View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Mitigating Secondary Traumatic Stress in Preservice Educators: A Pilot Study on the Role of Trauma-Informed Practice Seminars

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Mitigating Secondary Traumatic Stress in Preservice Educators: A Pilot Study on the Role of Trauma-Informed Practice Seminars
Language: English
Authors: Castro Schepers, Ofelia (ORCID 0000-0001-5255-4812), Young, Kathryn S.
Source: Psychology in the Schools. Feb 2022 59(2):316-333.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Preservice Teachers, Trauma, Educational Practices, Stress Variables, Coping, Correlation, Seminars, Stress Management, Teacher Education Programs
Geographic Terms: Colorado (Denver)
DOI: 10.1002/pits.22610
ISSN: 0033-3085
Abstract: In this study, explore secondary traumatic stress (STS) in preservice teachers (PSTs) and if trauma-informed practices (TIPs) have the potential to mitigate STS. We hypothesize that PST who have had consistent and extensive exposure to TIP will experience lower levels of STS in their student teaching or residency than students who have not had this exposure. Thirty-four PST participated in the study. Twenty-one were women, 12 men, and 1 identified as nonbinary. Their average age was 31 years. Participants were 73.1% Caucasian. A survey design was used. Surveys went out to all Metropolitan State University of Denver School of Education Students. Early results demonstrate a positive causal relationship between an increase of TIP seminars and decreased STS. By integrating TIP seminars and principles into teacher preparation programs, new teachers will enter the workforce better equipped to address their own needs and the needs of the children and families they serve.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1323613
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEExgsunL0WwZhAm9huEOwfAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDNxMAElwRfoW1F7BUQIBEICBmyn1X5C2I3maZ9rMZsm8msWVOb8OlloSd7H70g-f6Ng1hC4vm-TTjUe1bEAnjgE29TWErKCuebP292q8fEFs65W1Jw9epPtyXT4xh-m6UuQFxCwAnTK1IAdkkWvUX9ZyNf1NKVPh9g3jZPCYUFsZCAe6C2a-U7zUpGY7EBiCkl9Ih0huT14CqSi548nEAwW4MgypDCtY7-OfIzvl
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0154580212;pis01feb.22;2022Jan12.02:21;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0154580212-1">Mitigating secondary traumatic stress in preservice educators: A pilot study on the role of trauma‐informed practice seminars </title> <p>In this study, explore secondary traumatic stress (STS) in preservice teachers (PSTs) and if trauma‐informed practices (TIPs) have the potential to mitigate STS. We hypothesize that PST who have had consistent and extensive exposure to TIP will experience lower levels of STS in their student teaching or residency than students who have not had this exposure. Thirty‐four PST participated in the study. Twenty‐one were women, 12 men, and 1 identified as nonbinary. Their average age was 31 years. Participants were 73.1% Caucasian. A survey design was used. Surveys went out to all Metropolitan State University of Denver School of Education Students. Early results demonstrate a positive causal relationship between an increase of TIP seminars and decreased STS. By integrating TIP seminars and principles into teacher preparation programs, new teachers will enter the workforce better equipped to address their own needs and the needs of the children and families they serve.</p> <p>Keywords: secondary traumatic stress; teacher preparation; trauma‐informed care; trauma‐informed practice</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-2">INTRODUCTION</hd> <p>As families, teachers, and students navigate returning to schools after shared traumatic events such as Columbine, Sandy Hook, and most recently the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic, stakeholders are often met with support systems to address and mitigate the effects of trauma. There has been less attention to and understanding of addressing the needs of students who experience insidious forms of trauma, such as poverty, community violence, racism, and trauma caused by schools (Alvarez, 2020) and the effects of both types of trauma on their teachers. The traumas that students experience impact their teachers, too.</p> <p>Societal standards have positioned teachers as more caring, loving, and kinder than an average person outside of education. This expectation is often met by a desire teachers have to provide this type of emotional support. This expectation is then reinforced through research that shows students who can connect with their teachers have more substantial academic and social outcomes (Chang, 2009; De Royston et al., 2017; Gallagher et al., 2019; Martin, 2020). Further, scholars and educators argue that emotional and empathetic engagement is necessary to foster a welcoming environment for students in classrooms (Barr, 2016; Taylor, 2020).</p> <p>Since the early 1900s, teachers have expressed signs of stress described as "drain[ed] ... vitality," and health problems directly related to their profession (Tyack, 1974, p. 258). Being a part of the lives of students who experience traumatic events (both inside and outside of school) adds a layer of stress and trauma on teachers that has not been extensively explored (Borntrager et al., 2012; Caringi et al., 2015; Motta, 2012). Research has found that over 50% of school personnel showed signs of primary and secondary trauma, a rate that increased for those who lacked structural support through peer mentorship (Borntrager et al., 2012; Caringi et al., 2015). This "emotional duress that results when an individual hears about the firsthand trauma experiences of another" (National Child Traumatic Stress Network [NCTSN], 2020) is secondary traumatic stress (STS).