The Relationship between Religiosity and Burnout of ... - Springer Link

Social Psychology of Education 6: 61–90, 2003. © 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

61

The relationship between religiosity and burnout of principals: the meaning of educational work and role variables as mediators ANIT SOMECH and NELLY MIASSY-MALJAK Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, 31905, Haifa, Israel Abstract. The present study focused on the phenomenon of burnout amongst high school principals within three sectors: state-secular, state-religious, and ultra-Orthodox. Based on the cognitive approach of Lazarus (1996), the purpose of the work was to examine the relationship between religiosity and burnout, via mediator variables namely the meaning of the educational work and role variables (status, workload, wage, difficulties with teachers, and demands of parents). The sample consisted of 69 principals of three populations representing the structure of the Jewish educational system in Israel: 25 principals of the state-secular education sector, 23 of the state-religious education sector, and 21 of the ultra-Orthodox education sector. The data, collected through questionnaires, were analyzed by structural equation models. The findings which confirmed the main hypotheses, should encourage researchers and practitioners to focus more attention on understanding the phenomenon of burnout in a socio-cultural context.

1. Introduction The contemporary education system operates in a dynamic setting, in which changes are becoming part of every organization’s daily life (Levin, 1993). In this environment, school principals need to cope with complex tasks and a flood of information, and to serve as the link between the organization and the outside environment (Goldring & Rallis, 1993). Therefore, their job has become complex and dynamic, involving greater exposure to a wide range of pressures, and more potential for burnout (Whitaker, 1992; Cooper & Kelly, 1993; Pines, 1994; Allison, 1997). Burnout has an impact on the health of principals and the attitudes and behavior of employees, and, in turn, on organizational effectiveness (Burk & Weir, 1980; Lee & Ashforth, 1991; Malony, 1994). Accordingly, there is a growing need for research on the incidence of burnout among principals, to identify the factors that may deter or promote its frequency. The present research studies the issue of burnout among high school principals in three sectors: the state-secular, the state-religious, and the ultra-Orthodox schools in Israel. The purpose of the research is to examine the relationship between the degree of religiosity of the school principal and the level of his or her burnout, by means of mediating variables, namely, the meaning of educational work and role variables.

62

ANIT SOMECH AND NELLY MIASSY-MALJAK

2. Burnout In 1974, Freudenberger coined the term ‘burnout’ to describe a syndrome that includes physical and mental fatigue and low motivation towards clients. A review of the literature indicates two main theoretical approaches in the research of burnout: one, focuses on the process of ‘burning out’ (represented, for instance, by Daley, 1979; Edelwich & Brodesky, 1980); the other views burnout as the outcome of stress (represented, for instance, by Freudenberg, 1980; Maslach & Jackson, 1981; Lazarus, 1991, 1996). The present research is based on the latter approach, which conceives of burnout as the result of the interrelationship between an individual and the environment, which the individual perceives to be burdening his or her resources and endangering well-being. The cognitive theory of psychological stress is transactional in that the person and the environment are viewed as being in a dynamic reciprocal relationship. The theory identifies two processes, cognitive appraisal and coping, as critical mediators of stressful person–environment relationships and their immediate and long-term outcomes. Cognitive appraisal is a process through which people evaluate whether a particular encounter with the environment is relevant to their wellbeing and, if so, in what way. According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984), burnout is the outcome of cognitive appraisal processes that interpret the encounter with the stressful event. In the primary appraisal process, individuals evaluate whether the event is relevant, and, if so, whether it represents an opportunity for growth or potential for failure. In the secondary appraisal process, individuals evaluate the coping resources available to them. A combination of these two appraisals determines whether the individual perceives an event as challenging or threatening. Appraisal of the event as a challenge is accompanied by positive feeling, enabling deployment of coping resources in order to prevent, reduce, control, or withstand the internal and/or external demands that arise from the stressful encounter with the environment. Appraisal of the stressful event as threatening, burdening resources, and jeopardizing well-being, leads to acceleration of the burnout process. Cognitive appraisal and coping are transactional variables, in that they refer not to the environment or to the person alone, but to the integration of both in a given transaction. An appraisal of threat is a function of a specific set of environmental conditions that are appraised by a particular person with particular psychological traits. A range of personality traits, including values, commitments, goals, and beliefs about oneself and the world helps to define the stakes that the person identifies as having relevance to well-being in specific stressful transactions. Therefore, in accordance with this approach, we suggest that religiosity, defined as a certain type of value orientation that provides the person with a system of values and norms based on faith (Glock & Stark, 1965), may constitute a critical variable that affects the way in which individuals appraise and interpret the

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RELIGIOSITY AND BURNOUT OF PRINCIPALS

63

Figure 1. Research model: The meaning of educational work and the role variables mediate in the relationship between degree of religiosity and level of principal burnout.

encounter with stressful events. Hence, we propose a model (see Figure 1) that examines the relationship between the principal’s degree of religiosity and the level of his or her burnout, through the mediation of the variables: the meaning of educational work and the perception of the role variables (status, workload, difficulties with teachers, demands of parents, and wages). We hypothesize that stressful events will be appraised differently by ultra-Orthodox, religious (at government religious schools) and secular principals, and will therefore lead to different levels of burnout. In the following we discuss the relationship between each of the variables in the model and the variable of burnout.

64


2.1. DEGREE OF RELIGIOSITY AND BURNOUT The relationship between degree of religiosity and emotional adjustment has recently attracted much attention, despite the trend away from religion that characterizes modern Western society. The literature provides conflicting results regarding the relationship between religiosity and emotional adjustment (Bergin, 1983). Ellis (1971) claims that religion can be reduced to irrational faith in supernatural forces; Freud (1961) describes religion as a means for neurotic satisfaction of desires, and Marx (1964) views religion as the opiate of the masses, which impairs the motivation to change society. In contrast, other researchers (e.g., Farber, 1983; Hathaway & Pargament, 1990; Pargament, 1990; McIntosh, Silver, & Wortman, 1993) claim that religion has the power to give meaning and coherence to social systems, and to a variety of behaviors that influence a healthy lifestyle. In their view, religion affects positive adaptation and serves as a preventative framework that contains the person in the different realms of life. James (1914), a theoretician who laid the earliest theoretical basis for the psychological study of religiosity, notes the importance of religion in cases of severe personal crises. He contends that religion can bring people from a state of crisis to one of self-realization. According to Allan (1994) and Schvartz (1992), religion can be seen as an interpretive framework that gives meaning and explanation to people’s deeds and events on two levels: (a) the level of cultural knowledge (thinking), or schematic concepts by means of which it is possible to identify, sort, define, and organize specific events; and (b) the level of customs (behavior), or a deliberate scheme of behavior and acts, noting general ways of responding to situations and achieving goals. Recent research (e.g., Stone et al., 1988; Higgerson, 1998; Dubow et al., 1999) suggests that religion constitutes a dimension that mediates between a wide range of stressors and emotional and physical health. According to these researchers, religion is an effective value system for processing negative material and providing quick solutions in stressful situations. In general, religiosity, in the wider sense, is a framework of coping that influences and moderates responses to situations of high pressure. Williams et al. (1991) claim that religious involvement is a significant coping strategy, which influences and accelerates adjustment to and moderates the impact of situations of stress in life. Most researchers refer to two central mechanisms in religion as influencing people’s psychological resilience: the social mechanism, or the social support that the individual enjoys, such as that of the family, coworkers, and friends in general; and the personal mechanism, or coping resources that individuals acquire in the process of education and professional training. According to McIntosh, Silver, and Wortman (1993), religion can be considered as a cognitive scheme – a mental organization of experience that influences the way in which information is processed and behavior is organized. The cognitive scheme induces the processing of relevant information, and assimilates the stimuli


65

consistently and in correspondence with the existing scheme, thus accelerating the finding of meaning and a solution in the face of negative circumstances. According to these researchers, the higher the individual’s degree of religiosity, the more developed his or her scheme, which will help in coping with stressful situations. In other words, these studies suggest that the degree of religiosity mediates between different stress and crisis situations and mental and physical health (e.g., Koenig, 1988; Pargament, 1990). Hence, we hypothesize that there is a negative relationship between a principal’s degree of religiosity and his or her level of burnout.

