilitate quality leadership (Brock & Grady, 2002; Demerouti et al, 2001; Queen &

Queen, 2004). The role of stress is thought by many researchers to be a major contributor

to the high turnover and burnout rates of school superintendent positions (Bjork, Keedy,

Rhinehart, & Winter, 2002; Cooper, Fusarelli, & Carella, 2000; Educational Research

Service, 1998; Forderaro, 2006; Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Nussbaum, 2007; Queen &

Queen, 2004).

The purpose of this study was to investigate in what ways and to what degree, if

any, school superintendents perceive stress and what, if any, coping mechanisms were

engaged. This study focused on qualities of coping mechanisms and their effectiveness.

Underscored throughout the study is the need for effective stress management skills,

professional development geared towards developing a stress model, and creating a

positive school culture. Moreover, the researcher sought to identify any significant

differences between the coping mechanisms utilized by female and male leaders.

37
 Research Questions

Research and information gained from a synthesis of related literature (Bjork,

Keedy, Rhinehart, & Winter, 2002; Cooper, Fusarelli, & Carella, 2000; Demerouti et al,

2001; Educational Research Service, 1998; Farkas, Johnson, & Duffet, 2003; Forderaro,

2006; Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Johnson, 2002; Nussbaum, 2007; Public Agenda

2001; Queen & Queen, 2004) helped formulate research questions and guided this study.

The researcher attempted to find answers to the following research questions:

1. What are the frequencies of common occupational stressors as perceived by

superintendents?

2. Are there differences in occupational stressors between female superintendents

and male superintendents?

3. What are the frequencies of the type of coping mechanisms deployed as

perceived by superintendents, (Exercise/Nutrition, Getting away/Time off,

Artificial means, Relaxation techniques, Mentoring/guidance from peers) and

what type of coping mechanism is most effective as perceived by

superintendents?

4. Do male and female superintendents differ in the type of coping mechanism

they utilize?

5. What are the strategies employed by school district personnel to assist the

superintendents in managing occupational stress?

6. What support did school district personnel provide to enhance the effectiveness

of coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents to manage occupational

stressors?

38
 Population and Sample

The population included 531 superintendents of PK-12 school districts, and K-8

school districts. Superintendents within the study were selected for participation in this

study based upon two distinct criterions; geographical and gender.

To assist in achieving a purposeful sampling, a multi-tiered criteria process was

carefully devised. The first criterion was geographical in nature, as the researcher divided

the state of Missouri into suburban, urban, and rural. Fraenkel and Wallen (2003)

articulated the importance of sampling the population for the purpose of research and

generalizability.

Further criteria were then applied in order to stratify for improved, purposeful

sampling. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2003), “Stratification ensures that the

sample is representative” and reflects what the research is intended to study (p. 486).

Once the researcher identified 531 school districts throughout the state of Missouri and

stratified for suburban, urban, and rural, the researcher applied additional criteria of

gender consideration. Gender was identified for the purpose of distinguishing between

possible differences in stress and coping mechanism characteristics based on gender.

Upon development of the sample for the current study, the researcher cross

referenced the sample schools with information from the Office of Social and Economic

Data Analysis (OSEDA) to ensure a representative sample of the state of Missouri. The

researcher adopted the records of stratification from the public office of OSEDA. The

additional technique of representative sampling was utilized during the collection of data

for research analysis. Representative sampling is applied in order to accomplish

generalizability, which increases the “degree to which a sample represents the population

39
of interest” (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003, p. 109). Fraenkel and Wallen (2003) concluded

that whenever representative sampling is used “generalization is made more plausible if

data are presented to show that the sample is representative of the intended population on

at least some relevant variables” (p. 110). The steps of selecting the representative sample

improved stratification and allowed the researcher to survey a sample of schools (urban,

suburban, and rural) that was representative of the population. For example, if the

population was 50% rural, 25% urban and 25% suburban, the researcher’s representative

sample would be 50% rural, 25% urban, and 25% suburban. Table 1 below shows the

relationship between the population and sample by comparing the percentage and number

of schools in each of the three categories.

Table 1

Population and Sample of Schools by Percentage and Number

Population Sample
________________ __________________

Type of School Number Percent Number Percent

Urban 17 3 5 3

Suburban 74 14 10 14

Rural 440 83 365 83

Note: N=531

While the targeted audience for this research study was primarily intended for the

educational community, it is believed, however, that the research contained throughout

this study should prove valuable to leaders within a wide range of public and private

40
organizations. The tenets of stress management and leadership are based on positive

characteristics which should prove strengthening to the leadership of any organization.

Data Collection and Instrumentation

Data Collection Process

Upon receiving approval from the Human Subject Protection Review Committee

(Appendix D), the researcher ensured the confidentiality of the information obtained

through the study and included written informed consent details into the web-based

survey for those superintendents willing to participate in the study.

Three ethical guidelines were followed to protect the human subjects of research

involved this study. Protection of participants from harm, assurance of the confidentiality

and security of research data, and avoidance of deceiving subjects involved in the

research (Creswell, 2003; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003) were addressed. All participants

were instructed by completing the on-line survey, informed consent is implied. The

consent forms described their rights to voluntarily participate in the study, to withdraw

from participation at any time, to ask questions, and to have confidentiality respected

throughout the research project (Creswell). These consent forms met with the approval of

the Institutional Review Board of the University of Missouri, Columbia (Appendix D).

Instrumentation

A survey instrument, Superintendent Stress and Coping Mechanisms (SSCM)

(Appendix A), was created for this study to determine the extent of stressors on

superintendents and what coping mechanisms are utilized and how effective the coping

mechanisms are. Survey statements were based on common stressors as found in the

literature review. While developing the review of related literature the researcher was

41
able to identify several important constructs that aided in the process of developing the

survey items and open ended questions. The survey instrument is a compilation of the

most often identified stressors from previous studies covering stress in the

superintendency, including Farkas et al. (2003), Glass et al. (2000), and Richardson

(1998). The survey was designed to include a comprehensive list of stress-related events

as the centerpiece of the survey instrument. While ideas from several study instruments

were used to create this instrument, no specific wording was used from either of these

two studies.

380 surveys were electronically distributed throughout the state of Missouri. A

written statement was included in the survey informing the superintendents that by

completing the survey, they were implying their consent. All participant surveys were

completed through the internet using the survey builder website Survey Monkey. A

Likert scale, which is a scale “…with a number of points that provide ordinal scale

measurement,” (Wiersma, 2000, p. 171) was used to represent the responses collected

from superintendents. Lack of participation is one of the concerns with on-line surveys

(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). For this reason, the researcher developed a timely survey to

consist of a 30-item likert scale which was designed to ascertain superintendent’s

perceptions of occupational stressors. The survey also consisted of a 30-item scale

created to assess the leader’s perceptions of the coping mechanisms utilized for each

occupational stressor. There were 5 categories of coping mechanisms utilized

(1) Exercise/Nutrition Program, (2) Getting away/Time off from work, (3) Artificial

means, i.e. stimulants or prescription drugs, (4) Relaxation techniques, i.e. controlled

breathing, yoga, (5) Mentoring/Guidance from peers. Both surveys utilized the likert-type

42
scale as part of the instrument’s design, employing a scale of 1 to 4, 1 representing never

bothers me to 4 representing frequently bothers me. Using a likert-type scale provides for

a closed-ended response, while reducing the possibility for ambiguity (Dunn-Rankin,

Knezek, Wallace, & Zhang, 2004; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). The final phase of the

survey questioned how effective was the coping mechanism utilized for each

occupational stressor. This phase also utilized a likert scale of 1 to 4, 1 representing not

effective at all to 4 representing very effective.

The survey was pilot tested and retested with a group of superintendents. The

participants of the pilot test were provided with instructions on how to complete the

surveys and also were asked to provide feedback about the instrument: instrument design,

appearance of the survey, ease of use, clarity of directions, ease of comprehension and

the length of the survey. Participants were asked to complete the surveys a second time

within a period of one week to establish the reliability of the scores. According to

Fraenkel and Wallen (2003) reliability “refers to the consistency of the scores obtained—

how consistent they are for each individual from one administration of an instrument to

another and from one set of items to another” (p. 165). Additionally, feedback was used

to revise the surveys. This feedback helped the researcher confirm the validity of the

surveys (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003).

Data collection continued with qualitative follow up. Four open ended questions

were asked of each participant. The rich descriptions provided by the qualitative process

(Merriam, 1998) offered new insights and helped with data triangulation gained through

qualitative measures. These new insights developed as the researcher coded the data and

analyzed it for common themes. Frankel and Wallen (2003) referred to this analysis as

43
the “continual reworking of data with emphasis on patterns” (p. 542), while Merriam

(1998) stressed coding as a manner in which to “keep track of your thoughts, musings,

speculations, and hunches as you engage in analysis” (p. 165). Quantitative and

qualitative data analysis helped the researcher draw important conclusions about how

common occupational stressors affected coping mechanisms needed to maintain balance.

Data Analysis

The purpose of this explanatory mixed-method design study was to

determine superintendent perceptions of the frequency of occupational stressors as

well as the superintendent perceptions of what, if any, coping mechanisms were

most often utilized. Although research indicated that occupational stress is not a

new construct, the general perceptions were incidents of occupational stress are on

the rise (Farkas et al., 2003; Glass et al., 2000). The research that had been

conducted tended to focus on types of common stressors in the superintendency,

rather than the types of coping mechanisms, and what, if any, strategies were

employed by the school district to assist leaders with stress management skills. Two

phases of data analysis were chosen to describe numerical/statistical findings and

descriptive data.

The data from the Stress and Coping Mechanisms Survey (SCMS) (see

Appendix A) derived from selected district superintendents were collected,

tabulated, and analyzed. For research questions one, two, three, and four data were

entered into the SAS statistical package, to obtain detailed analysis of survey data.

Quantitative Analysis

The following statistical methods were utilized to address each research question.

44
 Research Question 1. In the attempt to ascertain the frequencies of the

occupational stressors as perceived by superintendents, a frequency distribution was

utilized. Fraenkel and Wallen (2003) stated, “To make any sense out of data, we must put

it into some sort of order” (p. 201).