</p> <p>Teachers serve a unique role for students in that they spend extended periods with students and serve as buffers for students' lived experiences, including those who have experienced traumas (Motta, 2012). This prolonged exposure renders teachers penetrable to the effects of STS. Though there is a myriad of research into various types of stress in teaching, studies that focus specifically on STS are in their infancy. We have found none that examine STS in the preservice population. The importance of this study is paramount. Teacher education programs often fail to prepare preservice teachers (PSTs) to cope with the distressing issues that arise from caring so genuinely for others (Borntrager et al., 2012; Tehrani, 2007, 2010).</p> <p>In this study, we explore the dimensions of STS in PSTs, an innovative strand of research in this field. This study aims to understand the presence of STS in preservice educators who are working closely in classrooms with teachers and students while concurrently understanding how attending TIP seminars may impact STS levels in this population.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-3">Theoretical grounding</hd> <p>Research on STS in psychology can help uncover important aspects of the cost of working in a helping profession. Research has shown that professionals exposed to others' traumas tend to describe similar symptoms to those directly affected by the trauma (Tehrani, 2007).</p> <p>Secondary trauma encompasses the spread of trauma reactions from those affected by trauma to those in close contact with the distressed persons (in this case, children). Research shows that individuals that have close contact with traumatized victims are at risk of vicarious trauma or emotional exhaustion, these individuals are identified as school mental health workers or social workers, but little has been done to consider teachers who spend extended time with students. Those who experience secondary trauma do not have to experience the trauma directly. The mere act of hearing students' traumas can cause teachers to experience secondary trauma (Motta, 2012).</p> <p>Secondary traumatization often manifests through common changes such as lack of time and energy for self‐care, increased cynicism, sadness, and seriousness in helping professions (Tehrani, 2007). Other terms that capture similar symptoms but are not interchangeable with STS are compassion fatigue, vicarious trauma, compassion satisfaction, and burnout (Borntrager et al., 2012). The symptoms of STS, which are said to mirror the symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, currently reported in the research are avoidance, negative changes in thinking and mood, emotional reactions, and intrusive memories (Borntrager et al., 2012; Figley, 1995). Tehrani concluded that STS is an occupational hazard, and teachers who are more vulnerable and empathetic tend to have a higher risk of experiencing STS.</p> <p>The Mayo Clinic symptoms of STS, as a parallel process to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (Sprang et al., 2018), included the symptoms above and the examples featured in Table 1 below.</p> <p>1 TableSymptoms and examples of symptoms of STS</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th align="left">Intrusive memories</th><th align="left">Avoidance</th><th align="left">Negative changes</th><th align="left">Arousal</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Recurrent, unwanted distressing memories of the traumatic event</td><td align="left">Trying to avoid thinking or talking about the traumatic event</td><td align="left">Negative feelings about yourself or other people</td><td align="left">Irritability, angry outbursts, or aggressive behavior</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Reliving the traumatic event as if it were happening again (flashbacks)</td><td align="left">Avoiding places, activities, or people that remind you of the traumatic event</td><td align="left">Inability to experience positive emotions</td><td align="left">Always being on guard for danger</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Upsetting dreams about the traumatic event</td><td /><td align="left">Feeling emotionally numb</td><td align="left">Overwhelming guilt or shame</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Severe emotional distress or physical reactions to something that reminds you of the event</td><td /><td align="left">Lack of interest in activities you once enjoyed</td><td align="left">Self‐destructive behavior, such as drinking too much or driving too fast</td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td align="left">Hopelessness about the future</td><td align="left">Trouble concentrating</td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td align="left">Memory problems, including not remembering important aspects of the traumatic event</td><td align="left">Trouble sleeping</td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td align="left">Difficulty maintaining close relationships</td><td align="left">Being easily startled or frightened</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note</emph>: Further information can be found at their website <ulink href="http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/post-traumatic-stress-disorder/basics/symptoms/con-20022540">http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/post-traumatic-stress-disorder/basics/symptoms/con-20022540</ulink>.