Concept of Well-Being for Teaching Staff and Students in Wales - Essay Example

Critically explore the relevance and application of the concept of well-being for teaching staff and within Further Education in Wales Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Teaching staff well-being as a concept 3 Relevance to Further Education teaching staff 6 Student well-being as a concept 8 Alternative perspectives: Maslow's hierarchy of needs 11 Well-being of teaching staff: Surviving, coping, thriving 13 Well-being of students: Surviving, coping, thriving 15 Applications and usefulness of well-being policies 17 Well-being policies as a search for higher meaning 20 Conclusions 21 References 22 Introduction The issue of staff and student well-being in FE in Wales is now not so much an issue to be solved, but a policy to be addressed. FE institutions are increasingly being encouraged to think about the health and happiness of staff and students proactively, rather than having to react to issues of poor health and unhappiness as they arise. The 'Healthy FE' initiative (Department for Business Innovation and Skills, 2008) is currently focussing on England only, but responsibility for well-being in FE for Wales is increasingly coming to the fore. Whereas FE has arguably been left out of much of well-being legislation in recent years, this policy signals a change in government attitudes. The independent nature of FE is potentially under threat as institutions are held to similar account as schools. Further to not creating negative situations for staff and students, well-being is increasingly being represented as ensuring conditions for staff or students. Throughout this assignment, it is argued that well-being is a series of balances which is difficult to achieve and must be addressed on an individual basis within a broadly supportive system of management. It is argued that well-being as a philosophy or policy has the potential to be more effective than existing deficit models where issues such as low morale, high workload and excessive stress are viewed simply as problems to be solved or obstacles to be removed. Teaching staff well-being as a concept Teaching staff face constant pressures to perform, and it is commonly accepted as a highly stressful job. As part of the debate over pay and conditions, the National Union of Teachers was potentially embarrassed in the media by the finding that the total work hours of teachers was less than an average worker when taken across the year and accounting for holidays (Baker, 2002). This effectively ended the debate over hours (that administration and marking was largely unpaid work), and focussed on more qualitative issues. These issues are related to well-being. For example, research commissioned by the National Union of Teachers found that the intensity of work was such that a teacher's blood pressure only returned to normal levels during the longer holidays (BBC News, 1999). Issues of stress and intensity had come into focus, and so the debate on pay and conditions was much less about the work teachers did and more about the effect that the work has on them. Cooper and Weinberg (2007) introduce their book with an argument which relates to this idea. Assuming that virtually every worker would leave their job if they were financially independent (e.g. won the lottery), Cooper and Weinberg then pose the question of whether one would swap some of that lottery cash for an extra ten years of life. This is the issue of well-being, that stressful employment can be viewed as selling your life away in two ways. Firstly, the time spent at work is so intense that there is no time for social activities or other enjoyment on workdays (and possibly a lot of leisure time is given over to recovery rather than leisure). Secondly, and less directly, the stress of working has a negative impact on one's health and can shorten life expectancy. In a world where everybody has not just won the lottery, this argument is still relevant. Life would equally be shortened and leisure opportunities impinged by a lack of money. As Cooper and Weinberg (ibid) argue, there comes a balancing point where employees decide how much of their time they are willing to sell to an employer so that they remaining time can be more enjoyable. This idea also holds true beyond the individual, for example a parent working hard to provide leisure opportunities for their children. In many cases, this decision is not made on a quantitative measure. One must choose full or part time work, and often there may not be that level of choice. The choice could be a full, intense, teaching load or no work. The balancing act then involves the more complicated issue of how one regards time at work. The less stressful and more enjoyable the time spent at work, the less an employee feels that they are selling their life an hour at a time. Positive experiences such as camaraderie and satisfaction can outweigh the loss of time. This highlights a flaw in a simple analysis of the 'winning the lottery' argument, that it is only relevant where leisure opportunities are more rewarding than working opportunities. Holmes (2005) makes the distinction between positive and negative stress, highlighting the difference that a little stress is needed to prevent boredom. Indeed, a boring life can be a stressful one. There is a difference between the lottery winner who 'does nothing' all day and the same person reliant on social benefits who does nothing all day. It may not just be that one is in a pool in Mauritius and the other is in a bedsit in Hull. The lottery winner is involved in stimulating leisure such as seeing the world or enjoying spa treatments. Positive stress satisfies the desire to feel useful and have purpose in life. In studying there is a clear aim of self-improvement, and an altruistic feel to the act of teaching. Even though there are extrinsic motivators (certificates or EMA payments to students, wages to teachers), it seems probable that there are other factors influencing staff and students. Imagining a college or sixth-form where there was no element of goodwill and only rational people working for grades or money conjures