Research Question 2. In order to distinguish differences between the occupational

stressors as perceived by genders, an independent samples t-test for uncorrelated means

was calculated. The total mean score from all of the stressors combined was statistically

analyzed for difference in gender. Fraenkel and Wallen (2003) defined t-test as “a

parametric statistical test used to see whether a difference between the means of two

samples is significant” (p. 241). The t-test was therefore used to determine the level of

significance, if any, between male and female occupational stressors combined. The level

of significance was determined at p<.05.

Research Question 3. In the determination of the most often utilized coping

mechanism and their effectiveness as perceived by superintendents a frequency

distribution was utilized. For the second part of question three in determining the

effectiveness of the coping mechanism, a one-way ANOVA was utilized to compare the

effectiveness of the categories of coping mechanisms. The mean effectiveness ratings of

each category of coping mechanism was calculated, then the ANOVA was used to

determine if there is a significance difference in effectiveness among the categories. The

level of significance was determined at p<.05.

Research Question 4. The high mean score was utilized in determining the most

frequently used type of coping mechanism. Then, the chi-square test of independence was

utilized to determine if a there was a relationship between the two categorical variables;

45
type of coping mechanism and gender. Fraenkel and Wallen (2003) reported using the

chi-square test was necessary when comparing categorical data. The level of significance

was determined at p<.05.

Qualitative Analysis

The following qualitative approach was employed to address research questions

five and six:

Research Questions 5 and 6. The qualitative approach of additional open-ended

questions on the SSCM survey was utilized to determine the strategies employed by the

School district to assist superintendents in managing stress. The use of qualitative data

contributed to the triangulation of the data and the rich description contained within this

study.

Included in the qualitative data were written comments from the surveys. The data

gradually evolved into patterns which allowed the researcher to analyze the resulting

information in each category (Creswell & Clark, 2007; Merriam, 1998). These patterns

were used to provide support and substance to the quantitative statistical analyses.

Patterns were reviewed through the framework of the research questions and narrative

descriptions were utilized to portray the findings and interpretations regarding the

effectiveness of the professional development and preparatory programs in developing

stress management coping skills for superintendents. Triangulation of data was used to

validate the findings (Creswell, 2003; Merriam, 1998).

46
 The Researcher’s Biases and Assumptions

One underlying assumption made by the researcher was the notion that

many superintendents simply do not know how and have not been given adequate

training on how to properly manage occupational stressors. It is assumed that

individuals in leadership positions have acquired these skills over the years, but the

research indicates that the leaders are not properly trained on how to deal with

stress and maintain balance within their personal lives. This is based upon research

and personal experience of knowing several people who hold superintendent

positions. A second underlying assumption is that today’s school districts are

aware of the high level of stress and are not including professional development

programs or preparatory curriculum addressing stress and coping mechanisms

management. The research supported the notion that there is a need for this kind of

training. Again, this assumption is derived from research and personal experience

with colleagues in the position of leadership.

Summary

Presented in Chapter Three was the information related to the design and

methodology used to carry out this investigation of stress and coping in the

superintendency. A rationale was provided for the use of an explanatory mixed

design research method. The population and sample were described, as well as data

collection and instrumentation. The two-phased data analysis was articulated, as

well as the researcher’s biases and assumptions. Within Chapter Four, the data

analysis and research findings are presented. Concluded within Chapter Five is a

47
discussion of the research findings, conclusions, and recommendations for future

research.

48
 CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction

The intent of this study was to add to the body of knowledge concerning how

superintendents in the state of Missouri perceive their occupational stress. The study also

intended to identify what coping mechanisms superintendents utilize to manage the

inevitable stress and how effective the coping skills were perceived and to see if gender

played a role in how they dealt with stress. Previous research clearly identified the

common occupational stressors which were directly related to high turnover in the

superintendent position (Bjork, Keedy, Rhinehart, & Winter, 2002; Cooper, Fusarelli, &

Carella, 2000; Educational Research Service, 1998; Forderaro, 2006; Glass &

Franceschini, 2007; Nussbaum, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004). However, little research

was available that revealed how superintendents manage occupational stress and what

strategies the school district employed to assist the administrative leaders with stress

management (Brock & Grady, 2002; Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Queen & Queen,

2004).

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine what are the common

stressors affecting superintendents in the state of Missouri. Secondly, to discover what

coping mechanisms are commonly utilized by the superintendent and the effectiveness of

the coping mechanism. Thirdly, to identify what, if any, professional development

practices were offered through the school district to assist the superintendent with

occupational stress management. And finally, the study investigated differences of coping

skills between male and female superintendents.

49
 Prior to the initiation of the data collection process, the researcher sought

approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of Missouri granted

research authorization (see Appendix D). In order to collect the necessary data for this

research project, superintendents from the 531 school districts in the state of Missouri

were surveyed. The representative sample population for this research study consisted of

practicing public school superintendents, 3 %(5) Urban school district, 14 %(10)

Suburban school district, 83 %(365) Rural school district in the state of Missouri.

Frequency distributions were utilized to ascertain the frequencies of occupational

stressors as perceived by the superintendents. Independent-samples t-tests for

uncorrelated means were conducted to determine the differences that might exist between

the occupational stressors as perceived by genders. In determining the most often utilized

coping mechanism and their effectiveness a frequency distribution was utilized. A one-

way ANOVA was used to compare the effectiveness of categories of coping mechanisms.

Once the mean effectiveness rating of each category of coping mechanism was

calculated, the ANOVA was used to determine if there is a significant difference in the

effectiveness of the categories. The high mean score was utilized to determine the most

frequently used coping mechanism, the chi-square test of independence was utilized to

determine if there was a relationship between the two categorical variables type of coping

mechanism and gender. A 0.05 significance level was established for all statistical tests

conducted.

The survey included four qualitative follow-up questions, in order to triangulate

the comprehensive data collected throughout the study. Follow-up open ended questions

were also employed in order to provide a rich, thick description to the quantitative results

50
achieved. The researcher carefully coded each transcript for specific comments which

related to the framework of the research questions regarding the effectiveness of the

professional development and support provided to help superintendents develop stress

management coping skills. The coded patterns that evolved in responses added depth and

substance to the quantitative data collected by means of surveys conducted.

The data were analyzed in an endeavor to answer the following research

questions:

1. What are the frequencies of common occupational stressors as perceived by

superintendents?

2. Are there differences in occupational stressors between female superintendents

and male superintendents?

3. What are the frequencies of the type of coping mechanisms deployed as

perceived by superintendents (Exercise/Nutrition, Getting away/Time off,

Artificial means, Relaxation techniques, Mentoring/guidance from peers) and

what type of coping mechanism is most effective as perceived by

superintendents?

4. Do male and female superintendents differ in the type of coping mechanism

they utilize?

5. What are the strategies employed by school district personnel to assist the

superintendents in managing occupational stress?

6. What support did school district personnel provide to enhance the effectiveness

of coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents to manage occupational

stressors?

51
 The following research hypotheses have been evaluated to offer response to the

stated research questions:

Ho1: There is no frequency difference in the common occupational stressors as

perceived by superintendents.

Ho2: There is no statistically significant difference between the perceived

occupational stressors as perceived by gender.

Ho3: There is no relationship between the frequency of coping mechanism

(Exercise/Nutrition, Getting away/Time off, Artificial means, Relaxation

techniques, Mentoring/guidance from peers) as perceived by gender, nor is there

significant difference in the type of coping mechanism utilized by gender.

Ho4: There is no significant difference in the type of coping mechanism utilized

by gender.

Contained in this chapter is a summary of the data analysis, population and

sample, collection instruments, data gathering methods for each research question, and

findings. The findings were organized to first address the four quantitative research

questions, and then the two qualitative questions. For the first four research questions,

tables were provided to help interpret the frequencies of common stressors, gender

differences in occupational stressors, frequencies of common coping mechanisms and

their effectiveness, and gender differences in coping mechanisms. For the two qualitative

questions, figures were also included to help the reader conceptualize the emerging

themes through a synthesis of the strategies employed by school district personnel to

assist leaders with occupational stress and support offered to address coping mechanisms

utilized by superintendents.

52
 Data Analysis

Population and Sample

The population for this study included all superintendents, kindergarten through

twelfth grade from 531 public school districts in the state of Missouri. Of the 531 public

school superintendents in the state, 380 superintendents were included; the population

sample was 3% urban and 14% suburban, 83% rural.

The representative sample included 5 superintendents from urban school districts,

and 10 superintendents from suburban school districts, and 85 superintendents from rural

school districts. Of the 380 surveys sent out, 100 surveys were returned for a return rate

of 26 percent. After the initial email request, 52 superintendents responded and

completed the survey. An additional 38 surveys were completed upon a second request

and 10 additional surveys were completed after a final request was issued. A total of 100

superintendents responded to the survey; however, 7 respondents did not complete the

survey, presumably due to a flaw in the on-line survey software. One superintendent

communicated having difficulty with the electronic survey due to software issues. The 93

who successfully completed the survey were able to do so without software

complications. Presumably, the 7 who did not complete the survey had difficulty with the

software and simply exited the survey.

Data Collection Instruments

Superintendent Stress and Coping Mechanism Survey (SSCM)

All respondents completed the SSCM Survey. The multiple-choice and short

answer survey was created for this study to determine the extent of stressors on

superintendents and what coping mechanisms are utilized and how effective the coping

53
mechanisms are. The open-ended qualitative questions were designed to collect

information on the kinds of support, if any, provided by the school district in dealing with

superintendent occupational stress and coping mechanisms. The qualitative data was

designed to provide insight and rich descriptions (Merriam, 1998) of the school districts

support in the arena of stress management for the administrative leader. The survey

instrument was a compilation of common stressors from previous studies investigating

stress in the superintendency; including Farkas et al. (2003), Glass et al. (2000), and

Richardson (1998). The survey was also modified for ease of administration. Four open-

ended items were added to help inform the qualitative portion of the study.

Research Questions: Analysis of Data

Responses to the Superintendent Stress and Coping Mechanisms Survey (SSCM)

collected from the superintendents of the 93 school districts in the state of Missouri

included in the study were carefully entered into the SAS statistical package. Research

questions one and two were analyzed using a frequency distribution and independent

samples t-test for uncorrelated means. Statistical significance was determined at the .05

level of confidence. Research questions three and four data were analyzed using Chi-

square and one-way ANOVA. Research questions five and six were analyzed using

qualitative analysis from the four open-ended questions listed on the SSCM survey.