</p> <p>This exposure to the traumas that students experience and bring to school daily (both inside and outside the school) adds a layer of stress and trauma on teachers that has not been extensively explored (Borntrager et al., 2012; Motta, 2012; Stevens et al., 2020). While other studies have explored stresses that impact teachers directly, in this study, we investigate STS, which pays particular attention to the stress caused by hearing about students' trauma. STS has been shown to cause high levels of burnout in other helping professions (Figley, 1995), and in research studies, teachers' scores were similar to those of social workers who regularly worked with individuals experiencing trauma (Borntrager et al., 2012). Given these understandings, it is pertinent to explore how trauma impacts stress levels and potential burnout and turnover in teachers, specifically in PSTs.</p> <p>There have been four studies that explore STS in teaching and school contexts. Stevens et al. (2020) examined the effects of lockdown drills on teacher STS. They found that although levels of STS in relation to school shootings were low and positively skewed, 16% of teachers reported levels of STS that merited additional concern. These studies found a need to ensure that tools that capture STS and similar phenomena in school personnel are available for future research (Motta, 2012). Specifically, Motta's work highlighted the weaknesses of the scales used to assess STS in children and school personnel. Further, the literature review findings also highlighted the lack of efficacy of the interventions that were implemented for STS. Other prominent research found that over 50% of school personnel showed signs of primary and secondary trauma, which was much higher for those who lacked structural support through peer mentorship (Borntrager et al., 2012; Caringi et al., 2015). Identifying STS in the teacher population encouraged our further investigations into the broader impacts of STS on PSTs.</p> <p>The study conducted by Borntrager et al. (2012) had 229 participants across six schools in the region. Their research findings showed a tension between the presence of STS and the presence of job satisfaction. Borntrager et al. (2012) suggest that most school staff members experienced a significant amount of stress related to the trauma. These findings highlighted a need to continue to research and understand the role STS has for school staff. They recommended that educators have access to on‐the‐job secondary trauma management systems, similar to that available to professionals in other helping professions. These management systems have proven to support staff in other helping professions in mitigating STS and other burnout measures. However, they have not yet been institutionalized across school systems.</p> <p>Current research in this area explores the presence of STS in in‐service teachers and the factors associated with STS. This study, which is in its infancy, has been crucial in understanding this phenomenon. Further, researchers such as Motta (2012) indicated a gap in the tools used to explore STS, highlighting that all instruments are specific to relationships between providers and clients or patients. Educators are in a unique position in that they do not fit the provider‐client relationship; it is a different sort of relationship with students. Further, there have been no studies to date that explore STS in preservice education and the use of trauma‐informed practice (TIP) seminars and knowledge gained as possible mitigating factors. This study aims to address that particular gap in the studies that have used these tools and to build off of the strengths of these studies.</p> <p>By integrating TIP seminars into teacher preparation, the hope is that new teachers enter the workforce better equipped to address their own needs and the needs of the children and families they serve. These practices also empower teachers to find alternatives to discriminatory, punitive discipline that contributes to the disruption of student education. These learning opportunities reduce the likelihood that teachers will have to gain such fundamental knowledge "on the fly" after employment. They will not have to struggle to fit TIP into other professional development priorities.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-4">Research questions</hd> <p>The following research questions were examined in this pilot study:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. What levels of Secondary Traumatic Stress do preservice educators who are in their final placements (student teaching or residency) experience?</item> <p></p> <item> a. Do these levels vary by preservice teacher demographics?</item> <p></p> <item> b. Do these levels vary by school demographics?</item> <p></p> <item> 2. Do levels of Secondary Traumatic Stress vary for preservice educators based on attending Trauma‐Informed Practices Seminars?