2.2. RELIGIOSITY, THE MEANING OF EDUCATIONAL WORK , AND BURNOUT The meaning of work is defined as an individuals’ beliefs regarding the results (positive and/or negative) of their work and how these results serve their life (Harpaz, 1990). The meaning includes beliefs, values, attitudes, and rationale regarding the nature of the work, its goals, its results, and the ways in which to handle it; it possesses dynamic and unique characteristics of each society in any given time in history (Harpaz, 1998). A survey of the literature indicates that the concept has been studied in the context of the meaning of work in general (e.g., Harpaz, 1990; Drenth, 1991; Caudron, 1997), but no research was found that focuses on the meaning of educational work. The meaning that people ascribe to work is influenced by their unique individual needs and psychological characteristics, such as locus of control and motivation to achieve, on the one hand, as well as by characteristics of the organization and the environment in which the job is performed, such as workload, status, relationships in the organization and relations between the organization and the environment (Kahn, 1987; Harpaz, 1998). According to Splete (1975), the meaning of work is derived from the individual’s work values, which are a series of perceptions that mediate between the individual’s emotional orientation and the group of external objects that offer him or her satisfaction. Work values are dynamic by nature and their meanings are unique to each society. In her study of registered nurses in government hospitals, Shefi (1994) shows that the meaning of work is determined by individual choices and experiences, and according to organizational–environmental contexts in which the individual lives and works. Research on the relationship between the meaning of work and burnout (e.g., Becker, 1973; Pines & Aronson, 1981; Pines, 1994) shows that the greater the meaning of work, the lower the level of burnout. According to these research findings, one of the main reasons for lack of pleasure from work, poor performance, and a high rate of turnover, is the feeling that the work is meaningless and useless. Lack of meaning of work leads to lack of self-confidence, depression, and hopelessness, which are signs of burnout. According to these authors, even when work is difficult, the sense of meaning reduces the level of burnout.

66


Similar to work, religious conviction also plays an important role, having had an impact on individual perceptions and attitudes. Consciously or unconsciously, religious beliefs and practices affect individual attitudes on important facets of life (Harpaz, 1998). Perhaps the most prominent articulation of the relationship between religion and work was presented by Max Weber (1922/1958), who examined Calvinism, and showed that this theology, similar to Protestantism as a whole, held that work was a virtue and that even menial jobs should be performed well. Judaism has also concerned itself with the value of work. Early Jewish thinkers considered the nature and meaning of work and the contribution of work to society and to lives of its members. The Talmud says, ‘He who does not teach his son a craft teaches him brigandage’ (Kiddushin, 29a). According to the rabbinical literature, he who turns to idleness corrupts his soul. Work stabilizes the soul of man and protects him from crises. While work is a central value in Judaism, educational work is perceived as a mission. Working in education is not a means to wages and esteem, but is defined as a duty, similar to that of observing the Sabbath and adhering to the laws of kashrut. The status of education work is reflected in Auerbach’s (1982) book on the teachings of the rabbis, ‘The Torah is greater than the priesthood and royalty.’ Only one research study was found that examines the meaning of educational work in the ultra-religious sector. Ben-Shlomo (1995) shows that while work is a source of personal and professional satisfaction and fulfillment of material and social needs for those who are not ultra-religious, among the ultra-religious, working in education is a supreme value and a sacred mission. On the basis of all the above, we hypothesize that there is a positive relationship between the degree of religiosity and the meaning of educational work, and that the meaning of educational work mediates the relationship between religiosity and burnout. 2.3. RELIGIOSITY, ROLE VARIABLES , AND BURNOUT In the present research, we chose role variables (perception of status, perception of wages, perception of workload, perception of difficulties with teachers, and perception of parents as demanding) that were found in previous research (e.g., Whitaker, 1992, 1995; Friedman, 1995a; Pawlas, 1996) as central factors in the burnout of school principals. The research hypothesis was that the perception of role variables mediates in the relationship between religiosity and burnout. 1. The perception of professional status. Earlier research shows that perception of status influences the level of the individual’s burnout. It was found that the more prestige individuals ascribe to their work, the more important they consider themselves and the greater their self-confidence and satisfaction with work; therefore, there is a negative relationship between the perception of status and the level of burnout (Sarros, 1988; Mackler, 1996). It should be noted


67

that most of the research on status focuses mainly on the non-religious population, and these studies indicate that the status of those involved in education in Israel is low relative to sectors such as medicine, law, business management, and computers (Kremer-Hayon & Hofman, 1985; Dambo, Levin, & Siegler, 1997). In comparison, Dambo, Levin, and Siegler (1997) and Ben-Shlomo (1995) reveal that in the ultra-religious sector, the status of those in educational professions is high relative to other areas. Hence, we hypothesize that there is a positive relationship between religiosity and the perception of status, and that the perception of status mediates in the relationship between degree of religiosity and level of burnout. 2. Perception of wages. Research shows that there is a negative relationship between the level of remuneration an employee receives and level of burnout (Etzion & Pines, 1981). According to Harpaz (1998), Israeli society is becoming individualistic and materialistic, and has less of a collective identity than it previously did. Non-religious Israeli employees, like their American counterparts, stress the importance of instrumental achievements, compared to the importance of the contributing to society. In contrast, the ultra-religious society upholds sufficing with little material wealth as a central value. This ethic echoes the attitude toward wages expressed in the adage: ‘Those who teach infants are paid to guard the infants from being subject to crime, from being hurt, or from hurting, but payment for teaching must not be charged’ (quoted by Auerbach, 1982; p. 43). Hence, we hypothesize that there is a positive relationship between religiosity and the perception of wages, and that perception of wages mediates in the relationship between degree of religiosity and level of burnout. 3. The perception of difficulties with teachers and demands of parents. Previous research (e.g., Katz, 1988; Borg & Riding, 1993; Cooper & Kelly, 1993; Friedman, 1993, 1995a; Carr, 1994) shows consistently that for principals in non-religious schools, difficulties with teachers and demanding parents are among the main work-stress factors that contribute to burnout. In other words, the absence of support and cooperation between principals and teachers, on the one hand, and the perception of parents’ behavior as demanding, on the other hand, predict non-religious principals’ burnout. In contrast, it seems that the patterns of the relationships between school principals and parents and teachers in the ultra-religious sector bear a different character, in which there is a large power distance between the principal and the teachers and parents. This is derived, among other things, from the fact that school principals hold the title of rabbi, and, as commanded ‘the respect for the rabbi is identical to respect for the Torah’ (Rivlin, 1985). Hence, we hypothesize that there is a negative relationship between religiosity and the perception of difficulties with teachers and demanding parents, and the perception of difficulties with teachers and demanding parents mediates the relationship between religiosity and the level of burnout.

68


4. Perception of workload. The work environment may create two types of load: qualitative load, when ‘it is difficult to do,’ and quantitative load, when there is ‘much to do’ (French & Caplan, 1972). Lazarus (1991) differentiates between objective overload and subjective overload (the perception of load), the latter being the case when an individual perceives and interprets his or her relationships with the environment as burdening his or her resources. The review of the literature indicates that the perceived workload has a central impact on the process of burnout (e.g., Savicki & Cooley, 1987; Hipwel, Tyler, & Wilson, 1989; Carr, 1994). Hence, in keeping with what has been said to this point about the relationship between religiosity and the perception of the educational role, we hypothesize that there is a negative relationship between religiosity and the perception of workload, and that the perception of workload mediates the relationship between degree of religiosity and level of burnout.