Research Question 1. What are the frequencies of common occupational stressors

as perceived by superintendents?

Research question one addressed the occupational stressors identified by

superintendents in the state of Missouri. Responding superintendents were asked to rate

54
each of the listed occupational stressors according to the extent each stressor has been

experienced. Respondents rated each stressor on a 4-point likert scale; the rating

4 = frequently bothers me, 3 = occasionally bothers me, 2 = rarely bothers me, 1= never

bothers me, and N/A = not applicable. A frequency distribution was utilized to determine

the frequencies of common stressors as perceived by superintendents. Represented in

Table 2 are the frequencies and percentages for occupational stressors identified and rated

as perceived by superintendents of school districts in the state of Missouri. The two

highest perceived stressors were (1) complying with state and federal mandates without

getting the necessary resource and (2) preparing and allocating budget resources.

Table 2

Frequencies and Percentages of Selected Occupational Stressors (N=93)

________________________________________________________________________
Stressor
Rating
________________________________________________________________________
Frequent Occasionally Rarely Never N/A
N % N % N % N % N %
Federal/State mandates 41 46 31 35 13 15 4 5 0

Allocating budget 34 38 36 40 15 17 5 6 0

High expectations on myself 27 30 34 38 23 36 6 7 0

Politics and Bureaucracy 24 27 42 47 20 22 4 4 0

Decisions that affect others 20 22 52 57 16 18 3 3 0

Meeting social expectations 18 20 34 37 29 2 10 11 0

Gaining financial support 17 9 42 47 26 29 4 5 0

Demands of board members 16 17 32 34 37 40 7 8 1 1

55
Table 2—Continued
________________________________________________________________________
Stressor
Rating
________________________________________________________________________
Frequent Occasionally Rarely Never N/A
N % N % N % N % N %

Activities outside work hours 13 15 42 47 27 31 6 7 1 1

Too much responsibility 9 10 22 24 30 33 25 28 5 5

Coordinating multiple tasks 7 8 38 42 37 41 8 9 0

Deadlines for reports 7 8 36 40 39 43 7 8 1 1

Trying to gain public support 7 8 46 51 30 33 7 8 0

Pressure for job performance 7 8 33 36 39 44 11 12 1 1

Resolve conflicts 6 7 47 52 33 37 4 4 0

Work frequently interrupted 6 7 41 45 33 36 10 11 1 1

Interrupted frequently 6 7 48 51 36 39 3 3 0

Speaking in front of groups 5 6 15 18 35 39 35 39 0

Resolving differences 4 4 27 30 43 48 14 16 2 2

Evaluating staff members 4 4 47 52 28 31 11 12 0

Writing/answering emails 4 4 24 26 47 52 16 18 0

Staff understanding my goals 3 3 39 42 37 40 12 13 0

Having too little authority 3 3 17 19 38 42 25 28 7 8

Too many meetings 3 3 29 32 40 44 17 19 1 1

Having what I need 3 3 23 25 4 5 18 19 7 8

Student discipline 2 2 23 26 50 56 12 13 3 3

Unclear responsibilities 2 2 11 12 40 44 33 37 4 4

Not being fully qualified 1 1 12 13 37 40 37 40 5 5

Not enough is expected 1 1 4 4 20 21 51 54 18 19

____________________________________________________________________
56
 Superintendents in the state of Missouri identified (1) complying with state and

federal mandates without getting necessary resources and (2) preparing and allocating

budget resources as the two most commonly identified occupational stressors. The

findings show greater than 80% of the respondents were frequently to occasionally

bothered by the stressor of complying with state and federal mandates, based on a

subscale of 1-4, (1) frequently bothers me, (4) never bothers me. Additionally, 78% of

the superintendents reported high stress from preparing and allocating budget resources.

The occupational stressor with the lowest frequency rating was feeling not enough is

expected of me by my board. The frequency rated 30 out of 30, with a percent frequency

of 1%.

Research Question 2. Are there differences in occupational stressors between

female and male superintendents?

An independent samples t-test was conducted to evaluate differences between the

occupational stressors as perceived by gender. The mean score from the total stressors

combined was statistically analyzed. The independent samples t-test showed no

significant difference between male and female superintendents in overall stress scores,

t(91) = -1.16, p = .2506. Displayed in Table 3 are the descriptive statistics for this

comparison between male and female superintendents.

57
Table 3

Overall total stress mean for both male and female.

Variable N Mean Standard Deviation Standard Error Mean

Female 17 3.5102 .4671 .0536

Male 76 3.8121 .5084 .1233

Note. The average subscale numbers shown above reflect the scores received on Likert-type items that

ranged from a 1 (never bothers me) to a 4 (frequently bothers me).

Research Question 3. What are the frequencies of the type of coping mechanisms

reported by superintendents (Exercise/Nutrition, Getting Away/Time off, Artificial means,

Relaxation techniques, Mentoring/guidance from peers) and what type of coping

mechanism is most effective?

A frequency distribution was utilized to determine the most often utilized coping

mechanism (Table 4). For the second part of question three in determining the

effectiveness of the coping mechanism, a one-way ANOVA was utilized to compare the

effectiveness of the categories of coping strategies (Table 5). The mean effectiveness

ratings of each category of coping mechanism was calculated, then the ANOVA was used

to determine if there is a significance difference in effectiveness of categories. The level

of significance was determined at p<.05.

Displayed in Table 4 are the mean scores of most frequently used coping

mechanism and the mean effectiveness score of each coping mechanism. Of the five

coping strategies, exercise was used most frequently with a 41.49 % frequency score. The

coping mechanism that was rated the most effective was exercise with a mean score of

3.31. The data demonstrate that getting away was rated the second highest utilized

58
coping mechanism with a frequency of 30.85 and a mean effectiveness score of 2.98. The

next highest frequency was mentoring, with a score of 22.34 and a mean effectiveness

score of 3.06. The coping strategies of relaxing, and artificial means were the two least

utilized coping mechanisms by superintendents. It is interesting to note that although

relaxing was not a common coping strategy utilized, the mean score for effectiveness was

3.15, demonstrating that relaxing was rated the second most effective means for coping

strategies. Triangulation of the qualitative data supported these results. Only two

superintendents commented on alcohol use and stated (1) “I have found that I cherish

time off. I also use alcohol more frequently than I did before I was a superintendent”. (2)

“Time away with other superintendents at meetings reduces stress and increases my beer

consumption”!

Table 4

Often utilized coping mechanism.

________________________________________________________________________
Coping Mechanism Combined Freq Effectiveness Mean Std. Dev
% (Combined)

Artificial 1.06 2.78 .46272

Exercise 41.49 3.31 .80729

Get Away 30.85 2.98 .72386

Mentor 22.34 3.06 .68127

Relaxing 3.15 3.15 .61298

Note. The average subscale numbers shown above reflect the scores received on Likert-type items that

ranged from a 1 (not effective at all) to a 4 (very effective).

59
 The Duncan Post Hoc method was used to compare means on the effectiveness of

the coping mechanisms. As shown in Table 5, exercise was rated as most effective,

significantly higher than the other categories of coping mechanism. Similarly, the Post

Hoc test showed that artificial coping strategy was rated as least effective, significantly

lower than the other categories of coping mechanisms. The other three coping

mechanisms, relaxing, mentoring, and getting away were not as differentiated. The data

indicates these coping strategies are similar in effectiveness, with no significance, except

that mentoring was rated as more effective than getting away.

Table 5

ANOVA Post Hoc Duncan Grouping: Mean effectiveness

_______________________________________________________________
Coping Mechanism Mean Grouping

Exercise 3.31 A

Relaxing 3.16 B

Mentor 3.06 B C

Getting Away 2.99 C

Artificial 2.78 D

Note. (N=93). The average subscale numbers shown above reflect the scores received on Likert-type items

that ranged from a 1 (not effective at all) to a 4 (very effective).

Research Question 4. Do male and female superintendents differ in the type of the

coping mechanism they utilize?

The chi-square test of independence was utilized to determine if there was a

relationship between the two categorical variables type of coping mechanism and gender.

The level of significance was determined at p<.05. Displayed in Table 6 is a summary

frequency for the coping strategies in relationship to gender. The chi-square test of

60
independence showed that males and females differed significantly in the coping

mechanism most often utilized, χ² (N=89, 4) = 105.69, p<.0001 or Chi Square, p< .0001.

Male superintendents chose getting away 40% of the time as their coping strategy for

occupational stress, while females chose exercise 34% of the time as their coping strategy

for occupational stress. It is interesting to note that although male superintendents utilize

getting away most often as their means to cope with stress, men reported the overall most

effective way to cope was exercise with an overall mean score of 3.31. Female

superintendents chose exercise as the most effective coping strategy 34% of the time.

Very closely rated as the second most effective coping mechanism for female

superintendents was mentoring/guidance from peers, with a 32 % frequency.

Table 6

Frequency of Coping Mechanism

Male Female ______________________

Coping Mechanism % Frequency % Frequency Mean effectiveness

________________________________________________________________________
Artificial 3.54 1.84 2.78

Exercise 28.50 34.02 3.31

Get Away 39.67 17.70 2.98

Mentor 22.29 32.18 3.06

Relaxing 6.00 14.25 3.15

Note. (N=93). The average subscale numbers shown above reflect the scores received on Likert-type items
that ranged from a 1 (not effective at all) to a 4 (very effective).

Research Question 5. What are the strategies employed by school district

personnel to assist the superintendents in managing occupational stress?

61
 The researcher utilized the qualitative questions from the SSCM survey to answer

research question five. The open ended questions included (1) Describe any strategies the

school district employs to address stress and the superintendency? Also, qualitative

question (4) was included: Are there any comments you would like to add in reference to

this study on occupational stress and coping mechanisms in the superintendency.

As the researcher sought to find patterns and themes among the transcripts of

written comments on the SSCM survey, several strategies emerged from the survey

comments relating to how the school district assist the superintendents with occupational

stress. The themes were: no known strategies, getting away, support from school board,

professional development, mentoring, and wellness programs. Reflections on the role of

gender were also addressed in relation to stress in the superintendency.

No known strategies. Comments provided by superintendents were very decisive

and unanimously stated school districts do not employ any strategies that they know of.