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0154580212-5">METHODS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0154580212-6">Context</hd> <p>In June 2018, staff from a national mental health non‐profit organization introduced the idea of integrating TIPs into teacher education to leadership in the School of Education (SOE) at University A. Each year Metropolitan State University of Denver (MSU Denver) prepares 300 PreK‐12 new teachers from diverse backgrounds to enter the teaching profession all over the state, including public, private, and parochial schools. Metropolitan State University of Denver and Resilient Futures (RF) began collaborating to provide seminars to current students preparing to become teachers.</p> <p>The RF staff hold expertise in trauma and resilience, have experience working directly with school principals, classroom teachers, and other personnel in high‐need schools with diverse student bodies. RF brought practicing teachers to the seminars to share their experiences with TIP in schools so that PSTs heard various perspectives. The RF psychologists initially shared the two‐part seminar sessions related to TIP content multiple times, evenings and weekends for student teachers and residency students.</p> <p>Student program fees provided pilot funding for seminars delivered by RF that addressed childhood trauma, teacher stress, and secondary trauma. MSU Denver PSTs and some faculty attended these seminars. The objectives of these initial seminars were to build core competencies related to TIP and teacher resilience among PSTs. Year 1 focused on students in their last year of teacher preparation—some students were completing 16‐week student teaching, others were completing year‐long residency programs. RF asks participants to complete questionnaires after each seminar to see what participants learned about TIP from the seminars and feeds this information back to MSU Denver.</p> <p>The goal of these seminars is to ensure every SOE student graduates with the ability to demonstrate the competencies of TIPs in their future classrooms and school settings. Their questionnaires indicated that preservice educators overwhelmingly felt that learning about TIP helped them improve their self‐care and their work with teachers, students, families, and other professionals. Respondents also indicated growth in learning about complex trauma, the biology of trauma, understanding TIPs, cultural humility, implicit bias, intersectionality, reducing deficit thinking, racial stress, and the school to prison pipeline. The second goal of this program and the primary goal of this paper is to determine if preservice educators who attend these TIP professional development seminars have a different level of STS than those who do not attend the seminars.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-7">Procedures</hd> <p>To capture a randomized sample of preservice educators in the survey responses, we distributed the Teacher Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (TSTSS) via email to all students that MSU Denver invited to participate in the TIPs seminars. This group consisted of 363 preservice educators in the last two semesters of their teacher preparation program at MSU Denver. Following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved protocol, we emailed TIP participants the TSTSS one additional time, explicitly pinpointing these students from email logs collected from the TIP seminars.</p> <p>The TSTSS was disseminated to preservice educators using the Qualtrics software. We scheduled a follow‐up email to be sent every 2 weeks for an additional three attempts. The emails were sent to all 363 students a total of four times. The final sample consisted of preservice educators in which 14 had not attended any TIP seminars, 9 who had attended at least one TIP seminar, and 11 who had attended two or more TIP seminars. The response rate was roughly 10%.</p> <p>There was a total of 22 surveys that were returned incomplete. The survey's timing, the use of Qualtrics software to deliver the emails versus our MSU Denver emails, and the content of the survey questions (asking about experiences around student trauma) may have led to some partially completed surveys. We eliminated cases that were more than 50% incomplete and did not use any of the analyses. The largely incomplete cases accounted for 16 of the surveys. Cases with minimal missing data points were analyzed where possible. The small survey sample and missing items did not interfere with the chosen method of data analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-8">Participants</hd> <p>Of the 34 participants with complete surveys, 21 were women, 12 men, and 1 identified as nonbinary. Their average age was 31 years. Participants were primarily Caucasian (73.1%). Although all of these people are preservice educators, many already had experiences in schools in other roles. Years of participants' experience in schools varied from novice to veteran, and 71% had less than 10 years of experience, 15% possessed between 10 and 20 years of experience, and 9% boasted more than 20 years of experience in schools in various capacities (paraprofessionals, teacher's assistants, etc.). Two participants failed to address their years of experience in classrooms. Grade level was also well represented, with 41% who taught primary through Grade 5, 21% taught Grades 6–8, 18% taught Grades 9–12, and 21% taught in K‐12 and K‐8 settings (other).