2.4. THE PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH AND HYPOTHESES As noted, the present research is based on Lazarus’ (1991) cognitive model, which stresses the importance of cognitive appraisal processes as mechanisms that interpret the environmental conditions as a challenge or a threat. According to the model proposed in the present paper, the degree of religiosity serves as a catalyst for the evaluation of environmental qualities as challenging or threatening, and, more specifically, the level of a principal’s religiosity influences the meaning of educational work and the perception of role variables, thereby influencing the level of burnout. Thus the research hypotheses are: 1. A negative relationship will be found between a principal’s degree of religiosity and his or her burnout. 2. A positive relationship will be found between a principal’s degree of religiosity and the variable of meaning of educational work. 3. A positive relationship will be found between principal’s degree of religiosity and the role variables of perception of status and perception of wages. 4. A negative relationship will be found between principal’s degree of religiosity and the role variables: perception of workload, perception of difficulties with teachers, and perception of parents as demanding. 5. A positive relationship will be found between the meaning of educational work to a principal and the role variables of perception of status and wages. 6. A negative relationship will be found between the meaning of educational work to a principal and the role variables of perception of workload and perception of difficulties with teachers and perception of parents as demanding. 7. The meaning of educational work and the role variables mediate in the relationship between degree of religiosity and level of principal burnout.


69

3. Method 3.1. THE SAMPLE AND THE RESEARCH DESIGN The present research included 69 male principals of high schools, divided according to three populations representing the structure of the Jewish education system in Israel: (a) state-secular education; (b) state-religious education; and (c) independent ultra-Orthodox education. The sample consisted of 25 principals from statesecular schools (average age: 53.8; average seniority: 28.4 years), 23 state-religious school principals (average age: 47.1; average seniority: 22.8 years); and 21 principals from the ultra-Orthodox schools (average age: 44.1; average seniority: 18.3 years). The sampling of the population was performed, in the first stage, among the ultra-Orthodox population (which isolates itself, and does not allow research). The Manof Institute (the Center for Judaism Research) in Jerusalem provided the researcher with a list of ultra-Orthodox school principals who were prepared to participate in the research. In the second stage, from a list of principals of state-secular and state-religious schools provided by the Ministry of Education, we identified two groups of principals with similar characteristics (in terms of age, education, seniority as principals, and socioeconomic level of the student body) to those of the ultra-Orthodox sample. We then sent questionnaires by mail to those principals that expressed willingness to participate in the research. The research population, then, represents the three main streams in Israel’s education system, each of which has unique characteristics: 1. State-secular (general) education is founded on a system of universal values, characterizing a humanistic educational view of the world, with emphasis on the common denominator of humans, the people, and culture (Dambo, Levin, & Siegler, 1997). The purpose of the education is to inculcate general and diverse cultural values while granting legitimacy to pluralism, creativity, and a critical view. The curriculum is determined by the Ministry of Education and Culture. In the state-secular schools, the classes are mixed (girls and boys study together) and the subject matter includes general subjects (mathematics, physics, and so forth). 2. Religious education incorporates two subsystems: (a) In the state-religious education, boys and girls study in separate classes, where they are taught general and religious studies. The approach is religious and Zionist-nationalist. The purpose of these schools is to teach the students to be loyal citizens, knowledgeable in the Torah and in science, who live in the non-religious world as religious people. The policy of the state-religious education division is to accept any student, as long as he or she accepts certain religious demands in the school and outside of it. The schools are meant to teach their students religious views and educate them to practical performance of religious commandments, or ‘good deeds’ (Ben Shlomo, 1995). Auerbach (1982) sees the religious high school as based on two principles, which distinguish it from

70


the ultra-Orthodox high school yeshiva: integration of the Talmud and Torah and general studies, in a comprehensive education system, and a view of the religious high school as an integral part of government education. (b) The ultraOrthodox education is an independent education system that constitutes part of the religious education system. The ultra-religious education is subject to state control, but it performs its own inspection system and its own curriculum. Girls and boys study in separate schools, and the curriculum includes sacred and secular studies, but mainly the latter. The students are not divided into classes by age, but rather by the level of their command of the material studied. There is almost no such thing as failure, as students are expected to attain to the best of their ability, and their achievements are appreciated (Wagner, 1983). Dambo, Levin, and Siegler (1997) claim that according to the ultra-Orthodox educational approach, learning is a purpose and value in its own right, intended to fulfill the command ‘study day and night.’ The very act of studying fulfills educational and value-related aims, regardless of the student’s achievements. Wagner (1983) identifies several central ideas that characterize the ultraOrthodox view of education: (a) the unlimited governance of halakha (Jewish law) on all spheres of life; (b) the principle of a unique unchanging continuity; (c) organizational and social segregation from the environment; and (d) unreserved recognition of the rabbinical authority as the exclusive absolute authority on any question. According to Wagner (1983), orthodox religious teaching methods in several religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism) share several common characteristics: (a) the schools are organized on the basis of religious aims and values, which characterize the community and constitute an integral part of the social structure in which they operate; (b) the students and the teachers are men; (c) the teachers not only convey knowledge but hold significant social status in the community, such as the religious-halakhic, judiciary, and medical authorities, and so forth; (d) there is a close relationship between student and teacher and in tutor–student relations.

3.2. THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS 3.2.1. Burnout School principal burnout was measured in this study based on Friedman’s (1995b) conceptualization of educational managerial burnout. Friedman suggests that school principal burnout can be operationalized as a three-dimensional concept, involving: (a) mental, cognitive, and physical fatigue (exhaustion) (b) negative feeling toward self (sense of unaccomplishment), and (c) negative feelings toward subordinates and service recipients (depersonalization, distancing, or deprecation). Friedman’s (1995) conceptualization of school principal burnout is, in fact, parallel to the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) (Maslach & Jackson, 1981), but its


71

operationalization is different in that it is tailored to the specific professional role of the school principal. (1) Exhaustion (nine items), describes internally focused feelings of emotional, physical, and cognitive fatigue, denoting the principal’s depletion of energy. For example: ‘I feel tired of running the school, to the extent that I wish to quit’. Cronbach’s coefficient was 0.86. (2) Aloofness (seven items), describes the principal’s emotional and personal detachment from service recipients, as well as distancing from problems, new ideas, and suggestions. For example: ‘I feel that my relationships with teachers and students are more impersonal than they used to be.’ Cronbach’s coefficient was 0.87. (3) Deprecation (six items) describes externally focused negative feelings that are expressed by belittling and negating those who work with the school principal and those who are the recipients of his or her services: teachers, students, and parents. These negative thoughts express the principal’s conviction that those around him or her no longer function as they should. For example, ‘I think that my school’s teachers do not do their job properly.’ Cronbach’s coefficient was 0.80. The responses were given on a Likert scale, from 1 (never) to 6 (always). The score of general burnout was calculated as an average of all items, and the score on the entire scale was calculated according to the average of the items on that scale. 3.2.2. Degree of Religiosity The degree of religiosity is a certain type of value orientation or broad perspective, reaching beyond the defined spheres, which provides people with a system of values and norms based in their faith (Glock & Stark, 1965). Most studies dealing with religion in relation to values and attitudes deal only with individuals who nominally identify with a specific religion. Rokeach (1973) claims that the findings may be affected by such variables as differences in religious upbringing and cultural differences, so that denomination is not sufficient to explain religious commitment. This needs to be measured by more rigorous criteria, including degree of religious conviction, and degree of observance of commandments. Therefore, in the present research, the degree of religiosity was examined on the basis of two measures: (a) self-definition of religiosity, based on a direct question in which the subjects where asked to define themselves in terms of religiosity along a continuum of three categories: non-religious, religious, or ultra-religious; and (b) beliefs and commandments, which were examined on two questionnaires developed by Ben Meir and Kedem (1979) for the Jewish population in Israel. The first of these is a beliefs questionnaire, comprising six items related to different beliefs, in which subjects are asked to indicate whether they believe or do not believe in each. For example, ‘Do you believe that God gave the Torah to Moses at Mt. Sinai? yes/no.’ In their research, Ben Meir and Kedem (1979) found a high reconstruction coefficient (0.92), testifying that the scale is one-dimensional, and a scalability coefficient of 0.80, testifying to differentiation among people. The