Of the 61 respondents, 34 stated no known strategies, yielding a 56% rating. A few

superintendents boldly stated, “…it even seems that some board members try to add

stress, not relieve stress.” Another stated, “The school district—none. Anything that is

done I do personally”. The superintendent that summarized the majority of responses

stated, “The school district has no strategies to address stress. If you plan to milk cows,

you can also plan on getting up early. Stress is part of the job. It is the individual who

must deal with the stress”.

Getting away. Another theme that emerged from the study was taking time to get

away. More than a third of the respondents reported the strategy the school district offers

that best suites dealing with stress is taking time for yourself; such as vacation time. A

62
superintendent stated, “…board does support and encourages taking vacation days and

getting a break from daily routine/pressures. Also wellness programs that include

exercise are in place”. A contrasting statement from a superintendent was, “I think all of

us look forward to retiring and not having to answer to federal and state mandates,

unreasonable parents, unmotivated staff members, and parents that are more interested in

extracurricular activities than education”. Another stated, “The best remedy is to get out

and retire as soon as you can”!

It is interesting to note that while some respondents mentioned time away as

support, they were unable to follow through with taking time off, “The superintendent

gets 3 weeks vacation. I have not been able to take a single day off this year”. Another

leader stated, “The board has told me to take time for myself. But, I find that difficult to

do”.

Support from school board. Superintendents expressed support from school board

as a strategy employed by the school district to address stress. Based on survey written

comments, superintendents demonstrated a strong belief that communication and

relationships with the board is important in creating a stress free environment. One

superintendent responded, “My board encourages me to take care of myself first and does

not micromanage my professional development choices or days out of the office. They

are very supportive of my health”. Conversely another respondent stated, “Most stress of

the superintendency is caused by micro management of the school board. Allowing

superintendents to exercise their authority within policy would relieve much of the

issue”. To summarize the theme of school board support, one respondent stated, “There

are no specific strategies, I happen to be in an excellent work environment with well

63
qualified administrators, teachers and support staff augmented by a board that works well

together and allows me to do the job necessary to attain the goals of the district”. Another

respondent stated simply, “Nothing formal from the district. The relationship with the

board is dependent on the individuals elected”.

Professional development/Mentoring. The less common themes reported as

strategies provided by the school district to address stress were professional development,

mentoring, and wellness programs. Of the 64 comments collected, only five

superintendents mentioned professional development as a strategy offered by the school

district, one survey comment stated, “They do allow me to attend professional meetings,

which is good because at those meetings, I can network with colleagues to discuss current

concerns (stressors)”. Conversely, another superintendent stated, “There is no plan to deal

with stress at the district level. I deal with things on my own”.

Wellness programs. Approximately 5 survey respondents mentioned the health

and nutrition challenges and wellness programs offered in their school district. The

programs were available to all the staff and one superintendent stated, “We have a

wellness program that provides resources for stress management to all staff”. A

contrasting comment stated, “None. I fight health issues due to stress. The job doesn’t

allow me to exercise, etc”.

Gender. The majority of the survey respondents believed gender was irrelevant in

reference to their ability to manage occupational stress. One superintendent stated, “I’m a

superintendent, I deal with it. It has little to do with gender”. Conversely, many

respondents were unsure if gender has anything to do with managing occupational

stressors, one male superintendent observed, “I have no idea although it is possible that

64
being a male has made gaining acceptance as an authority figure easier”. One female

stated, “I have to think like a man and not personalize or internalize situations (takes

practice)”. Other comments that triangulated the data were, “The superintendency would

be an almost impossible occupation for a woman without a very supportive spouse”. And,

“I receive a lot of pressure from my husband over the demands put on my time. This

causes friction in the marriage. Again, I find ways to cope on my own”.

Reported in Table 7 is a summary of the male and female trends that emerged

from the survey responses.

Table 7

Synthesis of emerging trends for gender difference and occupational stress

_______________________________________________________________________

Emerging Trends for Gender Difference

Males Females

Inability to express being stressed Inability to express being stressed

See big picture Multi-taskers
Tend to make decisions quicker Nurturer by nature
Less emotional Family pressures
Challenge to manage women Stereo typing: male dominated field

In summary, it is interesting to note that while men believed they were unable to

express being stressed it was because of pride, one male superintendent stated, “I don’t

feel I can tell anyone that I am stressed which I guess is a male thing”. While woman

believed they could not express being stressed due to a sign of weakness as a female

administrator. A female superintendent commented, “It would be presumptive on my part

to assume how men handle their stressors. I feel that I can not show stress because it

65
would be seen as a sign of weakness in a female administrator”. Also, noted is that both

male and woman believed they are able to solve problems in the most sufficient manner;

males because they are able to keep the emotion out of it, and woman because they can

use emotion to build relationships with parents, students and staff members. One male

superintendent commented, “…being a woman is often very helpful when discussing

parenting issues, emotional situations with parents or students, and maintaining strong,

positive relationships with fellow staff members”. Similarly, yet conversely one female

superintendent wrote, “I feel that woman are multi-taskers by nature, so this helps them

to be able to address occupational stress. I also feel, on the other hand, that we are

nurturers by nature, and this leads to occupational stress because we want to take care of

everyone. Two-edged sword, so to speak”.

Research Question 6. What support did the school district provide to enhance the

effectiveness of coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents to manage occupational

stress?

The researcher utilized the qualitative questions from the SSCM survey to answer

research question six. The open ended questions included (2) Explain what kinds of

support you receive from the school district to assist you with coping mechanisms for

occupational stressors? Also, qualitative question (4) Are there any comments you would

like to add in reference to this study on occupational stress and coping mechanisms in the

superintendency.

Of the 59 comments collected from qualitative research question number two,

greater than 50% (31) respondents reported no support, 27% (16) respondents reported

school board support, and 11% (12) reported time away. The least form of support

66
reported was professional development, yielding 8% (5) comments. Research question 4

added to the triangulation of the data, there were several responses (14) commenting on

how they manage stress. A superintendent summarized by saying, “The superintendency

is a very stressful position. Individuals must be able to handle these pressures and work

toward continuous improvement”. A visual representation of the results is offered in

Table 8.

Table 8

Synthesis of Qualitative Data received on School District Support for effectiveness of

coping mechanisms.

Emerging Theme for Coping Mechanism Effectiveness:

Provide support through:

! No known support
! Strong support from numerous individual board members.
! Flexibility to take time away from work when needed
! Opportunities for teamwork, i.e. leadership teams, professional
conferences in order to network.
! Wellness programs, i.e. health challenges for the entire staff.

In summary the data showed contrast in how the school district provided coping

strategy support to the superintendents. Professional development was mentioned by a

superintendent, “Being able to collaborate with professionals in like positions in the best

stress relief for me”. Yet, most respondents said no support was given, a superintendent

stated, “None, you either can handle the job or you’re out”. A respondent corroborates

both themes and stated, “During the 19 years as an administrator, there have been a few

years that the stress has been extreme and most of the time, the attendance of meetings

67
with other administrators have served to help most often, even though stress or even

negative things were not discussed”.

Null hypotheses

The following null hypotheses were evaluated in an effort to answer the

aforementioned research questions.

Ho1: There is no frequency difference in the common occupational stressors as perceived

by superintendents.

Based upon the analysis and the research data presented in Table 2, this

hypothesis is rejected. Of the thirty common stressors listed, the two common

stressors with the highest frequency score are (1) complying with state, federal

mandates and (2) preparing and allocating budgets. Complying with state, federal

mandates was yielded the highest frequency rating of 46%. The stressor that

yielded the lowest frequency rating was, feeling not enough is expected of me by my

board, with a frequency rating of 1%.

Ho2: There is no statistically significant difference between the perceived occupational

stressors as perceived by gender.

Based on the analysis of the data presented in Table 3 this hypothesis was

accepted. There were no significant difference in the perceived occupational stressors as

perceived by male and female superintendents: level of significance was determined at

p<.05. The common occupational stressors as perceived by gender yielded a value

p = .2506. Superintendent gender had no affect on the frequency of perceived

occupational stressors.

68
Ho3: There is no relationship between the frequency of coping mechanism

(Exercise/Nutrition, Getting away/Time off, Artificial means, Relaxation techniques,

Mentoring/guidance from peers) as perceived by gender, nor is there significant

difference in the type of coping mechanism utilized by gender.

Based upon the analysis and the research data as presented in Table 6, this

hypothesis is rejected. Significant gender difference was found between most frequently

utilized coping mechanism and effectiveness of coping mechanism based on

superintendents perceptions.

Ho4: There is no significant difference in the type of coping mechanism utilized by

gender.

Based upon the analysis and the research data as presented in Table 5 and Table

6, this hypothesis is rejected. Significant gender difference was found between types of

coping mechanism most often utilized by superintendents.

Summary

Presented in Chapter Four was a description of the data collection process, a

description of the data collection instruments used, Superintendent Stress and

Coping Mechanism Survey and a description of the follow-up qualitative questions

used. A representative sample of 93 superintendents completed the survey. An

analysis of the data revealed significant differences between types of coping

mechanisms utilized by gender and their effectiveness. In addition, there were

significant differences identified in responses to questions regarding how the school

board personnel support the superintendent with stress management.

69
 Analysis of the data collected from the Superintendent Stress and Coping

Mechanism Survey and follow-up comments from the four open ended questions

provided findings for the research questions. From the data, it was revealed that the two

highest perceived stressors were (1) complying with state and federal mandates without

getting the necessary resource and (2) preparing and allocating budget resources. The

least frequency of stress as perceived superintendents was feeling not enough is expected

of me by my board.

The independent samples t-test showed no significant difference between male

and female superintendents in overall stress scores. Mean scores of most frequently used

coping mechanism and the mean effectiveness score by gender showed a level of

significance. The data revealed exercise as significantly most effective. Similarly, the

Post Hoc test showed significant difference in the Artificial Coping Mechanism as least

effective. The chi-square test of independence showed that males and females differed

significantly in the coping mechanism most often utilized. The coping mechanism that

males chose most frequently was getting away, while females chose exercise. Several

strategies emerged from the survey comments relating to how the school district assists

the superintendents with occupational stress. The themes were; no known strategies,

getting away, support from school board, professional development, and mentoring, and

wellness programs. The role of gender as it relates to stress in the superintendency

showed similarities in the fear of admitting stress by both genders. The qualitative data

also demonstrated that emotion as strength for females because they are able build

relationships and dissolve conflict. Males reported emotion as a different form of

strength, reporting their ability to keep emotion out of disciplinary situations helped to

70
solve conflict. Data gathered through the open ended questions provided triangulation to

support these findings and supplied descriptive information to answer the qualitative

research questions.