</p> <p>The school environments in which preservice educators were placed at the time that the survey was conducted varied between charter (6%), parochial (18%), and public schools (76%). The public schools that were represented captured both schools that were identified as Title I (44%) schools and those that were not (32%). Title I schools receive federal funding if schools have a certain percentage of students who qualify for free and reduced lunch.</p> <p>Participants identified if they had participated in the optional TIPs seminars offered free of cost as students at MSU Denver SOE. Nineteen PSTs had not participated in any of the TIP seminars, and the remaining participants had attended one or more seminars (9 having attended one of the seminars and 11 having attended two or more).</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-9">Instrument</hd> <p>We used an unpublished survey named the "Teacher Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale." Researchers validated the survey instrument via an initial pilot study that they conducted in Fall 2015. It was developed by drawing on studies in the field of psychology on STS and adapting these to the field of education by making the wording more appropriate for educational settings and educators in particular (Bride et al., 2004). This section will provide detailed insight into how the unpublished survey was validated.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-10">Construct map development</hd> <p>We used Wilson's (2004) approach for conceptualizing a construct. The construct measured STS in public school K‐12 teachers. In defining this construct, we relied on Motta's (2012) work reviewing STS in children. He described secondary trauma as the "transfer and acquisition of negative affective and dysfunctional cognitive states due to prolonged and extended contact with others, such as family members, who have been traumatized" (2012, p. 257).</p> <p>In operationalizing this definition, the medical field and current research aided in defining observable symptoms of STS. Salston and Figley (2003) found that symptoms of STS often mimic posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. These symptoms include respondents indicating that they experience intrusive memories, avoidance, arousal, and negative changes in thinking and mood. These mirrored those from the Mayo Clinic seen in Table 1.</p> <p>We created a continuum of STS (Figure 1) based on the interpretation of two surveys—the PROQOL and the STS Scale. Both surveys are primarily used in psychology and were used in the two studies conducted on school personnel (Bride et al., 2004; Stamm, 2005). These surveys indicated that the three subscales on the scale move together, which mirrored the findings of Ting et al. (2005) which found that the subscales were not individual attributes. As the scales move up, this indicates a higher level of experienced STS. However, both of these scales left out the construct of negative changes in behavior. According to Bride et al. (2004), who relied heavily on the work of Figley (1995), "negative changes in behavior" can also be a symptom of burnout, and for their work, they decided to leave it out of the survey. The authors of the PROQOL also left out negative changes in their survey but included various other constructs that they measured in their survey. Of these constructs, one captures burnout. The TSTSS that was used for this study measured all four symptoms of STS.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01feb22/pits22610-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits22610-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 Construct map continuum of secondary traumatic stress" /> </p> <p></p> <p>The construct map (Figure 1) describes the four levels ordered from low to high and matched to the 4‐point Likert‐scale response categories. Each level addresses the four subscales and how these subscales change throughout the levels: intrusion, avoidance, negative changes, and arousal as defined through the symptoms in Table 1. A respondent at the highest level of the construct would self‐report <emph>always</emph> experiencing symptoms of intrusion, avoidance, negative changes, and arousal when considering their experiences with students who have been traumatized—indicating that all four subscales are correlated and move in the same direction.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-12">Survey item development</hd> <p>In developing items for the survey instrument, we explored two surveys that have been used with success in the psychology field in determining STS. The original surveys used no reverse coding, and both chose not to include negative changes in mood or behavior. One survey asked participants 17 questions, while the other was a 30‐question survey, but only 7 questions related to secondary traumatization. The responses ranged from 1 to 5 in Likert‐form with 1 = never and 5 = very often. In the STS Scale, some items were not stressor specific but instead conveyed general negative emotions and effects associated with traumatic stress. Some of the items were developed to specifically identify client exposure as an identified stressor. Scoring for both surveys was obtained by summing the endorsed frequency for each subscale and the total STS scale. There are no cutoff scores for either survey.</p> <p>We then compared the items in each survey to the symptoms that had been defined in the clinical/medical field. Based on this comparison, the items were adjusted to fit an educational setting with the purpose of relating the items to the lives of teachers and school personnel when considering their work with students. Some of the items changed very little as previous authors related directly to symptomology to generate their own questions. With this method, 39 items were developed and separated by subscale.