a different image to anywhere I have seen so far. Even schools in the most dire and deprived locations are united by a sense of hope that has nothing to do with certificates. This kind of satisfaction is part of the well-being issue, as to insulate staff and students from the lows of stress and over-work risks depriving them of the exhilarating highs of achievement and surmounting the odds. Relevance to Further Education teaching staff Just as the impact of poor well-being can be felt immediately and in less certain long-term ways at the individual level, so too is its impact at an institutional or systemic level. Holmes (2005. p.19) highlights the immediate effects of poor staff well-being, noting that working days lost to "work-related stress, anxiety and depression [have] doubled since 1995." This action suggests an assumption amongst employees that an 'all or nothing' work ethic is appropriate. Rather than managing a workload within comfortable limits and being occasionally overworked, employees are taking on more work and pressure than they can handle. This links back to the NUT study finding that teachers required the long holidays in order to reduce their blood pressure to normal levels (BBC News, 1999). Employees with only 20 days of annual leave do not have that opportunity. While the NUT study focussed primarily on schoolteachers, many of the stress factors are the same for FE. Teachers of short courses may also have additional strain from more student turnover, and FE teachers may find that they have fewer holidays than their school counterparts due to adult learning commitments. FE teachers in Wales are particularly vulnerable to these pressures because of limited opportunities for progression. Whereas counterparts in England may easily choose from a range of employment opportunities in a commutable area, teaching staff in Wales may feel more isolated and trapped with fewer local opportunities. Well-being and satisfaction cannot be achieved my moving onwards and upwards, and the prospect of leaving one's home and community for the sake of a career may be undesirable. It is arguably more likely that staff may feel trapped by limited options, that lacking a sense of freedom to move makes them resentful of the status quo. Student well-being as a concept In a similar manner to teaching staff, and perhaps much more so as they are still largely financially dependent upon families, FE students in Wales face much more limited options than their English counterparts. Lower employment or study choices may mean that students do not approach their studies with as many high ideals for self-improvement or learning for the joy of learning. A rational approach to performing tasks for the reward of qualifications may result in stress and other negative emotions. Particularly when grades are the only incentive to performance, they can appear a long way off when short-term frustrations and well-being issues become pressing. In schools, student well-being can often be understood as deficit modelled - schools encourage desirable behaviour and limit opportunities for well-being issues to develop. Compulsory physical education and guidelines for healthy meals are reflections of this attitude to well-being. Many private and boarding schools take this provision into FE under the banner of holistic education, although the learning culture they provide has so many varying factors that empirical research into the effectiveness of this approach over FE colleges has yet to be possible. An argument in favour of that approach can start to be made based on retention figures, but it is just as easily defeated by highlighting the differences in student intake. Aside from FE in school situations, student well-being has not received much attention until recently. Of course staff continue to care about students, but in a more trusting way - staff help to provide freedom for students to make their own choices, even if that is McDonald's for every meal. Encouraging exercise is largely limited to just that - encouraging. Time may be set aside in the traditional Wednesday afternoons, but there are few examples of FE colleges insisting that this time be spent on sport. The issue of student well-being in FE is therefore a much more careful balance than the issue of staff well-being, and one that is subject to comparatively little academic attention. Without allowing students to develop independence - possibly one of their prime factors for choosing an alternative FE provider to their school - well-being cannot truly be achieved. While the school methods of forcing good choices may be having success, students at FE require independence and the freedom to make and learn from bad decisions. There is a point reached by many if not all students where good advice only takes you so far. Eventually, every student will have to stay up all night drinking Red Bull to try to finish an essay - and this is an important, if not the only, way to truly learn to manage one's life and time effectively. To be micro-managed through every step of an essay as deadlines approach, as in compulsory education, defers this learning process to university or work where the stakes are sure to be higher. As part of preparing students for the pressures and demands of working life, they must be prepared for their own follies. Less obvious wellbeing issues, such as healthy eating and an active lifestyle, are more problematic at FE. Arguably, it is not the place of a teacher to tell a student that they have a lifestyle problem unless it is affecting their work. Whether a student chooses to eat lettuce leaves or battered Mars bars for breakfast does not feature in most curricula. However, in caring for the holistic nature of students the issue is now part of the remit of teachers in FE (and arguably the teachers themselves are also subject to the same scrutiny from their managers as lifestyle choices may impact on future performance if unchecked). Beyond providing persuasive reasons and options for students, however, FE does not - and perhaps should not - have a place in forcing well-being on students, as this is one of the main differences in learning to cope as