In Chapter Five, an overview of the design and procedures employed for this

study are described. A discussion of the findings of the study with limitations and design

control are included. In addition, implications for practice and recommendations for

further research are presented.

71
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Introduction

The researcher sought to add to the body of knowledge concerning how

superintendents in the state of Missouri perceive their occupational stress. The study also

intended to identify what coping mechanisms male and female superintendents utilize to

manage the inevitable stress and how effective their coping skills are. Also, the intent of

the study sought to identify what, if any, strategies were employed by the school district

to assist the superintendent. Previous research clearly identified the common

occupational stressors which were directly related to high turnover in the superintendent

position (Bjork, Keedy, Rhinehart, & Winter, 2002; Cooper, Fusarelli, & Carella, 2000;

Educational Research Service, 1998; Forderaro, 2006; Nussbaum, 2007; State Policy &

Compendium, 2001; Queen & Queen, 2004). However, little research was available that

revealed how male and female superintendents manage occupational stress and what

strategies the school district employs to assist the administrative leaders with stress

management (Glass & Franceschini, 2007; Queen & Queen, 2004).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate in what ways and to what degree, if

any, school superintendents perceive stress and what, if any, coping mechanisms were

engaged. This study focused on qualities of coping mechanisms and their effectiveness.

Underscored throughout the study is the need for effective stress management skills,

professional development geared towards developing a stress model, and creating a

72
positive school culture. Moreover, the researcher sought to identify any significant

differences between the coping mechanisms utilized by female and male leaders.

The major question for this study was: What is the perceived effectiveness of

coping mechanisms utilized by male and female superintendents and how does the school

district provide support? The research questions guiding this study were as follows:

1. What are the frequencies of common occupational stressors as perceived by

superintendents?

2. Are there differences in occupational stressors between female superintendents

and male superintendents?

3. What are the frequencies of the type of coping mechanisms deployed as

perceived by superintendents, (Exercise/Nutrition, Getting away/Time off,

Artificial means, Relaxation techniques, Mentoring/guidance from peers) and

what type of coping mechanism is most effective as perceived by

superintendents?

4. Do male and female superintendents differ in the type of coping mechanism

they utilize?

5. What are the strategies employed by school district personnel to assist the

superintendents in managing occupational stress?

6. What support did school district personnel provide to enhance the effectiveness

of coping mechanisms utilized by superintendents to manage occupational

stressors?

73
 Design and Procedures

A mixed-methods research design was chosen for this study to utilize “qualitative

data to enrich and explain the quantitative results in the words of the participants”

(Creswell & Clark, 2007, p. 34). Two data collection methods were employed. Phase one

involved a quantitative questionnaire distributed to a representative sample of

superintendents in the state of Missouri. The SSCM survey questionnaire was developed

by the researcher and pilot tested and retested by administrators. Results were used to

analyze the test as a whole as well as individual survey questions for reliability. Two

questions were removed after pilot testing and retesting, resulting in a 30-question survey

where superintendents rated the common stressors, coping mechanisms, and their

effectiveness. Four optional open-ended questions were included at the end of the survey

to allow respondents to add comments regarding their experiences as it relates to stress

and the superintendency. Each survey took less than fifteen minutes to complete. Data

were analyzed using SAS to calculate frequencies and to determine if there were

significant differences between the types of coping mechanism and their effectiveness.

t-test for independent means were conducted to determine differences between male and

female superintendents in overall stress scores (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). Mean scores

of most frequently used coping mechanism and the mean effectiveness were examined to

determine significance. The chi-square test of independence was used to show frequency

of coping mechanisms utilized by males and females.

Phase two of the investigation involved four open ended questions on the survey.

Data were gathered to identify strategies employed by the school district to assist

superintendents with occupational stressors. Superintendents were also asked to identify

74
the type of support they receive from the school district to assist with coping

mechanisms. Finally, participants were asked how, if at all, gender affected their ability

to manage stress. Themes were reviewed through the framework of the research

questions and narrative descriptions were utilized to portray the findings and

interpretations of the effectiveness of coping mechanisms.

Findings of the Study

A total of 93 superintendents participated in the study by completing and

returning usable Superintendent Stress and Coping Mechanism Surveys. The data from

the surveys identified no significant differences between overall stressors for male vs.

females. Thirty common stressors relating to the superintendent position were examined

according to perceptions identified on the survey instrument. While there were no

significant differences between the overall stressors by gender, data indicated the two

highest stressors for the executive leader are (1) complying with state and federal

mandates without getting the necessary resource and (2) preparing and allocating budget

resources. Mean scores were averaged within the Frequently Bothers Me (4) range and

Never Bothers Me (1) range on all stressors. The lowest stressor as perceived by

superintendents was not feeling enough is expected of me by my board members. Data

from the surveys identified a significant difference between type of coping mechanism

and effectiveness by gender. Five common coping mechanisms relating to occupational

stress were examined according to perceptions identified on by the participants. Mean

scores were averaged between the five coping mechanisms, (1) Exercise/Nutrition, (2)

Getting away/Time off, (3) Artificial means, i.e. stimulants or prescription drugs, (4)

Relaxations techniques, i.e. controlled breathing, yoga, and (5) Mentoring/Guidance from

75
peers. The data displayed males utilizing time away most frequently, while females

utilized exercise most frequently as a coping mechanism. The data demonstrated exercise

as the most effective coping mechanism for both genders. Data gathered through the

comments from four open-ended questions provided triangulation to support these

findings.

Research questions one through six addressed stress and coping mechanism as

related to occupational stressors and gender. Research one focused on emphasizing

frequencies of common occupational stressors. The data showed that, for (1) complying

with state and federal mandates and (2) budget allocating as the highest stressors, more

than half of the superintendents rated the stressors as of the common stressors listed as

frequently bothers me to occasionally bothers me ( based on a subcale of 1-4, 1 never

bothers me to 4 frequently bothers me). Yet, the majority of superintendents had no

known knowledge of strategies the school district offered to help them cope with the

stress.

Research question two centered on the differences in occupational stressors

between female and male superintendents, a better understanding of how gender manage

their stress could help to overcome barriers to successful leadership. Data from the

qualitative and quantitative supported the theory that male and female superintendents

have different ways in handling occupational stressors. Survey data indicated the need to

set stress management skills as a priority for the leadership position. Qualitative results

identified the need to better understand how gender affects stress in the superintendency.

Research questions three and four were directed toward determining the most

commonly utilized coping mechanisms and it’s effectiveness for gender. This area clearly

76
showed both gender found exercise as the most effective way to manage occupational

stress; however males utilized getting away more frequently. The comments from the

survey triangulated these findings but showed lack of understanding of how gender

affected coping skills. Interestingly, both genders believed that admitting stress was a bad

thing. Men believed it was a topic that was unspeakable. Woman felt it would be a sign

of weakness for the leadership position they were in. It is important to provide

professional development programs that address and define occupational stress and

coping skills geared toward gender, which could help the superintendent learn to balance

work and home life.

Research questions five and six concentrated on creating a culture of learning by

focusing on professional development for the administrative leader as it relates to stress

management. The descriptive information was gathered with the written comments from

the survey to answer research questions five and six. Research question five and six

examined effective strategies employed by the school district and their support on

enhancing coping mechanisms. The major theme that arose from the superintendents

surveyed indicated they were not aware of any strategies the school district has in place

to improve their own professional practice as it relates to stress management. Other

themes were, time away, school board support, professional development/mentoring, and

wellness programs. There seemed to be many opportunities to gain additional knowledge

for their professional growth. However, the professional opportunities were not directed

towards stress management skills. The key was being able to take time for yourself, and

look for opportunities that allowed the superintendents to mentor each other, and talk

about the stressful issues. Superintendents could benefit by learning to balance stress and

77
effective coping mechanisms. Keeping stress at bay through professional development

will only promote professional growth. In discussing professional development, few

superintendents made the connection between the importance of learning about stress and

how to manage stress more effectively. The research also indicated the need to strengthen

relations between the superintendents and the school board (Glass & Franceschini, 2007;

Queen & Queen, 2004). Further research is needed in this area.

Discussion of the Findings

One purpose of research employing mixed-method design was to “measure

trends, prevalence, and outcomes and at the same time examine meaning, content, and

process” (Creswell & Clark, 2007, p. 175). This type of research helped the readers make

sense of the data and understand the findings, making research accessible for

practitioners and enhancing the ability to utilize the findings to impact actual practices

already in place (Creswell & Clark). The data described in this research provided insight

into the ways in which identifying stress and coping mechanisms impact the development

of leadership skills in superintendents. In this section, links between the study’s findings

and pertinent research were made to explicitly help the reader understand the importance

of effective stress management skills.

Finding 1

Occupational stressors for superintendents included in this study are common

within the state of Missouri. As superintendents develop leadership skills and take on

increasing responsibility it is important for the district to provide the leaders with

instructional methods to help cope with the stress. Research questions one examined 30

common occupational stressors for superintendents. Over half of the superintendents

78
indicated (1) frequently bothers me to (2) occasionally bothers me on greater than 50% of

the stressors identified on the SSCM survey. Therefore, this finding supports the need for

help from the central office administrative staff, such as that described by the 2007 mid-

decade study of the state of the superintendency (Glass & Franceschini 2007),

Few executive leadership positions are free from stress. The

same can be said for the superintendency. The decades
covered by the 10-year studies show increasing levels of
reported stress. Levels of very great stress are highest in
smaller districts. This could be due to superintendents
initially learning their way in the profession with little help
from the central office administrative staff (p.47).

Data from this investigation indicated participation in stress management programs is

minimal, at best. The school districts did not have structured programs in place to assist

struggling superintendents to make the connection between superintendent stress and the

importance of learning how to manage stress. Superintendents are left on their own to

figure out ways to deal with the daily stressors of the job. Stress management skills for

superintendents leading today’s schools could have a positive impact on attracting

qualified candidates and keeping them in the position (Howley et al, 2002; Nussbaum,

2007; Public Agenda 2001). Stress management programs hold promise to bring about

needed changes to those currently holding leadership positions as they express their needs

and concerns of occupational stressors.