72


range of behaviors is quite broad, ranging from 29% believing in the most ‘difficult’ belief, and 64% believing in the ‘easiest’ belief. The second questionnaire was a commandments questionnaire, composed of 20 items related to different commandments, in which the respondents were asked to indicate whether they fulfilled or did not fulfill each. For example, ‘Do you buy only kosher meat?’ The reconstruction coefficient is 0.94; the scalability coefficient ranges from 0.60 to 0.70. The questionnaires were constructed on the basis of a Guttman scale, in which the items are organized by degree of ‘difficulty,’ from the most to the least difficult. Respondents are asked to indicate for each item whether it suits or does not suit them, the assumption being that those that indicate a certain item also believe in the items that follow it, but do not believe in the items preceding it. The score is determined as that of the most ‘difficult’ item that the respondent answered. For example, a respondent who indicates the first item is given the highest score, and a respondent who indicates no items receives the lowest score. The score on each of the questionnaires was calculated as the total number of items that the respondent answered positively, divided by the total items that the respondent answered at all; the range of scores is from 0 to 1. The score on religiosity was calculated as an average of the scores on the two questionnaires. 3.2.3. The Meaning of Educational Work The meaning of work is defined as the individual’s belief regarding the results (positive and/or negative) of his or her work and how these results serve his or her life (Harpaz, 1990). The meaning of educational work was measured by a questionnaire adopted from the Meaning of Work-International Research Team (MOW) (1987), and was specially adapted for use in this study. Accordingly, the meaning of work was conceptualized and measured in terms of five major domains (or central variables): 1. Centrality of the educational work: Two measures of work centrality were used. The first was a Likert-type scale measure of absolute educational work importance, indicating the importance of work from 1 (low) to 7 (high); the second was a measure of relative educational work importance, which had principals assign up to a total of 100 points to the following areas of their lives: leisure, community, work, religion, and family. 2. Valued educational work outcomes: Principals were asked to assign up to a total of 100 points to the following six outcomes provided by work: status and prestige, income, time absorption, interesting contacts, service to society, and interest and satisfaction. 3. Work-role identification: In order to examine how principals define and identify educational work in terms of various roles, principals were asked to rank six work roles according to their importance: task, organization, service, role colleagues, occupation, and money.


73

4. Importance of educational work goals: Principals were asked to rank 11 goals or aspects of their work life in order of their importance: opportunity to learn, interpersonal relations, promotion, work hours, variety, interesting work, job security, match between job and abilities, pay, working conditions, and autonomy. 5. Societal norms regarding educational work: Principals were asked to evaluate a set of statements about work in terms of what one should expect from working, or entitlements (e.g., ‘If a worker’s skills become outdated, his/her employer should be responsible for retraining’), and what a person should contribute through working, or obligations (e.g., ‘It is the duty of every able-bodied citizen to contribute to society by working’). Principals rated each of 10 such normative statements from 1 (disagree) to 4 (agree). Because the response scales on the questionnaire items are not uniform, the scales were adjusted so that the maximum score of meaning of educational work is 10 (high significance) and the minimum score is 1 (low significance). The internal reliability of the questionnaire is α = 0.73. 3.2.4. Role Variables In the present research, five role variables were examined: perception of workload; perception of parents as demanding; perception of difficulties with teachers; perception of status; and perception of wages. They were examined by means of a questionnaire developed especially for the population of school principals by Friedman (1995a). 1. Perception of workload includes 11 items that describe the subjective perception of load felt by the principal in the work environment. For example, ‘The time is not sufficient to fulfill all the tasks I am charged with as a school principal.’ The responses were given on a Likert scale, from 1 (never) to 6 (always). The internal reliability of the scale is α = 0.81. 2. Perception of parents as demanding includes five items, and is defined as the principal’s feeling about the demanding nature of the parents, the degree of requirements, and the pressure exerted by the parents. For example, ‘Parents make demands of me and of the teachers, as though they were our bosses.’ The responses were given on a Likert scale, from 1 (never) to 6 (always). The internal reliability of the scale is α = 0.82. 3. The perception of difficulties with teachers includes seven items, and refers to the difficulties of the school principal in interactions with the teachers with which he or she works. For example, ‘Many teachers reveal a lack of discipline, tardiness, failure to attend meetings, and so forth.’ The responses were given on a Likert scale from 1 (never) to 6 (always). The internal reliability of the scale is α = 0.85. 4. Perception of status includes two items and refers to the degree of prestige and esteem that the principal ascribes to his or her profession. For example, ‘To

74


what degree do you think your job is perceived as prestigious in the society in which you live?’ The responses were given on a Likert scale from 1 (very low) to 4 (very high). The internal reliability of the scale is α = 0.80. 5. Perception of wages includes three items and refers to the degree to which the principal is satisfied with his or her wages, such as, for instance, ‘To what degree are you satisfied with your wages?’ The responses were given on a Likert scale, from 1 (not satisfied at all) to 5 (very satisfied). The internal reliability of the scale is α = 0.80. The score on each scale was calculated by averaging the items on that scale. 3.2.5. Background Variables – Demographic Questionnaire The principals were asked about the following background variables: age, level of education, marital status, seniority in teaching, seniority as principal, seniority as principal of the current school, stream of the school, number of teachers in the school, number of students in the school, and socioeconomic level of the student population in the school, as defined by the Ministry of Education. 4. Results The averages, standard deviations, and correlations of all the research variables are presented in Tables I and II. 4.1. PRELIMINARY ANALYSES ANOVA tests were run in order to examine whether there are differences in the level of burnout of principals according to the variables of education, school stream, number of students in the school, number of teachers, seniority, and age. The results of the analyses showed that there are no significant differences (p > 0.05) according to these variables in the level of principal burnout. These findings support the findings of the present research, presented below, regarding the differences in the burnout level in different sectors, and emphasize that the source of the difference does not lie in biographical differences. 4.2. EXAMINATION OF THE RESEARCH HYPOTHESES The first research hypothesis was that we would find a negative relationship between a principal’s degree of religiosity and his or her level of burnout. According to the data presented in Table II, there is a significant negative correlation between the variable of religiosity and the variable of burnout (r = −0.40, p < 0.001). In addition, the differences in burnout levels in the three research groups was examined using an one-way ANOVA analysis. The results of the analysis (see Table I) show that degree of religiosity significantly affects burnout level


75

Table I. Means and SD’s of research variables by research groups Mean

F

Post hoc

State- StateUltrasecular religious Orthodox

Degree of religiosity

0.28 (0.15)

0.92 (0.08)

0.98 (0.02)

UltraStateUltra-Orthodox Orthodox religious State-religious State-secular 315.8∗∗∗ ∗

Meaning of educational work

6.09 (1.20)

Perception of status

2.8 (0.64)

6.48 (1.4)

7.24 (1.26)

∗

6.03∗∗

Ultra-Orthodox State-religious State-secular

∗

3.00 (0.67)

3.47 (0.50)

7.06∗∗


∗ ∗

Perception of 3.23 difficulties (0.83) with teachers

2.5 (0.52)

Perception of parents as demanding

2.88 (0.81)

2.5 (0.69)

Perception of wages

2.96 (0.88)

1.9 (0.62)

21.36∗∗∗ ∗ ∗

1.9 (0.70)

9.67∗∗∗ ∗ ∗

3.08 (1.24)

4.04 (0.8)

7.83∗∗∗ ∗ ∗

Perception of workload

4.34 (0.68)

4.48 (0.52)

4.37 (1.9)

Burnout

2.78 (0.70)

2.44 (0.48)

1.93 (0.50)

0.10


∗

Ultra-Orthodox State-religious State-secular Ultra-Orthodox State-religious State-secular Ultra-Orthodox State-religious State-secular Ultra-Orthodox State-religious State-secular

12.33∗∗∗ ∗ ∗


∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

(F = 12.33, p < 0.001). Post hoc tests showed that the differences between the ultra-Orthodox and the other two groups are significant (p < 0.001). In contrast, the difference between principals in state-religious and state-secular schools is not significant (p > 0.05). In other words, the burnout level of ultra-Orthodox principals was found to be the lowest of the three research groups (M = 1.93), while no significant difference was found between the burnout levels of principals of state-religious schools (M = 2.44) and state-secular schools (M = 2.78).

76

Table II. Intercorrelations among research variables Variable

2

3

4

5

1.00 0.35∗∗

1.00

0.07 −0.40∗∗∗

0.15 −0.37∗∗

1.00 0.17

1.00

−0.54∗∗∗

−0.49∗∗∗

0.08

0.56∗∗∗

0.20 0.32∗∗ −0.41∗∗∗

0.26∗ 0.59∗∗∗ −0.52∗∗∗

−0.12 0.08 0.16

−0.21 −0.35∗∗ 0.58∗∗∗

∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001.