an adult. Rather, a policy of making students aware and responsible for their own well-being is the most viable course with students held to account and encouraged to find ways to work within deadlines and see contributing factors such as diet and exercise as relevant to proper body and brain functioning. Alternative perspectives: Maslow's hierarchy of needs At the start of this assignment, a comparison was made between two hypothetical people who 'did nothing' all day (i.e. did not work). One was a lottery winner in Mauritius, the other was someone reliant on social benefits in Hull. Using Maslow's (1943) hierarchy can help to explain why these two people have different attitudes towards employment. With more of the safety and comfort needs satisfied to a higher level, the lottery winner is closer to seeking self-fulfilment and making decisions as to what they really want to achieve in life. The poorer counterpart is so pre-occupied with satisfying basic needs that they cannot focus on grander issues. To work would be an incremental improvement. Using this perspective for staff well-being, an income can only meet needs to a limited extent. Beyond the point at which comforts can be purchased, other needs become more important such as feeling valued, included, respected, etc. Focussing staff satisfaction issues on money may not help to solve the situation (although Rao [2006] argues that money also supplies a symbolic function by showing that an employee is valued and respected). A debate on staff well-being could be underpinned by Maslow's (1943) ideas to decide which needs are to be accommodated by employers through dedicated efforts, which are met by the employee using wages, and which are the sole responsibility of the employee regardless of their work. Applying the same perspective to student well-being is more problematic, as their needs are viewed in a more transitory manner (including a specific example from Maslow himself). Because students are enduring the 'work' of FE on a more limited scale than teachers, they can be more reasonably expected to sacrifice more basic needs in the quest for satisfying the self-fulfilment objective of education. There is a difference between the student who gives up their weekend to study and the teacher who gives up their weekend to mark. The teacher is doing so to meet other basic needs and avoid problems at work, the student is doing so to attain a higher need. However, the needs of students should not be ignored as FE can be regarded as the stage at which students are forming habits for adult life. If students habitually neglect their basic needs to satisfy longer-term or pressing objectives, then this becomes a problem when those objectives are constant and changing. Training students to recognise well-being as a consideration trains them to judge appropriate sacrifices. To use well-being guidance as a form of legislation could send the wrong message. Maslow's ideas can help students to differentiate between well-being rights and well-being needs, so that they can determine when a sacrifice is worth it. In this way, students should also be better able to detect infringements of well-being. For example, being asked to complete an essay at the last minute with a severe penalty for late submission which would require staying up all night could be argued an infringement of well-being rights as it forces the student to ignore basic needs. Applying a graded penalty system for late submission of the same article acknowledges well-being needs - the student determines the payoff between spending more time and losing a number of marks per day. Well-being of teaching staff: Surviving, coping, thriving Staff not surviving under the burden of teaching duties may exhibit this through poor teaching performance, missing deadlines, taking a large number of days off work, or relying on substances such as alcohol to 'get through the week'. Strain may begin to show outside of work, for example in personal relationships. This is an example of staff in need of help, where their work and personal life is being negatively affected and obstacles are becoming overwhelming. At the basic level of achieving well-being, staff are surviving. They are not so stressed and over-worked that they are unable or unwilling to come to work. They may feel the strain, but they have sufficient strength or willpower to overcome the obstacles. Their students are achieving reasonably well and observations are reasonably successful. Surviving may be achieved through use of prescription drugs such as anti-depressants. Staff at a FE provider meeting legal requirements could fit this profile. At the next level, the FE provider is helping to remove obstacles and staff are coping with pressures. There may be some concept of a work-life balance. For example, staff might adopt a 'work hard and play hard' mentality and be aware of the benefits of proper diet and exercise in managing stress. Coping staff feel sufficiently valued and that they have a purpose. Their students will most likely benefit from this and receive more dynamic lessons, enjoying a better learning climate. When asking for advice as to how to manage the pressures of studying, students can receive useful personal advice. With obstacles in perspective, staff are reasonably happy and will continue in this way quite contentedly. At the top level, the aspirational level, staff are thriving. They have enough of what Holmes (2005) terms positive stress to keep them interested. There is a challenge and a purpose, and they know that the challenge will be overcome and the purpose met. More than being content to teach, staff love coming to work. Even with greater financial independence, such staff are likely to wish to retain some involvement with the FE provider - they feel an integral part of the culture. Lessons are enjoyable and inspirational. This is the argument for not viewing well-being as a deficit model. Rao's research (2006) into what he calls employee loyalty showed a recurrent statistical pattern. Staff who were unhappy or had low well-being were severely affected. Staff who were very happy were not as exponentially better than average. That