Finding 2

The quantitative data showed there were no gender difference for overall stressors

between superintendents, with a mean stress score of 3.8 for males and 3.5 for females.

Similar gender perceptions were reflected in the overall stressor scores. However,

79
data from the qualitative and quantitative survey questions supported that male and

female superintendents have different ways of handling occupational stressors.

There were parallels and contrasts in how the different genders perceived their coping

skills. A contrasting theme that arose was emotion. Males believed lack of emotion was

advantageous in dealing with difficult situations, while females believed having emotion

was advantageous and helped to understand difficult situations better. A parallel between

gender was not wanting to admit being stressed. Males believed personal pride stopped

them from admitting they were stressed and females believed it would be a sign of

weakness by admitting being stressed. Clearly, there are barriers in the perception of

stress as it relates to gender. Stress management education as it relates to gender is

needed through professional development programs, which will help administrators,

become more successful in dealing with occupational stressors and ultimately enhance

the organization.

Finding 3

One of the keys to effective stress management programs is ensuring the

executive leaders understand which strategies work and knowing appropriate coping

strategies are available (Lyle, 2005). The data demonstrated that both genders found

exercise as the most effective means to cope with occupational stress. However, only a

few school districts had wellness programs in place to help their leaders be successful

with managing their stress. The qualitative data indicated the importance of having

exercise equipment in the building through comments written on the surveys. The data

showed males chose getting away/time off as their preference to manage occupational

stressors although they rated exercise as the most effective coping strategy. Females

80
chose exercise most frequently, which would support the need to have the exercise

equipment in the building. The research comments reported family pressures as a barrier

to females finding ways to manage the occupational stressors.

The second most effective strategy to manage occupational stress was getting

away/time off. However, there were inconsistencies in the superintendents’ ability to take

advantage of the vacation time allotted. The lack of opportunities to take time off during

the school year was documented through the qualitative data collected. Comments of the

desire to take time off from work were mentioned in the data, but the inability to do so

due to overwhelming work load was prevalent. Although some superintendents described

the school board as supportive of taking time off, equal number of comments described

the lack of support they received from their board. The general consensus was that the

board makes the difference. Including the school board in stress management programs

would be beneficial to the school district. Experiencing the professional development

together could prove invaluable to increasing effective communication between the

superintendent and the school board members, which would ultimately improve the

learning culture.

Finding 4

Data from research question five indicated professional development

opportunities were one of the least offered methods of assisting superintendents in

improving stress management skills. Data from the survey comments thus provided

triangulation for this finding as professional development was identified by only five out

of 59 survey comments as one of the methods school districts utilize as an effective way

to enhance their skills in stress management and coping mechanisms. Research from the

81
literature review supported the importance of understanding stress and learning ways to

reduce superintendent stress (Glass & Franceschini, 2007). Glass and Franceschini

further stated, “The important challenge facing superintendents is learning how to handle

personal stress in a positive and constructive manner without passing it on to their staff.

Intellectually understanding that stress is a normal condition of the position is just as

important as finding personal coping mechanisms to reduce its negative effects.”

Not all stress is negative; however accumulated stress over periods of time can

affect behavior, judgment, and performance. Few professional development opportunities

are available to allow superintendents to learn coping skills to fit their needs and enhance

their leadership capabilities.

Implications for Practice

The study’s findings have direct implications on superintendents, school district

personnel, students, families of superintendents, family of students, and school climate.

Four research implications for practice were identified and described in the paragraphs

below.

One of the most critical aspects of being an effective leader is ensuring you have

the skill set and knowledge to function optimally in the school environment. Suggestions

from participants in existing superintendent positions indicated occupational stressors

were at high levels, but the school district had done little to include stress management

skills in preparatory programs. Gender was also an important factor when determining

how gender played a role in coping mechanisms and how effective the coping strategy

was. Although this was identified as an important factor, the comments shared by the

82
participants indicated a lack of knowledge as to how gender difference is associated with

stress management skills.

Participants also indicated the importance of having a supportive school board.

The superintendent must have confidence that the board is there to help, not to add stress

to the job. Opinions differed with the ability to get away or take time off. Many

superintendents indicated they received the support in order to get rejuvenated. Yet,

others believed the overwhelming workload would only put them further behind. There

were a few superintendents who indicated professional development opportunities, but

the majority reported they received no known benefits offered by the school district

personnel in which to learn stress management and/or coping strategies.

Superintendents need training and networking opportunities of their own to be

able to share what is working within their organization and what is not working. These

training sessions could be facilitated through the superintendent associations, the

Regional Professional Development Centers, or the Department of Elementary and

Secondary Education. Superintendents working in the state of Missouri received some

professional development training prior to being placed in the superintendency. This

training should be examined for content to determine whether superintendents are

receiving the support they need to be effective in their roles. Stress management

programs hold promise to bring about needed changes if to those currently holding

leadership positions as they express their needs and concerns of occupational stressors.

According to the data analyzed for this research, exercise seemed to have a

positive affect on the superintendents’ ability to deal with occupational stress. Yet, the

health challenges and wellness programs throughout the districts were minimal, with no

83
standardization in place. Wellness programs should be examined to determine how

similar opportunities could be created throughout the district to allow for similar stress

management results. Districts might work cooperatively to pool resources and develop

wellness programs where administrators from schools in a close geographic area could

work together and encourage one another to participate. Ultimately, building mentoring

opportunities and gaining support from the school district to more effectively manage the

occupational stressors of the superintendency.

Finally, university personnel need to make changes in their leadership preparatory

programs to reflect the needs of today’s superintendent with increasing responsibilities.

The managerial-style leadership of the past is often ineffective in bringing about

improved student learning. Superintendents must have the instructional background to be

able to lead more effectively through the occupational stressors of the position. Many

professional development programs have not adapted to the changing needs of today’s

and future administrators (Glass and Franceschini, 2007).

Limitations and Design Control

Like any other study, there were several limitations that need to be acknowledged

to identify potential weaknesses. Steps were taken to minimize the effects of these

limitations through supervision and guidance from experienced researchers throughout

this study. The following limitations related to this study were identified by the

researcher:

1. The study was limited to superintendents from the state of Missouri. The

researcher assumed the sample chosen for this study was representative of

superintendents throughout the Midwestern state. .

84
 2. Participation in the study was limited to the superintendents who consented to

voluntary participation.

3. It was assumed that superintendents based their responses on their own personal

and professional experiences.

4. It was assumed that superintendents were forthright in their responses and

correctly interpreted the questions as intended.

5. Researcher bias was controlled through triangulation of survey data and

qualitative questions and questionnaires and supporting policy documents.

The mixed methods sequential explanatory design consists of two distinct phases:

quantitative and qualitative (Creswell & Clark, 2007). In this design, the researcher first

collected and analyzed the quantitative data. From this data, semi-structured, open-ended

questions are written to use in the second phase. The second phase consisted of the

researcher conducting qualitative research and analyzing the data to help explain or

expand concepts obtained in the first phase. The rationale for this design in that the

qualitative data and the subsequent analysis provided a general understanding of the

research problem. The qualitative data analyses refined and explained the statistical

results by exploring participants’ views in more depth (Creswell & Clark).

Recommendations for Future Research

Training administrative leaders is essential to enhance their ability to effectively

lead schools of tomorrow through the reform efforts necessary to meet state and federal

accountability standards. Effective stress management programs must be developed or

enhanced to provide the appropriate preparation for new and current leaders. This

research should be replicated after the professional development programs directed

85
towards teaching stress management and coping skills to superintendents have been in

place for several years and improvements have been made based on feedback from the

participants, their respective school districts, and any outside sources with information to

impact program effectiveness.

Few stress management programs are currently in place within school districts

across the state. Research should be conducted to analyze professional development

programs with positive results. Questions should be raised to determine the

characteristics of effective programs. Identification of effective characteristics should

then lead to examine how these programs could be replicated on a larger scale across the

state.

This research was restricted to one Midwestern state. Would research conducted

involving multiple states have the same results? Are there some states across the country

with existing stress management programs in place that are effective? Research should be

conducted to determine where effective programs are located in other states.

Identification of effective programs should also lead to replications as stated in the

previous paragraph.

Further research should also be conducted to compare actual school board

relations from schools where superintendents have completed various types of stress

management programs. Would comparisons of climate assessment data within school

districts determine the effectiveness of stress management programs from a different

standpoint? Our schools exist in a data-driven world—how do we examine this data to

determine effectiveness?

86
 Summary

The purpose of this study was to investigate in what ways and to what degree, if

any, school superintendents perceive stress and what, if any, coping mechanisms were

engaged. This study focused on qualities of coping mechanisms and their effectiveness.

Underscored throughout the study is the need for effective stress management skills,

professional development geared towards developing a stress model, and creating a

positive school culture. Moreover, the researcher sought to identify any significant

differences between the frequency of stressors by gender and coping mechanisms utilized

by female and male leaders.

No significant differences were found between the frequencies of overall stressors

by gender. Although no significant differences were found, the data indicated high levels

of occupational stress in the superintendency. The school district personnel provided no

known support to superintendents in developing stress management skills. Data from the

interviews provided rich narrative descriptions to substantiate the findings from the

survey.

Coping strategies were examined to determine effectiveness and included gender

difference. The data revealed gender difference in the coping mechanism utilized and

effectiveness of the coping strategy. Most of the superintendents identified exercise and

getting away as one of the most frequently utilized strategies; exercise was most effective

for both genders. The most ineffective strategy was identified as artificial means, while

superintendents reported mentoring or communication with fellow superintendents

helpful in managing occupational stress. Another concern was the need for a supportive

school board. The support from central office staff to assist superintendents with stress

87
management skills was minimal. In addition, superintendents identified lack of

understanding for gender difference and superintendent stress. Professional development

was mentioned the least by superintendents as the one of strategies in place to help them

develop coping skills to manage occupational stress. Other themes that were identified by

one or more participants is the need for wellness programs. Study indicated exercise as

the most frequently used coping strategy and the most effective, yet just a handful of

districts had wellness programs in place.

