Dr. Matthias Nübling

Transcription

1 Experiences of measurement and intervention in psychosocial risk with teachers in Germany. Difficulties and achievements in the process. Dr. Matthias Nübling Martin Vomstein, Ariane Haug, Inga Nolle, Alexandra Linder, Dr. Hans-Joachim Lincke FFAW: Freiburg Reserach Centre for Occupational Sciences GmbH Bertoldstr. 63 * D Freiburg Tel: (0761) , Fax: (0761) nuebling@ffaw.de Santiago de Chile, November 7th, 2017 Ministerium für Kultus, Jugend und Sport 1

2 Why assessment of psychosocial factors? Legal obligation (assess, prevent, document, evaluate risks) in any profession (lawsuit on this) Humanitarian aspect / responsibility for the health of employees Economic aspect (higher productivity, less sick leave) 2

3 Legal Obligation and economic/ humanitarian challenge Days of sick-leave by disease group (2004 = 100%) Mental diagnoses Sick-leave days in % Germany (AOK) Source: Fehlzeitenreport Cardiovascular Psyche (orange), Herz/Kreislauf Respiratory Atemwege (grey) Digestive tract (yellow), Muscolosceletal (blue) Injuries (green) Verdauung Muskel/Skelett Verletzungen 3

4 Assessment, improvement, evaluation Process and actors Survey T1 = Diagnosis Analyses: actions and survey results (T1, T2) Evaluation: Promising actions? Survey T2 = Evaluation report FFAW support systems Results in Schools, Enterprises, Organisations Interpretation Defining improvement fields and strategies Improvement actions = Intervention 4

5 Content of COPSOQ-teachers questionnaire Demands Quantitative demands (B1: 1-4) Emotional demands (B1: 5-7) Demands for hiding emotions (B1: 8; 9) Work-Privacy Conflict (B2: 1-5) Influence and possibilities for development Influence at work (B3: 1-4) Possibilities for development (B4: 1; B5: 1-3) Meaning of work (B5: 4-6) Commitment to the working place (B5: 7-10) Specific aspects for teaching staff Common educational vision (C1: 1-5) Lesson disturbances (C2: 1-7) Noise and voice strain (C3: 1-4) Opportunities to relax (C4: 1-4) Conflicts with parents / employers (C5: 1-3) Support by parents (C5: 4-6) Equipment (C6: 1-8) Conferences and meetings (C7: 1-4) Subject support (C8: 1) Verbal abuse (C2: 8) Physical Violence (C2: 9) 36 aspects Social relations and leadership Predictability (B6: 1-2) Role-clarity (B6: 3-6) Role-conflicts (B6: 7-10) Quality of leadership (B7: 1-4) Social support (B8: 1-4) Feedback at work (B8: 5-6) Social relations (B8: 7-8) Sense of community (B8: 9-11) Mobbing (single item) (B8: 12) Strain (Effects, Outcomes) Intention to leave (D1) Job satisfaction (D2: 1-7) General Health State (E1) Burnout (CBI) (E2: 1-6) Cognitive stress (E3: 1-4) Satisfaction with life (E4: 1-5) Additional aspects Insecurity at work (B9: 1-4) Trust and Fairness (B8a: 1-4) 5

6 Teachers / schools surveyed schools, teachers in region Baden- Württemberg, participation ( ), 2nd round schools, teachers in Region Nordrhein- Westfalen ( ) 500 schools in Europe (30 countries, 21 languages), 2011, perticipants Some smaller projects in ca. 100 schools in Germany and Austria > teachers, > schools 6

7 Performance of online survey 2. Performance survey school 1. Materials to school (link and password) 4. Data analysis FFAW T 1 T 2 T 3 3a. online-data 3b. Indiv. feedback 5. Comparison with reference data Inclusion in database 7. Improvement actions Data base: Profession specific reference values 6. report + CD (4 weeks) 8. Final report 7

8 Results and ideas for improvement on 4 different levels (for all aspects) a) single teacher: individual direct feedback b) single school: mean values compared to mean of school type or national or international mean c) subgroups comparisons (age, gender, ) d) all teachers (compared to other professions) -> improvement strategies on these 4 levels 8