is to say, one has to work harder to achieve a positive rather than overcome a negative when it comes to employee well-being. However, Rao's research suggests that this increment is definitely worth the effort. The same efforts that turn an underperforming teacher average can also turn a well-performing teacher exceptional. Well-being of students: Surviving, coping, thriving Research such as Rao's (ibid) is less relevant to students, as well-being is generally measured in simpler terms such as examination performance or retention rates. So the student not surviving is to be found missing large amounts of classes, attending only to avoid punishment or financial penalties such as withdrawal of student support payments. They may be actively disruptive in class, reverting to school-level behaviours and making the job of the teacher and other students difficult. They may not be seeking help from their FE provider. They will either fail to reach their potential, or leave before they have the chance. At the surviving level, students will be attending and doing required work to a bare minimum. They may be struggling with fatigue or other concerns, such as struggling to balance a part-time job. Surviving students may not trigger concern, but on closer examination may admit problems or ask for help - particularly if they are facing deadlines or disciplinary meetings. They may share their problems only when they realise the extent of them. At the coping level, students will be meeting targets and contributing well to class. They appear reasonably happy. They are sufficiently motivated to do well and have balanced other commitments. They may be most obvious by how unobvious they are; these students do not demand much time or help, and when they ask advice they have a clearer idea of the problem and how the tutor can be of assistance. As with teaching staff, Rao's (ibid) diminishing returns finding presents the key question: is the improvement from coping to thriving worth the effort From a utilitarian perspective, the struggling and surviving students should receive the greatest attention. However, the thriving students also contribute to a culture in which they are role models for successful well-being management. Healthy, happy, exceeding expectations, enjoying education and having a clear sense of purpose for their learning - these students may produce themselves, but they are also more likely to be formed by a culture in which such behaviours are encouraged. Social Learning Theory (Ormrod, 1999) stresses the importance of role models and reinforcement of positive behaviours, and this is where policy can help. By providing FE learners in Wales with models and incentives for the short-term, they can begin to realise the massive long-term advantages to managing their own well-being in a proactive way rather than reacting retrospectively to every new pressure and demand. This point also illustrates how issues of staff and student well-being issues are interlinked. Happy staff will help to provide conditions and a model for happy students. Happy students will require less negative (e.g. disciplinary) and more positive (e.g. encouraging and praising) responses and behaviours from their teachers. As with any change, the short-term cost is difficult to accept (Kotter, 1996) - it appears ironic that more work is necessary to improve working conditions when teachers and students may be at their limit. A series for Teachers' TV (2006) highlighted how this was an important reality to face. Featuring an award-winning headteacher who forced his staff to go home at 4.30pm and spend time with their families or take exercise, the show emphasises how not only are individuals responsible for their own well-being but they are responsible for forcing it to happen. There will always be a short-term objective to be met, and a temptation to let it eat into one's "me" time. Indeed, concern for one's own well-being can appear selfish. However, the case study in this series highlighted how those short-term problems and obstacles are ever-present in different guises, and forcing staff and students to pay attention to their own health and happiness is repaid by having them meet future challenges more efficiently and effectively. Applications and usefulness of well-being policies The well-being of teaching staff can be understood in a positive or negative way. In the negative, or deficit, model well-being is thought of as a minimum threshold to be reached. Holmes (2005) writes that the main issue is not that teaching is a stressful occupation, but that it continues to be so. There is a case of standstill, that "long after we have identified what it is about the job that leads to negative stress, these are still issues that are having to be tackled (or not)". The key problem about well-being policies is that the payoff is long-term and hard to quantify. If the effect of improving well-being of staff is less burnout, this could take 30 years to show statistically. Shorter-term retention targets can be affected by short-term policies, such as pay deals. Equally, long-term benefits for students are unlikely to be detectable as it is the next sector - employers and universities - who would largely benefit from the labours of the Further Education sector. Further to this problem is an issue of priorities. It is a principle of employee behaviour in companies that people often need short-term incentives to achieve long-term goals (Kotter, 1996). Short-term targets for assessment, data collection, etc. will therefore always dominate the immediate consciousness, making it less likely that the long-term change (increased well-being) will happen. This is largely a product of well-being policies being recommended, that they are good intentions. Something to aspire to. However, to approach well-being issues from a negativist perspective could also generate more problems. The media is replete with examples of 'Health and Safety gone mad', where a policy that had good intentions (keeping people safe) became problematic when it became compulsory (demonstrating that all risks to public and employees have been controlled). To make it compulsory that