</p> <p>After the items were developed, the instrument was sent to an expert education panel to ensure that the survey met the needs of teachers. It was then sent to a psychology clinician in the field for direct feedback on the construct. The feedback that was received from the panel had common themes. All who were part of the panel requested the use of reverse items. Reverse item usage aligns closely with Weems and Onwuegbuzie (2001) who discussed the need to vary the questions to ensure respondents did not merely check the same column without reading every question. The panel also suggested a reduction of questions that were not directly associated with student–teacher interaction.</p> <p>Twenty‐eight Likert‐style statements designed to measure levels of STS in teachers resulted from this process. Each of the questions attended to one of the four categories presented in Table 1 (intrusive memories, avoidance, negative changes, and arousal). Ten demographic questions that gave pertinent information about the respondents to help inform possible predictors of STS were included as well. Cronbach's alpha was 0.92, which is high for an attitudinal test and shows internal consistency. The initial survey was created using Qualtrics software and disseminated through the software as well. For this study, we added additional demographic questions that gave insight into the specifics of preservice educators' experiences.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-13">Instrument development and analysis</hd> <p>Overall, the analysis used to validate the scale relied on methods from the Classical Test Theory (CTT) and Item Response Theory (IRT). Both item and person‐level analyses were conducted. The following sections will discuss the findings from the CTT.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-14">CTT: Item average and item difficulty</hd> <p>The average score for each item and the <emph>p</emph>+ values were calculated. The <emph>p</emph>+ values are the probability of respondents answering the question at the highest level. The average item score was 2.19, indicating that, on average, teachers that were part of the survey validation had not experienced significant levels of STS. <emph>p</emph>+ values ranged from 0.3 to 0.83, which provides a good range of difficulty of questions. The average <emph>p</emph>+ value was 0.55 with a standard deviation of 0.16.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-15">Item correlation</hd> <p>The next step was to analyze the item correlations with the total score without the item included. The higher the correlation between the item and the survey instrument, the more likely it is that a person who endorsed the item positively scored higher on the total survey. The results are shown in Figure 2.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01feb22/pits22610-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits22610-fig-0002.jpg" title="2 Item correlation" /> </p> <p></p> <p>One unique but explainable finding was that Item L ("I purposefully avoid finding out all the details of my students' lives") was negatively correlated with the item total. This construct is typically seen and worded for social workers and therapists and related to not learning about their clients' lives. It is likely that teachers would respond differently to this because knowing the lives of their students is crucial to connection in the classroom.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-17">Test reliability</hd> <p>To assess the instrument's overall reliability, we tested the coefficient for Cronbach's alpha, which is the average of all inter‐item correlations, or a measure of internal consistency designed to estimate the proportion of variance in the scores that can be attributed to true score variance, or the proportion of variance that is systemic in a set of scores. Cronbach's alpha was also calculated for the data using the equation <emph>α</emph> = NN−11−<emph>i</emph> = 1Nxi2Total2 where the sum of item variance was 9.12, and the total item variance was 83.26. Cronbach's alpha was found to be 0.92. This is very high and suggests that the items are very internally consistent.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-18">Item analysis</hd> <p>Next, we analyzed each item to determine those items that were most helpful to assessing respondents. As shown in Figure 3, the item where teachers were asked, "I find it difficult to separate my personal life as a teacher" was the most difficult for participants. While the item "I have had negative feelings about children I teach or their families," was the easiest for participants. The item difficulty and discrimination test showed a spread throughout both difficulty and discrimination.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01feb22/pits22610-fig-0003.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits22610-fig-0003.jpg" title="3 Item analysis of discrimination and difficulty levels" /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0154580212-20">Standard error of measurement</hd> <p>We calculated the Standard Error of Measurement = std dev of the test * √(1 − CA). A score of 0.31 was calculated, indicating a 95% certainty that the scores would be ±2<emph>SEM</emph> of the initial score.