6

7

8

1.00 0.21 −0.25∗

1.00 −0.46∗∗∗

1.00

1.00 −0.34∗∗ −0.44∗∗∗ 0.69∗∗∗


Degree of religiosity Meaning of educational work Perception of workload Perception of parents as demanding Perception of difficulties with teachers Perception of wages Perception of status Burnout

1


77

Hypothesis 2 was that a positive relationship would be found between the degree of religiosity and the meaning of educational work. As indicated by Table II, a significant positive correlation was found between religiosity and the meaning of educational work (r = 0.34, p < 0.01). In addition, the differences between the level of meaning of education work of principals in schools according to the three research groups was examined. The results of a one-way ANOVA analysis (see Table I) indicate a significant effect of degree of religiosity on the level of meaning of educational work (F = 6.06, p < 0.01). The level of meaning of educational work among the ultra-Orthodox school principals was found to be the highest among the three groups (M = 7.24), followed by the principals of the state-religious schools (M = 6.48). The state-secular principals reported the lowest level of meaning of educational work among the three groups (M = 6.09). Post hoc tests showed that, similar to the pattern of differences found regarding the burnout variable, in terms of level of meaning of educational work, significant differences were also found only between the ultra-Orthodox principals and the state-secular principals, and in contrast, no significant differences were found between the principals of ultra-Orthodox and state-religious schools, nor between principals of state-secular and state-religious schools. In addition, an examination of the relationship between meaning of educational work and burnout revealed a significant negative correlation (r = −0.52, p < 0.001). According to Hypothesis 3, we expected to find a positive relationship between principal’s degree of religiosity and role variables of perception of status and the perception of wages, and a negative relationship between degree of religiosity and the role variables of perception of workload, perception of difficulties with teachers, and perception of parents as demanding. The research findings partially confirmed this hypothesis (see Table II). A significant positive correlation was found between degree of religiosity and the perception of status (r = 0.32, p < 0.01), and significant negative correlations were found between degree of religiosity and perception of difficulties with teachers and perception of parents as demanding (r = −0.40, p < 0.001; r = −0.54, p < 0.001, respectively). However, significant correlations were not found between degree of religiosity and perception of workload (p > 0.05). In addition, ANOVA analyses were conducted for each of the role variables, by research group. 4.2.1. Perception of Status Table I shows that, in accordance with the hypothesis, significant differences were found in the perception of status of the principals in the three groups. UltraOrthodox principals view their educational role as one of greater prestige than state-secular and state-religious principals do (F = 7.06, p < 0.01). Post hoc tests indicated significant differences between ultra-Orthodox principals and those of state-religious schools and between ultra-Orthodox principals and those of statesecular schools. No significant differences were found between principals of

78


state-religious schools and those of state-secular schools. Furthermore, examination of the relationship between the perception of status and burnout level (see Table II) revealed a significant negative correlation (r = −0.46, p < 0.001). In other words, a negative relationship was found between perception of status and degree of burnout. 4.2.2. Perception of Wages As Table I shows, significant differences were found among the principals in the three groups, as hypothesized, in terms of perception of wages. The ultra-Orthodox principals reported higher satisfaction with their wages relative to the principals of state-religious and state-secular schools (F = 7.83, p < 0.001). Post hoc tests indicated significant differences between ultra-Orthodox and state-religious principals and between ultra-Orthodox and state-secular principals. No significant differences were found between the state-religious and state-secular principals. In examining the relationship between perception of wages and burnout level (see Table II), a negative significant correlation (r = −0.25, p < 0.05) was found; that is, a negative relationship was found between perception of wages and level of burnout. 4.2.3. Perception of Workload No significant differences were found in the perception of workload of the principals in the three groups (p > 0.05). That is, the hypothesis that ultra-Orthodox principals perceive their work as less burdening compared to principals of statereligious and state-secular schools was not confirmed. The examination of the relationship between perception of load and burnout level (see Table II) also indicated no significant correlation (p > 0.05). 4.2.4. Perception of Difficulties with Teachers Table I shows that, in accordance with the hypothesis, significant differences in perception of difficulties with teachers were found among the three groups (F = 21.36, p < 0.001). Post hoc tests also show significant differences between the three groups. In other words, the state-religious principals reported a higher level of difficulties with teachers, followed by the principals of the state-religious schools, while the principals of the ultra-Orthodox schools report the lowest level of difficulties with teachers. Examination of the relationship between the perception of difficulties with teachers and burnout level (see Table II) revealed a significant positive correlation (r = 0.69, p < 0.001), that is, a positive relationship was found between perception of difficulties with teachers and level of burnout. 4.2.5. Perception of Parents as Demanding Table I indicates that, as hypothesized, significant differences were found among the three groups in the perception of parents as demanding (F = 9.67, p < 0.001).


79

The ultra-Orthodox principals reported the lowest perception of parents as demanding relative to the principals of state-secular and state-religious schools. The post hoc tests show significant differences between ultra-Orthodox principals and those of the state-religious schools, and between ultra-Orthodox principals and those of the state-religious schools. Significant differences were not found between the principals of the state-religious and the state-secular schools. Examination of the relationship between the perception of parents as demanding and burnout level (see Table II) indicates a significant positive correlation (r = 0.57, p < 0.001); that is, a positive relationship was found between perception of parents as demanding and burnout level. Regarding the relationship between the meaning of educational work and the role variables, the following results were indicated (see Table II). In accordance with hypothesis 4, positive and significant correlations were found between the meaning of educational work and the perception of status and the perception of wages (r = 0.26, p < 0.05; r = 59, p < 0.001, respectively). Examination of the relationship between the meaning of educational work and the perception of difficulties with teachers and the perception of parents as demanding revealed, as hypothesized, significant negative correlations (r = −0.48, p < 0.002; r = −0.36, p < 0.01). However, a significant negative correlation was not found between meaning of educational work and the perception of workload (p > 0.05).

5. Examination of the overall model According to the model proposed in this research, the variable of meaning of educational work mediates the relationship between degree of religiosity and perception of role variables (status, workload, wages, difficulties with teachers, and demanding parents), and these influence level of burnout. Therefore, structural equation modeling (SEM) was performed (see Table II). 5.0.1. SEM The model proposed in the present research presents several variables that predict the dependent variable, that is, burnout. By means of SEM, we examined the level of overall prediction of each of the variables suggested in the model, and the exclusive, separate contribution of each variable to level of burnout. This method enables the examination of a series of simultaneous dependent relationships and of simultaneous relationships between dependent and independent variables. The overall model describes relationships between the variable of degree of religiosity (the independent variable) and the variable of the meaning ascribed to educational work (a mediating variable); and between the variable of the meaning ascribed to educational work and the role variables (mediating variables) and the variable of burnout (a dependent variable).

80


Examination of the fit of the model was conducted by means of the following variable of fit: In a χ2 -test to match the goodness of fit of the model, χ2 = 19.20 was obtained (with 12 degree of freedom, p = 0.084), which shows a good fit between the data and the model. The measures of fit for the general model were: index of goodness of fit GFI = 0.93 and index of lack of fit RMSEA = 0.066. According to Hypothesis 5, the meaning of educational work and the role variables mediate the relationship between degree of religiosity and level of burnout. In order to test this hypothesis, a SEM was performed, with several changes made in order to improve the results of the fit of the model. The changes made in the model were as follows. The channel of the degree of religiosity → burnout was removed from the original model (see Figure 2). Since a significant negative relationship, but no mediation was found between degree of religiosity and the perception of difficulties with teachers, we added a channel that did not appear in the initial model: degree of religiosity → perception of difficulties with teachers; the coefficient of the channel is −0.88 (p < 0.5). In addition, in the improved model, we added reciprocal effects between the three role variables: perception of workload, perception of difficulties with teachers, and perception of parents as demanding. The following results were obtained: significant reciprocal relations were obtained between the perception of load and the perception of difficulties with teachers (error covariance = 0.22, p < 0.05), between perception of load and perception of parents as demanding (error covariance = 0.21, p < 0.05), and between perception of difficulties with teachers and perception of parents as demanding (error covariance = 0.21, p < 0.05). The findings in the improved model also indicate significant relationships in the following channels: 1. Meaning of educational work → perception of status (0.29, p < 0.05). 2. Meaning of educational work → perception of difficulties with teachers (−0.23, p < 0.05). 3. Meaning of educational work → perception of parents as demanding (−0.22, p < 0.05). 4. Meaning of educational work → perception of wages (0.21, p < 0.05). The channels noted testify that the meaning of educational work mediates the relationship between degree of religiosity and all the role variables, with the exception of the perception of load. However, it was found that only two role variables – the perception of difficulties with teachers and the perception of parents as demanding – mediate the relationship between meaning of educational work and burnout. In contrast, the variables perception of status, perception of load, and perception of wages were not found to mediate the relationship between meaning of educational work and burnout. In addition, a significant and non-mediating relationship was found between degree of religiosity and difficulties with teachers.