9 a) Individual level 9

10 a) Individual feedback (personal result) Quantitative demands MN = 75, Reference = For all scales. Print, save or delete. 10

11 b) School level 11

12 Mean value (95% confidence interval) b) school report: comparison of school mean with reference values (national and Europe) Questionnaire Part B: Demands: Scale values school No Total ETUCE country x Total ETUCE Europe For all aspects school reports Quantitative demands (low=pos.) Emotional demands (low=pos.) Demands for hiding emotions (low=pos.) Work-Privacy Conflict (low=pos.) 12

13 c) Subgroup level 13

14 c) Subgroup comparison: principals, deputies and teachers without leading position split fy function no leading position deputy principal total principal department leader mean value Quantitative demands (low=pos.) Emotional demands (low=pos.) Scale Hide emotions (low=pos.) Work-Privacy Conflict (low=pos.) 14

15 c) Subgroup comparison: principals, deputies and teachers without leading position split by function no leading position deputy principal total principal department leader mean Conflict with parents (low=pos.) Support by parents (high=pos.) Equipment (high=pos.) Scale Quality of conferences (high=pos.) Professional support (high=pos.) 15

16 d) Total level 16

17 d) All teachers vs all professions (COPSOQ database Germany) Scale values: Demands mean (95% confidence intervals) Quantitative Demands (low = pos.) Teachers D total COPSOQ DB: all professions Emotional Demands Hide Emotions (low (low = pos.) = pos.) Scale Work-Privacy Conflict (low = pos.) 17

18 d) All teachers vs all professions (COPSOQ database Germany) Influence and development mean (95% confidence interval) Teachers D total COPSOQ DB: all professions 42 Influence at work (high = pos.) Poss. for development (high = pos.) 74 Meaning of work (high = pos.) Commitment (high = pos.) Scale 18

19 d) All teachers vs all professions (COPSOQ database Germany) Social relations and leadership 100 mean (95% Confidence interval) Teachers D total COPSOQ DB: all professions Predictability (high=pos.) Role clarity (high=pos.) Scale Role conflict (low=pos.) Quality of leadership (high=pos.) 19

20 d) All teachers vs all professions (COPSOQ database Germany) Scale: Insecurity at work mean (95% confidence interval) Teachers Germany German COPSOQ DB: all professions 32 0 Insecurity at work (low=pos.) Scale 20

21 Mean (95% confidence interval) d) All teachers vs all professions (COPSOQ database Germany) COPSOQ outcomes: teachers and all professions 16 intention to leave (low = pos.) job satisfaction (high = pos.) self rated health (high = pos.) Scale Teachers Germany German COPSOQ DB: all professions personal burnout (low = pos.) cognitive stress symptoms (low = pos.) satisfaction with life (high = pos.) 21

22 2 1 5 Low insecurity compensates (partly) high emotional demand and high WPC. Model: burnout, R²=0.47 Demands Quantitative demands (B1: 1-4) Emotional demands (B1: 5-7) Demands for hiding emotions (B1: 8; 9) Work-Privacy Conflict (B2: 1-5) Influence and possibilities for development Influence at work (B3: 1-4) Possibilities for development (B4: 1; B5: 1-3) Meaning of work (B5: 4-6) Commitment to the work place (B5: 7-10) Social relations and leadership Predictability (B6: 1-2) Role-clarity (B6: 3-6) Role-conflicts (B6: 7-10) Quality of leadership (B7: 1-4) Social support (B8: 1-4) Feedback at work (B8: 5-6) Social relations (B8: 7-8) Sense of community (B8: 9-11) Mobbing (single item) (B8: 12) 3 Specific aspects for teaching staff Common educational vision (C1: 1-5) Lesson disturbances (C2: 1-7) Noise and voice strain (C3: 1-4) Opportunities to relax (C4: 1-4) Conflicts with parents / employers (C5: 1-3) Support by parents (C5: 4-6) Equipment (C6: 1-8) Conferences and meetings (C7: 1-4) Subject support (C8: 1) Verbal abuse (C2: 8) Physical Violence (C2: 9) Strain (Effects, Outcomes) Burnout (CBI) (E2: 1-6) Additional aspects Insecurity at work (B9: 1-4) Trust and Fairness (B8a: 1-4) 4 22