</p> <p>Overall, the TSTSS proved to be a valid measure of the construct STS.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-21">Data analysis</hd> <p>Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26. In this study, the instrument measures STS as a continuous variable, and the other descriptive variables were held constant to understand the differences in STS across those variables. We used multiple regression to examine how preservice educators' secondary stress means varied when considering personal characteristics, school characteristics, and attendance at TIP seminars. The chosen characteristics are consistent with other studies that use these measures to understand the impact of STS broadly and specifically. Essential to an education setting, what grade level is being taught, and years of experience in a classroom have proven useful to understand other phenomena in education. Specific to this study, TIP Seminars attended were crucial to answer our research questions. We followed the multiple regression with an ANOVA and a post hoc analysis to identify the significance of the mean differences identified in the multiple regression between STS and preservice educator attendance at TIP seminars. A description of measures is displayed in Table 2.</p> <p>2 TableDescription of measures</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th align="left">Variable</th><th align="left">Variable SPSS name</th><th align="left">Type</th><th align="left">Explanation</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Secondary Traumatic Stress</td><td align="left">STS_Levels</td><td align="left">Continuous</td><td align="left">STS is the phenomenon being measured. It is calculated based on how respondents answer the survey.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Age</td><td align="left">age</td><td align="left">Continuous</td><td align="left">Preservice educators' age.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Gender</td><td align="left">gender</td><td align="left">Categorical</td><td align="left">Self‐identified gender: Female, nonbinary, Male.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Ethnicity</td><td align="left">ethn_white</td><td align="left">Dichotomous</td><td align="left">Self‐identified ethnic background was minimized into two categories: white and nonwhite.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Class</td><td align="left">class_working</td><td align="left">Categorical</td><td align="left">Preservice educators' socioeconomic status based on upbringing.</td></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">class_middle</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">class_upper</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">class_high</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td align="left">Experience</td><td align="left">novice experienced veterans</td><td align="left">Categorical</td><td align="left">Three categories based on the literature of when teachers are considered the beginning, middle, and veterans in their field. Used to capture amount of time preservice educators and their experience in schools broadly.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Grade Level</td><td align="left">elementary middle high other</td><td align="left">Categorical</td><td align="left">Preservice educators' grade level. "Other" identifies those who are in K‐12 or K‐8 settings.</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Retention</td><td align="left">Yes</td><td align="left">Categorical</td><td align="left">Preservice educators were asked if they planned on staying at the same school the following year. Yes, No, Undecided.</td></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">No</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">Undecided</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td align="left">TIP Seminar Attendance</td><td align="left">0</td><td align="left">Categorical</td><td align="left">Three categories were identified—those who attended 0, 1, or 2 or more TIP seminars.</td></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">1</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td align="left">2+</td><td /><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>We began the analysis by cleaning the data. Cleaning included dropping incomplete cases and reverse coding the positively worded items. To respond to the first question, we ran descriptive statistics to identify the overall mean of STS across all preservice educators. The sub‐questions required the use of a multiple regression analysis. Since regression relies on one or more continuous predictor variables, and we only had one continuous predictor variable, and the others were categorical, we chose to run a regression on the continuous variables. We then relied on the ANOVA to predict the continuous variable (STS) against the categorical predictor variables. Because of the categorical nature of the dependent variable, to answer the final question, we ran an ANOVA and post hoc test.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-22">RESULTS</hd> <p>The survey was developed to capture the trauma teachers' experience from the trauma of others' which we captured in the construct of STS. This process began with examining the symptomatic level of STS. The attitudinal portion of the survey was 28 items with four attitudinal scoring measures. Respondents were able to respond to the items using the four attitudinal responses of Never, Occasionally, Very Often, or Always, based on how much they agreed with the statements made. Demographic variables were embedded at the end of the survey as separate questions.