81

Figure 2. The improved model: Structural Equation Model (SEM).

To sum up, the results of the SEM support the central research hypothesis, and indicate that when the school principal’s degree of religiosity was higher, the level of meaning of educational work was higher, and this influenced the perception of the role variables, so that the higher the level of meaning of educational work, the lower the difficulties with teachers and perception of parents as demanding, and the higher the perceived status and satisfaction with wages. However, the results indicate that only the variables of perception of difficulties with teachers and perception of parents as demanding mediate the relationship between the meaning of educational work and burnout. In other words, the relationship between religiosity and burnout is mediated by the meaning of educational work and two role variables – perception of difficulties with teachers and perception of parents as demanding.

82


6. Discussion School principals face very busy and highly unpredictable work days with many individuals and groups competing for their time. They are becoming increasingly faced with more pressure, more aggression, more change, and more conflict than ever before (Allison, 1997). Therefore, understanding burnout, and the identification of the sources of stress unique to the school principal’s job is critical to the improvement of principals’ functioning, in particular, and, as a result, the functioning of schools in general. The general finding that emerges from the present research is that the level of burnout of the ultra-Orthodox principals was found to be significantly lower than that of the state-religious and state-secular principals. This finding confirms and reinforces the point of departure of this research, according to which, following Lazarus’s (1991) cognitive approach, burnout is the product of cognitive appraisal processes that interpret the encounter with stressful events as burdening their resources and threatening their well-being. Accordingly, an appraisal of threat is a function of a specific set of environmental conditions that are appraised by a particular person with particular psychological characteristics. A range of personality characteristics including values and beliefs about oneself and the world helps to define the stakes that the person identifies as having relevance to well-being in specific stressful transactions. More specifically, the findings of the present research suggest that religiosity, which provides individuals with a system of values and norms founded on faith (Koening, 1995), influences the way in which principals appraise the meaning of their educational work and role variables as a source of stress, and this appraisal affects the level of their burnout. The research findings reinforce the approach of researchers who view religious conviction as a cognitive element that aids adjustment. In other words, religion is an effective value system for processing negative content and providing quick solutions in stressful situations (see e.g., McIntosh, Silver, & Wortman, 1993; Tomaka & Blascovich, 1994). According to these researchers, religion is a cognitive-organizational set of experiences that affects the way in which information is processed and behavior is organized, and may represent people’s basic assumptions about the world. Religion induces the processing of relevant information, and assimilates the stimuli in a way that is consistent and overlaps with the existing scheme, thus inducing the discovery of meaning and solutions when faced with unfavorable circumstances. The meaning ascribed to educational work is expressed in this research in the beliefs of the principals regarding the results of their educational work (positive and/or negative) and how these results serve them in their lives. In the present research, significant differences were revealed between the ultra-Orthodox principals and the state-religious and state-secular principals in terms of the meaning of educational work: the level of the meaning of educational work for ultra-Orthodox


83

principals was high compared to that in the other two sectors (state-religious and state-secular schools). In other words, the findings of the present research suggest that religious principals see their educational work as a central element of their lives, relative to other spheres of life; they identify with their jobs, find their work interesting and challenging, and feel committed to achieve the educational goals. The positive relationship between religiosity and meaning of educational works, which is clearly indicated, supports the conclusions of Hammer (1988) and Turnipseed (1994), who suggest that religion views work in the care-giving professions as a sort of mission, and therefore religious principals who do educational work that involves a type of care-giving find more meaning in their educational work than do non-religious principals. Moreover, the present research findings indicate a negative relationship between the meaning of educational work for principals and their level of burnout. These findings are similar to those reported in previous research (e.g., McIntosh, Silver, & Wortman, 1993; Pines, 1994), of a negative relationship between the meaning of work for workers and the level of burnout, so that the higher the level of the meaning of work, the lower the level of burnout. In other words, these findings may indicate that the meaning of work is an effective coping mechanism for school principals, which helps reduce their burnout. It seems that the meaning of educational work among the ultra-Orthodox principals, derived from their religious view of life, constitutes a resource for coping with job stress, as a sort of ‘emotional filter.’ This perception may constitute a source of strength in coping with the stress of the job, and thereby influence the level of burnout. In the present research, five role variables found in previous research (e.g., Whitaker, 1992, 1995; Friedman, 1995a; Pawlas, 1996) as central variables that affect principal burnout were investigated: perception of workload, perception of wages, perception of difficulties with teachers; perception of parents as demanding. With the exception of the perception of workload, all the other four role variables were found to be related significantly to the meaning of educational work and the level of principal burnout. In other words, the higher the level of the meaning of work for principals, the higher the status they associate with their jobs and their perception of their wages, and the less their difficulty with teachers and perception of parents as demanding. Similarly, the higher the perception of salary and status, and the less the difficulty with teachers and perception of parents as demanding, the less burned out the principals feel. However, the examination of the overall model of mediation shows that of the five role variables, only two (perception of difficulty with teachers and perception of parents as demanding) mediated the relationship between religiosity and the level of burnout. Thus, similar to previous research (e.g., Cooper & Kelly, 1993; Carr, 1994), the present findings show that the reciprocal relations between the principals and the immediate environment, which include ties and relationships with the teaching staff and community, have a central impact on the level of their burnout.

84


As for the perception of difficulties with teachers, it seems that the position of the principal as superior of the teachers, on the one hand, and as a colleague of the school teaching staff, on the other hand, is by nature a stressful role. Previous research (e.g., Cooper & Kelly, 1993; Gaziel, 1993; Carr, 1994) has shown that while principals expect teachers to respond to their instructions and the school rules of work, cooperate with their decisions, fulfill the tasks and roles they assign teachers to their satisfaction, and demonstrate concern, awareness and initiative regarding what happens in the school, the teachers aspire to create a separation between the organizational-managerial authority of the principals and educational authority. Teachers are interested in gaining autonomy in the classroom, academic freedom, and lack of intervention, while they also demand full support on matters of discipline and procedures, relations with other teachers, and support when dealing with the parent community. This situation arouses a feeling among principals that they cannot control what happens in the school by virtue of their legitimate authority; the situation is perceived by the principals as threatening their authority and has been found to be a central factor in their burnout, by both Sarros (1988) and Gaziel (1993). As for the perception of parents as over-demanding, it seems that the growing involvement of parents in the last decade has generated a change in the nature of the school as a social system, expanding their boundaries and their accessibility to the outside environment (Goldring & Rallis, 1993). The school is perceived today as an open system, which operates in reciprocation and cooperation with different factors outside of it, and the role of the principal in this new system is defined and colored differently than in the past. Principals must cope with parents who have become a moving force within the school and outside of it; they have to learn how to negotiate and to adapt to increasing interaction with parents. They must maintain the right balance between involvement of the community and the autonomy of the teaching staff (Goldring & Shapira, 1992). Therefore, the involvement of parents creates uncertainty and lack of clarity among principals. The greater the desire of the parents to participate in what happens at the school, the greater the threat to the liberty of the principals; thus the principals may sense a threat to their authority and their place in the hierarchy (Whitaker, 1992; Goldring & Rallis, 1993). However, the findings of the present research, as noted, indicate that the perception of difficulties with teachers and the perception of parents as demanding mediate the relationship between the variable of religiosity and the principals’ burnout level. More specifically, the principals’ degree of religiosity was found to influence the level of meaning of educational work, and the level of meaning of educational work influences the perception of difficulty with teachers and parent demands, which, in turn, influences the level of principal burnout. Thus the research findings, consistent with Lazarus’s (1991) approach, suggest that the ultra-Orthodox principals, who ascribe great importance to their educational work, perceive the encounter with stressful events (parents, teachers) as less threatening,