The study’s findings raise concern that many of our superintendents are entering

the field without the proper preparation for understanding the implications of stress.

Support for these district leaders is critical in light of the accountability standards enacted

by our state and federal policy-makers. Effective stress management programs should be

in place to assist executive leaders as they begin to create and sustain learning

communities. There is need for improvement in supporting superintendents with

occupational stressors. Current district leaders and policy-makers must not ignore this

issue. Our superintendents must be supported and encouraged as they grow into the

administrative leaders of the future.

88
 References[BNM1]

American Association of School Administrators. (2000). The study of American school

superintendency 2000. Arlington, VA.

American Management Association (1996). Stress rides in the executive suite. HR

FOCUS, 73(10). 19.

Andero, A. (2000). The changing role of school superintendent with regard to curriculum

policy and decision-making. Education, 121(2), 276-286.

Armitage, K.(1998). Stress bites. Journal of Administrative Management, 17, 1-2.

Association of California School Administrators. (2000a, April 24). Study validates roles

of principal, examines shortage of candidates. EDCAL, 29 (32), 3.

Association of California School Administrators. (2000b, November 20). 2000 Annual

conference renews spirit. EDCAL, 30 (16), 1-14.

Beck, L. G. (1994). Ethics in educational leadership programs: An expanding role.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Bhatnagar, D. (1988). Professional women in organizations: New paradigms for research

and action. Sex Roles, 18, 343-355.

Bjork, L. G., Keedy, J., Rhinehart, J. S., & Winter, P. A. (2002). State action for

educational leadership policy (SAELP): The principal search process. Proposal

for the Center of the Study of Superintendency, University Council for

Educational Administration (UCEA). College of Education, University of

Kentucky.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and

leadership, 3rd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

89
Borg, M., & Riding, J. (1993). Occupational stress and job satisfaction among school

administrators. Journal of Educational Administration, 31(1), 4-21.

Brandt, R. (1993). On structuring roles and relationships: A conversation with Phil

Schlechty. Educational Leadership. 51(2), 8-11.

Briskin, A. (1996). The stirring in of soul in the workplace. San Fransisco: Jossey-Brass.

Brock, B. L., & Grady, M. L. (2002). Avoiding burnout: A principal’s guide to keeping

the fire alive. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Brubaker, D & Coble, L. (1995). The derailed superintendent. The Executive Educator,

17 (10), 34-36.

Buhler, P. (1993). Stress Management. Supervision, 54(5), 17-19.

Colgan, C. (2003). Burnout out. American School Board Journal. 190(4). Retrieved

November 17, 2007 from [Link]

Cooper, B. S., Fusarelli, L. D., & Carella, V. A. (2000). Career crisis in the

superintendency? The results of a national survey. Arlington, VA: American

Association of School Administrators. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service

No. ED 443 167).

Crampton, S., Hodge, J., Mishra, J., & Price, S. (1995). Stress and stress management.

SAM Advanced Management Journal, 60(3), 10-18.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods

approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed method

research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

90
Cunningham, W. G., & Burdick, G. R. (1999). Empty offices. American School Board

Journal, 186 (12). 25-30.

Daalen, G, Willemsen, T., Sanders, K., (2006). Reducing work–family conflict through

different sources of social support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69 (3), 462-

476.

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job

demands-resources model of burnout. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3),

499-512.

De Vise, D. “Three Superintendent Finalists Identified, Called Highly Qualified,” The

Washington Post, 20 April, 2006, sec. B, p. 2.

Domenech, D. (1996). Surviving the ultimate stress. School Administrator, 53(3), 40-41.

Dunn-Rankin, P., Knezek, G. A., Wallace, S., & Zhang, S. (2004). Scaling Methods.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Educational Research Service. (1998). Is there a shortage of qualified candidates for

openings in the principalship? An exploratory study. Arlington, VA: National

Association of Elementary Principals and National Association of Secondary

School Principals.

Esparo, L. (2001). The leadership crisis: The shortage of qualified superintendents is not

going away. American School Board Journal, 188(5), 46-48.

Farkas, S., Johnson, J., Duffet, A. (2003). Rolling up their sleeves: Superintendents and

principals talk about what’s needed to fix public schools. Public Agenda:

Sundberg & Associates.

91
Fielden, S. L., & Davidson, M. J. (2001). Stress and the woman manager. In J. Dunham

(Ed.), Stress in the workplace: Past, present and future (pp. 109-129). London,

England: Whurr Publishers, Ltd.

Fink, A. (1995). How to design surveys. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fisher, A. (1997). Why are you so paranoid? Fortune, 136(5). 171-172.

Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000a). Positive affect and the other side of coping.

American Psychologist, 55(6), 647-654.

Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000b). Stress, positive emotion and coping. Current

Directions in Psychological Science, 56(9), 115-118.

Forderaro, L.W. “The Search for the Perfect Schools Chief,” New York Times, 9 July,

2006, sec. 14LI, p. 1.

Fowler, F. (1999). Curious and curiouser: New concepts in the rapidly changing

landscape of educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly,

35(4), 594-604.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in

education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fuller, H., Campbell, C., Celio, M. B., Harvey, J., Immerwahr, J., & Winger, A. (2003)

An impossible job? The view from the urban superintendent’s chair. Center on

Reinventing Public education, Retrieved January 12, 2006, from

[Link]

Gates G., & Gmelch, W. H. (1998). The impact of personal, professional and

organizational (2), 146-159.

92
Geller, B. M., & Hobfoll, S. E. (1994). Gender differences in job stress, tedium, and

social support in the workplace. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11,

555-572.

Gianakos, I. (2002). Gender roles and coping with work stress. Sex roles 42, 1059-1079.

Giugni, T. (1998). Surfing to singing. School leader’s battle stresses at work. EDCAL, 28

(6), 1.

Glass T. (2000). The shrinking applicant pool. Education Week, 20(10), 49-51.

Glass, T. E., Bjork, L., & Brunner, C. C. (2000). The study of the American school

superintendency 2000. Arlington VA: American Association of School

Administrators.

Glass, T., & Franceschini, L. (2007). The state of the American school superintendency, a

mid-decade study. American Association of School Administrators: Arlington

VA, Rowman & Littefield Education.

Gmelch, W. (1996). Breaking out of superintendent stress traps. School Administrator,

53(3), 32-33, 35-39.

Goens, G. A. (1998). Too many coxswains: Leadership and the principalship. NASSP

Bulletin, 82(600), 103-110.

Goldstein, A. (1992). Stress and the superintendency. The School Administrator, 49 (9),

8-13.

Greenburg, H. (1980). Job stress. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., & Shaw, J. D. 2003. The relation between work-family

balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 510-531.

93
Greyser, L. (1999). Professional development helps counter lone ranger syndrome.

Leadership News, 1 (11).

Hammond, J., Muffs, M., Sciascia, S. (2001). The leadership crisis: Is it for real?

Principal, 81(2), 28-32.

Harrison, D. (1997). First-degree concern. People Management, 3(25), 36-39.

Houston, P. (2001). Superintendents for the 21st century: It’s not a job, it’s a calling. Phi

DeltaKappan, 82(6), 428-433.

Howley, A., Pendarvis, E., & Gibbs, T. (2002). Attracting principals to the

superintendency: Conditions that make a difference to principals. Education

Policy Analysis Archives, 10(43).

Howley, A., Pendarvis, E. (2002). Recruiting and Retaining Rural School Administrators.

Charleston, WV: Clearinghouse and Rural Education. Retrieved 17 November,

2007 from [Link]

Iwasaki, Y., Mackay, K. & Mactavish, J. (2005). Gender-Based Analyses of Coping with

Stress among Professional Managers: Leisure Coping and Non-Leisure Coping

Journal of Leisure Research, (37).

Johnson, J. (2002). Staying ahead of the game: Public agenda survey. Educational

Leadership, 59(8), 26-30.

Jones, B. A. (2001). The superintendent and principal shortage. Policy Today: University

of Missouri System Consortium for Educational Policy Analysis.

Kearns, D. & Harvey, J. (2001). A legacy of learning. Washington, DC: Brookings

Institute Press.

94
Keedy, J. & Bjork, L. (2001). The superintendents, local boards, and the political arena.

The AASA Professor, 24 (4), 2-5.

Lashway, L. (2002). The superintendent in an age of accountability. ERIC Digest. ERIC

#ED468515.

Lazarus, R. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York, NY: Springer.

Leher, P. & Woolfolk, R. (1993). Stress management. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Levi, L. (2001). Stress in the global environment. In J. Dunham (Ed.), Stress in the

workplace: Past, present, and future (pp. 1-18). Philadelphia, PA: Whurr

Publishers.

Long, B. C., (1989). Sex-role orientation, coping strategies, and self-efficacy of women

in traditional and nontraditional occupations. Psychology of Women Quarterly,

13, 307-324.

Lyles, T. (2005). Stress recovery manual. Florida: Healthful Communications, Inc.

Marino, S. (1997). The stress epidemic. Industry Week, 246(7), 14-15.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Milstein, M. (1992). The overstated case of administrator stress. The School

Administrator, 49 (9), 12-13.

Mizzel, H. (2000). Educators: Reform thyselves. Education Week, 19(30), 1-27.

Nelson, D. & Burke, R. J., (2002). Gender, Work-stress, and Health. Washington, D.C.:

American Psychological Association, 260 pp. ISBN 01-55798-923-0.

Nussbaum, D. (2007) “Calling All Superintendents,” New York Times, 9 September,

sec. 14NJ, p.1.

95
Olson, L. (2000). New demands, new pressures alter administrators’ roles. Education

Week, 19 (19), 14-18.

Osborne, A. (1996). Why I left the superintendency for the principalship. The School

Administrator, 53(3), 29-30.

Owen, J. C. & Ovando, M. N. (2000). Superintendents guide to creating community.

Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Patterson, J. (2000). The anguish of leadership. Arlington, VA: American Association of

School Administrators.

Perry, E. (1994). The role of the school administrator: Leading toward cooperation.

Paper presented at the International Conference of the International Association

for the Study of Cooperation in Education, Portland, OR.