23 But not everywhere (European ETUCE study) Questionnaire Part B, Scale: Insecurity at work (low=pos.) Country value Mean COPSOQ Europe Germany: 16 points Maximum Lithuania: 54 Minimum Norway: 12 points AT: Austria BE: Belgium BG: Bulgaria CY: Cyprus CZ: Czech Republic DK: Denmark EE: Estonia FI: Finland FR: France DE: Germany GR: Greece HU: Hungary IS: Iceland IE: Ireland IT: Italy LV: Latvia LT: Lithuania LU: Luxembourg MT: Malta NL: Netherlands NO: Norway PL: Poland PT: Portugal RO: Romania SK: Slovakia SI: Slovenia ES: Spain SE: Sweden CH: Switzerland GB: UK Country 23 Mean value (95% confidence interval)

24 Result levels = Action levels 24

25 4 levels of results, 4 levels for prevention strategies, improvement actions a) Personal level, single teacher What can I do? Healthy life in general, voice training (offered in BW), personal coaching (offered in BW), making myself strong (independent of workplace, no COPSOQ-assessment needed) Problem: outcome based, not affecting (adverse) workplace conditions b) Single school level What are the main improvement fields for this school? to be answered by principals and teachers together and documented. Problem: no time, no persons, (believe) no money (but often there is some, i.e. several schools with noise-control assessment and noise reduction in building!) only some schools working successful with results, no structured evaluation yet we do not know, what has been successfully tried 25

26 4 levels of results, 4 levels for prevention strategies, improvement actions c) Subgroup level (above school level) Comparison between subgroups, specific intervention programmes, i.e. anti-violence-training in NRW for teachers in schools for mentally handicapped pupils Problems. None, good allocations strategy. Improvement would be to select schools d) Teacher level (national or in Germany: regional level) Comparison to other professions, in NWR: specific programme against high WPC, in BW specific training of principals in leadership quality. Problems. None, improvement would be to select schools 26

27 Model: job satisfaction, BW, R²= Demands Quantitative demands (B1: 1-4) Emotional demands (B1: 5-7) Demands for hiding emotions (B1: 8; 9) Work-Privacy Conflict (B2: 1-5) Influence and possibilities for development Influence at work (B3: 1-4) Possibilities for development (B4: 1; B5: 1-3) Meaning of work (B5: 4-6) Commitment to the working place (B5: 7-10) Social relations and leadership Predictability (B6: 1-2) Role-clarity (B6: 3-6) Role-conflicts (B6: 7-10) Quality of leadership (B7: 1-4) Social support (B8: 1-4) Feedback at work (B8: 5-6) Social relations (B8: 7-8) Sense of community (B8: 9-11) Mobbing (single item) (B8: 12) Specific aspects for teaching staff Common educational vision (C1: 1-5) Lesson disturbances (C2: 1-7) Noise and voice strain (C3: 1-4) Opportunities to relax (C4: 1-4) Conflicts with parents / employers (C5: 1-3) Support by parents (C5: 4-6) Equipment (C6: 1-8) Conferences and meetings (C7: 1-4) Subject support (C8: 1) Verbal abuse (C2: 8) Physical Violence (C2: 9) Strain (Effects, Outcomes) Job satisfaction (D2: 1-7) Additional aspects Insecurity at work (B9: 1-4) Trust and Fairness (B8a: 1-4) 27

28 Important actors / key factors School authorities (ministry, regional and local authorities) Unions (often the ones pushing towards risk assessment) Professionals (school psychologists, occupational physicians, ) Valid, reliable, independent and anonymous measurement Results in detail and on different levels Priorities are based on data! Allocation of resources! Support systems helping schools Evaluation of improvement actions (re-assessment) 28

29 Thank you for your attention! ETUCE survey Still warm : if you want to try: teacher-copsoq.eu login: ETUCE, Password: test123 29

30 Thank you for your attention! International Network 30