85

and this perception helps them cope more effectively with the pressures at work, and therefore, to be less burned out. In other words, consistent with Hammer (1988), and Turnipseed (1994), religious values may serve to interpret the meaning of potentially threatening events, as well as to formulate effective strategies for response. Believing in one’s mission or having a firm set of guiding principles may result in the individual defining nonessential (in the person’s interpretation) duties as pressure. It is argued here that the choice of a care-giving occupation, and the activity of caring for others may be a ‘calling’ (Pines & Aronson, 1981), therefore, intense belief in the meaning of the educational work may prevent the principal from emotionally compensating for potential stressors by defining them as non-threatening or even challenging. Hence, the research findings support the claim that the religious scheme is a cognitive element that helps reduce burnout. In other words, religiosity provides the individual with a schematic concept system (such as religious beliefs) that supplies an organized framework for granting meaning, which is a critical mechanism for coping with stress (Fichter, 1981). However, it seems that another variable, which was not examined directly in the present paper, but may mediate the relationship between degree of religiosity and burnout, is the dimension of individualism-collectivism. According to Sagy, Orr, and Bar-On (1999), the ultra-Orthodox society has a collectivist orientation. That is, it is characterized by normativism, homogeneity, and social harmony, a sense of intimacy within the group, and sharp distinction from other groups. Moreover, the society emphasizes the values of social support and a sense of a common fate, in contrast to individualist values, which stress personal achievement, autonomy, and self-reliance (Triandis, 1989). According to Sagy, Orr, and Bar-On (1999), not only does the religious ethos, in general, preach collectivism and solidarity; the Jewish world view allows and even requires support for others and involvement in the community, two variables that were found in earlier research as central moderators of the incidence of burnout (Gaziel, 1993; Pines, 1994). Therefore, further research should focus on the identification of additional variables that may mediate the relationship between religiosity and burnout, and thus enhance our understanding of how the variable of religiosity affects burnout. Finally, the differences that were found between the state-religious and the ultraOrthodox principals, and the lack of differences found between the state-religious and state-secular principals in all the research variables (with the exception of the perception of difficulties with teachers) may be the product of the social-cultural context of the state-religious sector. This sector lives mainly in a heterogeneous society, and therefore, unlike the ultra-Orthodox sector, is exposed in daily life to a non-religious society, lifestyle, characteristics, and world view. According to Gaziel (1993), the personal universe of values is influenced more by the broad social context than by the system of rules and intra-organizational characteristics. Therefore, the administrative separation between the state-secular and the statereligious education systems is not necessarily evidence of different value systems.

86


Finally, despite the noted contributions, the present study is not without limitations. First, the data in the study were collected from a single source – self-report of principals – and therefore, may be affected by method variance. The seriousness of this problem depends upon the research questions being investigated. In our model (based on Lazarus’s (1991) approach), perceptions are of theoretical interest and thus a single source may not be as critical an issue (Facteau et al., 1995). Second, the cross-sectional design of the present study raises the issue of causality. Nor could the data provide direct evidence of causal links between religiosity, the meaning of the educational work, the role variables, and burnout. Moreover, the suggested model in the present study assumed that actual job stressors were similar across schools and that religiosity produces a greater sense of meaningfulness of work, perceptions of better working conditions, and an indirect effect on burnout. However, an alternative explanation to the present results could be that perhaps the environments of orthodox schools were less stressful and that diminished burnout (Coleman, Hoffer, & Kilgore, 1982). Longitudinal research is needed in order to examine the causal linkages proposed in the model. Finally, the sample in the present study included 69 participants, which were all male and Jewish. Additional research is needed to determine whether the results of this study are replicated with a more diverse sample.

7. Summary and conclusions To date, the theoretical and empirical literature has dealt mainly with burnout among principals of non-religious schools, and very little with burnout among principals in the religious sector. The present paper is one of the few that investigates a religious population, comparing three groups of school principals: state-secular, state-religious, and ultra-Orthodox. The research findings that indicate a relationship between principals’ degree of religiosity and their level of burnout, and that this relationship is mediated by meaning of educational work and role variables, have both theoretical and practical implications. First, the results support Lazarus’s (1991) approach, which sees burnout as a product of the relationship between the individual and the environment, which the individual perceives as burdening his or her resources and threatening his or her well-being. Specifically, we found that the degree of religiosity incorporates a value system, which constitutes the meaning of educational work and acts as a perceptual ‘filter’ in the process of coping with job stress, thereby moderating the incidence of burnout. Second, the relationship found between degree of religiosity of burnout level underscores the need to study the phenomenon of burnout not only on the individual level, searching for intra-personal variables to predict burnout, but also indicates the need to understand the phenomenon in the broader, social-cultural context. In other words, it seems that burnout should be seen not only as a problem of individuals, but also as a phenomenon that occurs in a context. Third, from the practical perspective, the differences among


87

the principals from different sectors, both in burnout level and in the variable of meaning of educational work, stress the need to adopt a differential approach when developing programs to cope with burnout in each sector, according to the special needs of each population. Furthermore, the relationship found between the perception of difficulties with teachers and parents’ demands and burnout, calls for workshops to improve the working relations between teachers, parents, and other service recipients. On the system-wide level, care should be taken so that principal training courses include subjects of creating and cultivating staff, worker motivation, conflict management and solution, and coping with stressful situations. Finally, the research finding that the meaning of educational work mediates the relationship between religiosity and burnout indicates that finding meaning in work plays a critical role in reducing potential burnout. While the religious principals find meaning in educational work through religious values, it is important that the non-religious society finds ways to enhance the meaning of educational work through the relevant values of non-religious society.

References Allan, G. (1994). Traditions and transitions. Psychoanalytic Review, 81, 79–100. Allison, D.G. (1997). Coping with stress in the principalship. Journal of Educational Administration, 35, 39–55. Auerbach, A. (1982). The rabbis: chapters in art and philosophy. Jerusalem: Hebrew University (Hebrew). Becker, E. (1973). The denial of death. N.Y: Free Press. Ben Meir, M. & Kedem, P. (1979). A religiosity index for the Jewish population in Israel. Megamot, 24 (3), 353–362 (Hebrew). Ben Shlomo, N. (1995). The intervention of professional-cultural values in satisfaction with work at ultra-religious boarding schools. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel (Hebrew). Bergin, A.E. (1983). Religiosity and mental health: A critical reevaluation and meta-analysis. Professional psychology: Research and practice, 14, 170–184. Borg, M.G. & Riding, R.J. (1993). Towards a model for the determinants of occupational stress among school teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 6(4), 355–373. Burke, R.J. & Weir, T. (1980). Coping with the stress of managerial occupations. In C.L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds.), Current concerns in occupational stress. Chichester : Wiley. Caudron, S. (1997). The search for meaning at work. Training and Development, 51, 24–27. Carr, A. (1994). Anxiety & repression among school principals. Warning: principalship can be hazardous to your health. Journal of Education Administration, 32 (3), 18–34. Coleman, J., Hoffer, T., & Kilgore, S. (1982). Achievement and segregation in secondary schools: a further look at public and private school differences. Sociology of Education, 55, 162–182. Cooper, C.L. & Kelly, M. (1993). Occupational stress in head teachers: a national UK study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 130–143. Daley, M.R. (1979). Burnout: smoldering problem in protective service. Social Work, 24, 375–337. Dambo, Y., Levin, A., & Siegler, R. (1997). Ultra-religious and non-religious: problem-solving among students from two educational sectors. Megamot, 38 (4) (Hebrew). Drenth, P. (1991). Work meaning: a conceptual semantic and developmental approach. European Work and Organizational Psychologist, 1, 125–133.