Piltch, C. A., Walsh, D. C., Mangion, T. W. & Jennings, S. E. (1994). Gender, work, and

mental distress in an industrial labor force: An expansion of Karasek’s job strain

model. In G. P. Keita & J. J. Hurrell Jr. (Eds.), Job stress in a changing

workforce: Investigating gender, diversity, and family issues (pp 39-45).

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Public Agenda. (2001). Trying to stay ahead of the game: Superintendents and principals

talk about school leadership. New York: Public Agenda Online. Retrieved July

24, 2007 from [Link]

Queen, J. A. & Queen, P. S., (2004). The frazzled teacher’s wellness plan: A five-step

program for reclaiming time, managing stress, and creating a healthy lifestyle.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

96
Richardson, L. (1998). Stress and the Superintendency: Implications for Achieving

Excellence. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the University Council for

Educational Administration. St Louis, MO.

Rose, L.C. & Gallup, A.M. (2003). The 35th Annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of the

public’s attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 41-56.

Rose, L.C. & Gallup, A.M. (2007). The 39th Annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of the

public’s attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan. Retrieved Feb 25,

2008 from [Link]

Selye, H. (1976). The Stress of Life (New York: McGraw-Hill)

Shields, M. (2003). Stress, health and the benefit of social support. Health reports,

Catalogue Number 82-003-XPE, 15(1). Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

Shipps, D. & Firestone, W.A. (2003). Juggling accountabilities. Education Week on the

Web. Retrieved August 12, 2007, from

[Link]

Simpson, R., Lacava P. & Sampson, G. (2004). The No Child Left Behind Act :

Challenges and implications for teachers. Intervention in school clinic, 40(3), 38-

40.

Somerfield, M. R., McCrae, R. R. (2000), Stress and coping research. Methodological

challenges, theoretical advances, and clinical applications. American Psychology,

55(6), 620-625.

Taylor, S., Klein, L., Lewis, B., Gurung R., Gruenewald, T. & Updegraff, J.(2000).

Biobehavioral Responses to Stress in Females: Tend-and-Befriend, Not Fight-or-

Flight. Psychological Review, 107(3), 411-429.

97
Thomas, R. M., & Brubaker, D. L. (2000). Thesis and Dissertations: A Guide to

Planning,Research, and Writing. Westport, Connecticut: Bergin & Garvey.

Travers, C. (2001). Stress in teaching: past, present, and future. In J. Dunham (Ed.),

Stress in the workplace: Past, present and future (pp. 130-155). Philadelphia,

PA: Whurr Publishers.

Wallace, B. (2003). The superintendent selection process: A national investigative study.

Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(06), 1936A. (UMI No. 3095687)

Walsh, R. (1999). Essential spirituality: The 7 central practices to awaken heart and

mind. New York: John Wiley.

Weber, M. R. (1999). A balancing act of demands and needs. The School Administrator,

56(2), 38-40.

Whitacker, K. S. (1996). Exploring causes of administrator burnout. The Journal of

Educational Administration, 34(1), 60-71.

Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction. Needham

Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon .

Wolf, S. (1986). Occupational stress. Littleton, MA: PSG Publishing Company.

Zemke, R. (1991). Workplace stress revisited. Training 28(11), 35-39.

98
 Appendix A

Survey Instrument

99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
 Appendix B

Superintendent or IRB Information Letter

I am a doctoral student at the University of Missouri-Columbia and am currently

completing my dissertation entitled, “Implications of Stress and Coping Mechanisms in
the Superintendency.” As part of the research study, 380 superintendents from all over
the state are being surveyed on-line regarding perceived stress, coping mechanism, and
professional development.

The survey should take approximately 15 minutes to complete. The superintendent from
the geographic and gender specific requirements that were chosen will complete the
survey. By completing the survey informed consent is being given.

I am writing to seek your permission to conduct the surveys in your district, providing the
superintendents voluntarily agree to participate. Would you please take a moment to sign
the attached form, so that I may seek your involvement?

Confidentiality of the school and superintendent will be protected throughout the study.
Neither school nor superintendent will be identified in reporting results. While I do hope
that you will take time to participate within your district, participation is voluntary.
Participants may withdraw at any time without penalty. Individual responses to the
survey are confidential. Only aggregate data will be reported in the study results. Your
signature on the attached form indicates your informed consent to participate in the study.
You may fax the signed informed consent form to me at the FAX number listed below
and keep the original signed copy for your records.

If you have any questions about this research project, please feel free to contact me at
home (660) 473-2507, my office (660) 687-1199, or [Link]@[Link] or
nita_hawk@[Link] . You may also contact my Faculty Advisor, Dr. Barbara N.
Martin, at 660-543-8823 or bmartin@[Link]. Thank you in advance for your assistance
with this project.

Sincerely,

Nita Hawk
Doctoral Candidate
University of Missouri-Columbia

FAX (660) 687-3874

111
 Appendix C

Informed Consent – Superintendent/IRB

I, (Name ___________________ ), (District _________________ ), (Date ___/___/___ )

consent to participate in this research project. I understand this is an on-line survey and
by completing the survey, informed consent is given. I have read and understand the
following:

PROJECT BACKGROUND: This project involves gathering data through a survey

investigating the superintendent occupational stress, coping mechanisms, and
professional development. The data will be collected for analysis and may be published.
You must be at least 21 years of age to participate.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship, if any, that
occupational stress and coping mechanisms have on each other. Also, to determine if
male and female deal with stress differently and finally if there is a relationship to
professional development deployed by the school system and coping mechanisms
utilized.
VOLUNTARY: The survey is voluntary. Participants may refuse to answer any
question or choose to withdraw from participation at any time without any penalty or loss
of benefits to which they are otherwise entitled.
WHAT DO YOU DO? Sign this consent form and fax a copy to me at the FAX number
below, thereby acknowledging your participation to be involved in completing the
survey.
BENEFITS: Your participation in this research project will enrich the information base.
A clearer understanding of how superintendents manage the inevitable occupational
stress of the leadership position. The findings could help superintendents understand
how effective coping mechanisms serve to help create balance and professional success.
RISKS: This project does not involve any risks greater than those encountered in
everyday life.
CONFIDENTIALITY: Your confidentiality will be maintained in that a participant’s
name will not appear on the survey or in the published study itself. A code number may
be assigned so that responses may be grouped for statistical analysis. The data will only
be reported in aggregate form.
INJURY: It is not the policy of the University of Missouri to compensate human subjects
in the event the research results in injury. The University of Missouri does have medical,
professional and general liability self-insurance coverage for any injury caused by the
negligence of its faculty and staff. Within the limitations of the laws of the State of
Missouri, the University of Missouri will also provide facilities and medical attention to
subjects who suffer injuries while participating in the research projects of the University
of Missouri. In the event you suffered injury as the result of participating in this research
project, you are to immediately contact the Campus Institutional Review Board
Compliance Officer at (573) 882-9585 and the Risk Management Officer at (573) 882-
3735 to review the matter and provide you further information. This statement is not to
be construed as an admission of liability.
112
Thank you for your assistance in providing current information regarding the possible
relationship between occupational stressors and coping mechanisms employed by the
superintendent. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. If you have any questions regarding
the study, please contact me at home (660) 473-2507, work (660) 687-1199, or
[Link]@[Link] or nita_hawk@[Link] . You may also contact my
Faculty Advisor, Dr. Barbara N. Martin, at 660-543-8823 or bmartin@[Link]. If you
have questions regarding your rights as a participant in research, please feel free to
contact the Campus Institutional Review Board at (573) 882-9585. Thank you in
advance for your assistance with this project.

Sincerely,
Nita Hawk
Doctoral Candidate, University of Missouri-Columbia FAX (660) 687-3874

113
 APPENDIX D

IRB APPROVAL LETTER

Comment Number: 182387 (03-04-2008) Exempt Approval Letter (Jan2008)

sent on Mar 04, 2008: To: [Link]@[Link], drbabs1952@[Link]
BCC: greeningjm@[Link] Subject: Campus IRB Exempt Approval Letter: IRB
# 1107717
Dear Investigator:
Your human subject research project entitled ``Implications of Stress and Coping
Mechanisms in the Superintendency`` was reviewed and APPROVED as "Exempt" on
March 04, 2008 and will expire on March 04, 2009. Research activities approved at
this level are eligible for exemption from some federal IRB requirements. Although
you will not be required to submit the annual Continuing Review Report, your
approval will be contingent upon your agreement to annually submit the "Annual
Exempt Research Certification" form to maintain current IRB approval. You must
submit the "Annual Exempt Research Certification" form by January 18, 2009 to
provide enough time for review and avoid delays in the IRB process. Failure to timely
submit the certification form by the deadline will result in automatic expiration of IRB
approval. (See form: [Link]
If you wish to revise your activities, you do not need to submit an Amendment
Application. You must contact the Campus IRB office for a determination of whether
the proposed changes will continue to qualify for exempt status. You will be expected
to provide a brief written description of the proposed revisions and how it will impact
the risks to subject participants. The Campus IRB will provide a written
determination of whether the proposed revisions change from exemption to expedite
or full board review status. If the activities no longer qualify for exemption, as a
result of the proposed revisions, an expedited or full board IRB application must be
submitted to the Campus IRB. The investigator may not proceed with the proposed
revisions until IRB approval is granted.
Please be aware that all human subject research activities must receive prior
approval by the IRB prior to initiation, regardless of the review level status. If you
have any questions regarding the IRB process, do not hesitate to contact the
Campus IRB office at (573) 882-9585.
Campus Institutional Review Board

114
 VITA

Nita C. Hawk was born on March 16, 1958, in Lincoln, Nebraska, the daughter of

Harold William and Effie May Johnson. She attended the public schools of Lincoln,

Nebraska, graduating from Pius X High School in 1977. She received an Associates

Degree in Radiological Technology (1980) from St. Luke’s School of Radiology, Kansas

City, Missouri, a B.S. in Physical Education/Wellness Management (1994), an M.S. in

Exercise and Sports Science (1996), both from the University of Central Missouri. As

part of the University of Missouri-Columbia statewide cohort program, she completed the

Ed.D. in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis (2008). She has been employed by

the United States Air Force, at Whiteman Air Force base since August 1996, and is

currently Director of Health Promotions, a position she has held since 2005.

She has two children; Courtney and Drew; one daughter-in-law, Marybeth, and

one grandson, Shiloh.

115