teachers and students were not unduly stressed would create a wealth of problems for such FE staples as coursework, examinations, deadlines, tutorials, presentations, etc. The other extreme, where well-being is considered solely as an ideal, is equally unworkable. If it becomes another piece of policy to which only lip-service is paid, then it will be an ineffective policy. Holmes (2005) shows a compromise between these extremes: that managing well-being is done on a macro-level. While it could seem ironic to add to workload to reduce stress (one can already imagine the cartoon in The Times of a teacher under a mountain of paperwork with the phrase "fill in this form to show you're not stressed about filling in forms"), the idea has some merit. Holmes urges teachers strongly with the warning that "keep in mind that you have a responsibility to safeguard your health. Only you can know when you have reached your limit of tolerance" (2005. p.43). Transferring this principle to students as well as staff could have some merit. Already extension procedures exist in most institutions to grant deadlines in exceptional circumstances. Some higher education institutions have similarly imposed graded sanctions for missing deadlines, such as 5% per day late. This helps to encourage students to manage their workload and stress within a more flexible timescale, without having to worry whether their reason is "valid" or not (e.g. is there a difference between being incapacitated through flu or a hangover). The prospect of performance related pay, coupled with FE's increased flexibility to set pay and conditions compared to the school sector, could offer a similar option for staff where meeting deadlines results in slightly increased pay and missing them slightly less. Likewise, staff should be confident of support from managers just as students can expect from tutors - that it is recognised that personal factors can influence professional activities because teaching and learning are so heavily tied to notions of the person, particularly in the formative independence stages of FE. Well-being policies as a search for higher meaning As with Maslow's (1943) work, Vernon (2008) argues that the goal is not mere happiness or comfort but transcendence - a measure of self-fulfilment and meeting of destiny. To write this in a policy statement may appear trite, but it highlights how the policy should be an aspirational one. It is not about demonstrating that staff and students are not stressed, but helping staff and students to find their own fulfilment and motivations. Vernon's argument that well-being is an issue of seeking fulfilment and love can also be linked to a Freudian analysis of motivation; that while money, prestige, etc. are motivators they are ultimately a means to a more fulfilling end. Recognising this in policy form is to recognise the aspiration of the human condition. It may be helpful to think of well-being policies for FE in those terms. At the basic level is the deficit model, what was termed earlier in this assignment as 'coping'. This is aided by ensuring staff and students have sufficient time to do their work, do not suffer abuse or undermining behaviour, etc. At the level of thriving, however, the benefits for the whole system become apparent. The benefits come when staff and students are supported in their own quest for meeting their own goals and leaving happy lives (which admittedly still sounds trite, but Vernon uses the term 'love' which is even more open to derision). For example, students will realise greater ambition, staff will be more creative, fewer days will be taken sick - the benefits of a positive learning environment are clear. Conclusions The complex issue of ensuring well-being is all about balances. The balance between too much and too little work or pressure, the balance of a living wage with the time to enjoy it, the balance of enjoying studies and performing to full potential. It is a balance which can be exploited by the lazy while also failing to help the most industrious. As with managing many elements of working life, there is a strong argument for micro-management within broader principles - that management seeks to enable staff and students to help themselves rather than seeking to impose wellbeing. As well as being responsible for one's own well-being, everyone in the FE community is responsible for the well-being of others. A more holistic approach towards learning and teaching foregrounds consistency and recognises the benefits of high-quality interpersonal relationships in the workplace. As FE is traditionally the place where students first encounter the balance of increased personal freedom with increased personal accountability, it is arguably time that their teachers acted as appropriate role models by managing their workload and attitudes as part of their broader aims in life. While there will always be an element of 'coping' in any well-being discussion, staff and students should ideally be able to envisage their place on the path towards self-fulfilment. References Baker, M. (2002). Teachers: Stressed or stroppy BBC News. Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/education/mike_baker/1979892.stm [accessed 15:01:10] BBC News (1999). Classroom stress for primary teachers. Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/558196.stm [accessed 15:01:10] Cooper, C. and Weinberg, A. (2007). Surviving the Workplace. Thomson. Department for Business Innovation and Skills. (2008). Healthy FE programme launched to improve health and wellbeing of staff and students. Available from: http://www.dius.gov.uk/news_and_speeches/press_releases/healthy [accessed 15:01:10] Holmes, E. (2005). Teacher well-being. Routledge. Kotter, J. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press. Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396. Ormrod, J. (1999). Human Learning. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall. Rao, A. (2006). The Tao of Loyalty: Winning with Employees. Sage. Teachers' TV (2006). Time Management. WMV video file. Available from: http://www.teachers.tv/video/1515 [accessed 13:01:10] Vernon, M. (2008). Wellbeing. Acumen. Read More