88


Dubow, E.F., Pargament, K.I., Boxer, P., & Tarakeshwar, N. (1999). Religion as a source of stress, coping, and identity among Jewish adolescents. Paper Presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM. Edelwich, J. & Brodsky, A. (1980). Burnout: stages of disillusionment in the helping professions. N.Y.: Human science. Ellis, A. (1971). The case against religion. A psychotherapists view. N.Y.: Institute for Rational Living. Etzion, D. & Pines, A. (1981). Burnout and coping: a cross-cultural comparison. Paper presented at the International Interdisciplinary Congress on Women, Haifa, Israel, Dec. Facteau, J.D., Dobbins, G.H., Russell, J.E.A., Ladd, R.T., & Kudisch, J.D. (1995). The influence of general perceptions of the training environment on pertaining motivation and perceived training transfer. Journal of Management, 21, 1–25. Farber, B.A. (1983). Current trends, future directions. In B.A. Farber (Ed.), Stress and burnout in the human service professions. N.Y.: Pergamon. Fichter, J.H. (1981). Religion and pain: the spiritual dimensions of health case. N.Y.: Crossroad. Freud, S. (1961). The future of an illusion. N.Y.: W.W. Norton (Original work published, 1928). French, J.R.D. & Caplan, R.D. (1972). Organizational & stress and individual strain. In A.J. Morrow (Ed.), The failure of success. N.Y.: Amacom. Freudenberger, H.J. (1974). Staff burnout. Journal of Social Issues, 30 (1), 12(1), 159–165. Freudenberger, H.J. (1980). Burnout: the high cost of high achievement. N.Y.: Doubleday Garden City. Friedman, I.A. (1993). Burnout in teaching: the concept and its unique core meaning. Jerusalem, Israel: The Henrietta Szold Institute. Friedman, I.A. (1995a). School principal burnout: The concept and its components. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 191–198. Friedman, I.A. (1995b). Measuring school principal-experienced burnout. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 641–651. Gaziel, H. (1993). Occupational stress as experienced by educators. Its possible determinate: the Israeli setting. Curriculum & Teaching, 8(91), 81–90. Glock, C. & Stark, R. (1965). Religion and society in tension. Rand McNally, Chicago. Goldring, E.B. & Rallis, F. (1993) Principals of dynamic school: taking charge of charge (Chap. 1–2, pp. 1–34). CA: Corwin Press, INC. Goldring, E.B. & Shapira, R. (1992). Principals’ survival with parental involvement: The place of the school community in a value system. Tel Aviv University: School of Education. Hammer, A.L. (1988). Coping resources inventory: Manual. Palo Alto, CA: Counseling Psychologists Press. Harpaz, I. (1990). The meaning of work in Israel: its nature and consequences. N.Y.: Praeger. Harpaz, I. (1998). Cross-national comparison of religious conviction and meaning of work. CrossCultural Research, 32, 143–170, Cross-Cultural Research, 31, 171–200. Hathaway, W.L. & Pargament, K.I. (1990). The religious dimension of coping: Implications for prevention and promotion. In R.E. Hess (Ed.), Religion and prevention in mental health. Prevention in Human services, 9, 65–92. Higgerson, M.L. (1998). In my view: restoring hope and building leaders. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 35, 6–7. Hipwell, A.E., Tyler, P.A., & Wilson, C.W. (1989). Sources of stress and dissatisfaction among nurses in four hospital environments. British Journal of Medical Psychology March 62(1), 71–79. James, W. (1914). The self and the object world. N.Y.: International Universities Press. Kahn, R.L. (1987). Job burnout: prevention and remedies. Public Welfare, 36(2), 61–63. Katz, M. (1988). Georgia principals identify their most troublesome administrative problems: a 1988 survey. Georgia Educational Leadership Academy, Research Report.


89

Koening, H.G. (1995). Religion as cognitive schema. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 5, 31–37. Kremer-Hayon, L. & Hofman, J. (1985). Teachers’ professional identity and burnout. Research in Education, 34, 90–96. Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. N.Y.: Oxford University Press. Lazarus, R.S. (1996). Psychological stress and the coping process. N.Y.: McGraw Hill. Lazarus, R.S. & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. N.Y.: Springer Pub. Lee, R.T. & Ashforth, B.E. (1991). Work unit structure and processes and job related stressors as predictors of managerial burnout. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1831–1847. Levin, B. (1993). School response to a changing environment. Journal of Educational Administration, 31(2), 4–20. Mackler, J. (1996). A survivor’s guide to the principalship: overcoming the challenges. NASSP Bulletin, 80 (577), 84–89. Malony, H.N. (1991). Psychology of religion: personalities, problems, possibilities. Imprint Grand Rapids, M.: Baker Book House, Maslach, C. & Jackson, S.E. (1981). The measurement and experience of burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99–113. Marx, K. (1964). Originally published 1948. In T.B. Bottomore & M. Rubel (Eds.), Selected writings in sociology and social philosophy. Baltimor M.D.: Penguin. McIntosh, D.N., Silver, R.C., & Wortman, C.B. (1993). Religion’s role in adjustment to a negative life event: coping with the loss of a child. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 812–821. MOW-International Research Team. (1987). The meaning of work: an international view. London: Academic Press. Pargament, I.P. (1990). God help me: towards a theoretical framework of coping for the psychology of religion. Research in the Social Study of Religion, 2, 195–224. Pawlas, G.E. (1996). Year-round education: Florida principals’ perspectives. ERS-Spectrum, 14, 42–47. Pines, A.M. (1994). The Palestinian intifada and Israeli’s burnout. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 25, 438–451. Pines, A.M. & Aronson, E. (1981). Burnout from tedium to personal growth. N.Y.: Free Press. Rivlin, A. (1985). ‘Against everyone’: the pedagogy of the rabbis. Sifriat Poalim (Hebrew). Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. N.Y.: Free Press Sagy, S., Orr, E., & Bar-On, D. (1999). Individualism and collectivism in Israeli society: comparing religious and secular high-school students. Human Relations, 52, 327–348. Sarros, J.C. (1988). Administrator burnout: findings and future directions. Journal of Educational Administration, 26, 184–196. Savicki, V. & Cooley, E. (1987). The relationship of work environment & client contact to burnout in mental health professionals. Journal of Counseling and Development, 65, 249–252. Schvartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–69. Shefi, N. (1994). Socialization process of young nurses to the world of work. PhD Thesis, University of Haifa (Hebrew). Splete, H. (1975). Career development: theory and research. N.Y.: Grune & Stratton. Stone, A., Helder, A., & Schneider, M. (1988). Coping with stressful events: coping dimensions and issues. In L. Cohen (Ed.), Life events and psychological functioning: theoretical and methodological issues. Newberg Park, CA: Sage; pp. 182–210. Tomaka, J. & Blascovich, J. (1994). Effects of justice beliefs on cognitive appraisal of and subjective, physiological, and behavioral responses to potential stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 732–740.

90


Triandis, H.C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 506–520. Turnipseed, D.L. (1994). An analysis of the influence of work environment variables and moderators on the burnout syndrome. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 782–800. Wagner, D.A. (1983). Rediscovering ‘rote’: Some cognitive and pedagogical preliminaries. In S.H. Irvine & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Human assessment and cultural factors. N.Y.: Plemum; pp. 179–190. Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (T. Parsons, Trans.). N.Y.: Scribner’s (Original work published, 1922). Whitaker, K.S. (1992). Principal burnout & personality: Do relationships exist? Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Whitaker, K.S. (1995). Principals burnout: implications for professional development. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 9, 287–296. Williams, D.R., Larson, D.B., Buckler, R.E., Heckman, R.C., & Pyle, C.M. (1991). Religion and psychological distress in a community sample. Social Science & Medicine, 32, 1257–1262.

Biographical Notes Anit Somech is a lecturer of organizational psychology at the University of Haifa, Israel. Her research focuses on two major areas: administration and leadership, and work motivation. Specifically she investigates (a) micropolitics in organization – influence strategies of managers, and (b) team work – organizational citizenship behavior at the individual, team, and organizational levels. Nelly Miassy-Maljak received her M.A. in counseling from the University of Haifa, Israel. She taught counseling courses at the Faculty of Education, University of Haifa. Her research interests include psychological and social influences on principals’ burnout.