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-23">Research question 1: Do preservice educators experience STS?</hd> <p>Our research had four scoring categories for the attitudinal survey that were meant to assess embodiment or STS. These four categories (never, occasionally, very often, and always) were a means for determining how respondents' attitudes toward STS varied. Since it is attitudinal, and there are no correct or incorrect answers, maintaining a 4‐point scale was appropriate. Figure 4 shows the histogram of the total scores.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01feb22/pits22610-fig-0004.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits22610-fig-0004.jpg" title="4 Histogram of teachers' total STS scores. STS, secondary traumatic stress" /> </p> <p></p> <p>The responses had a minimum total score of 38 and a maximum total score of 66, with the overall minimum and maximum ranging from 0 to 112. The scores showed a right skew, with an average of 50.79 and a standard deviation of 7.89. This skew indicates that preservice educators are experiencing lower levels of STS than the median possible score. The right skew indicates that the bulk of the preservice educators experience relatively low levels of STS, with a handful of preservice educators experiencing moderate levels of STS. The minimum and maximum showed that there were no preservice educators that experienced STS of zero, but also none that experienced the max level of STS that would be possible.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-25">Sub‐question 1.a.: Does STS vary by school demographics?</hd> <p>To answer the sub‐question "Does this vary by school demographics?" we ran a regression of the variables that held constant school demographics. Table 3 has the regression outcomes for levels of STS by school demographics. The intercept represents the expected mean of STS.</p> <p>3 TableSecondary traumatic stress of preservice educator by school demographics</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th /><th align="left">Estimated</th><th align="left">Standard error</th><th align="left"><italic>T</italic>‐value</th><th align="left"><italic>Pr</italic>(>[<italic>t</italic>])</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Intercept</td><td align="left">52.00</td><td align="left">3.11</td><td align="left">16.68</td><td align="left"><2e−16***</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Elementary</td><td align="left">−1.50</td><td align="left">3.81</td><td align="left">−0.39</td><td align="left">0.69</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Middle school</td><td align="left">−1.29</td><td align="left">4.41</td><td align="left">−0.29</td><td align="left">0.77</td></tr><tr><td align="left">High school</td><td align="left">−1.83</td><td align="left">4.59</td><td align="left">−0.40</td><td align="left">0.69</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 <emph>Note</emph>: <emph>N</emph> = 34; Significance: 0<sups>(***)</sups> 0.001<sups>(**)</sups> 0.01<sups>(*)</sups> 0.05<sups>(.)</sups>.</p> <p>The three main types of schools that were identified were elementary, middle, and high school. Unfortunately, there was only one person who responded to the survey that did not work at a school that was not classified as a Title I school. The results show no discernible difference between the types of schools that preservice educators were placed. STS does not vary by school type.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-26">Sub‐question 1.b.: Does STS vary by preservice educator demographics?</hd> <p>To answer the sub‐question "Does this vary by preservice educator demographics?", we first found the level of STS for all preservice educators and ran a regression of the variables that held constant all Preservice educators' demographics that were reported. Table 4 has the regression outcomes for levels of STS by preservice educator demographics. The intercept represents the expected mean value of STS when considering all of these variables.</p> <p>4 TableLevels of secondary traumatic stress in preservice educators by demographic</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr valign="bottom"><th /><th align="left">Estimated</th><th align="left">Standard Er.</th><th align="left"><italic>T</italic>‐value</th><th align="left"><italic>Pr</italic>(>[<italic>t</italic>])</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td align="left">Intercept</td><td align="left">50.14</td><td align="left">8.82</td><td align="left">5.69</td><td align="left"><6.39e−06***</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Working class</td><td align="left">−1.28</td><td align="left">5.39</td><td align="left">−0.23</td><td align="left">0.82</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Middle class</td><td align="left">1.98</td><td align="left">5.59</td><td align="left">0.37</td><td align="left">0.72</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Female</td><td align="left">11.00</td><td align="left">8.23</td><td align="left">1.33</td><td align="left">0.19</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Male</td><td align="left">9.57</td><td align="left">8.09</td><td align="left">1.18</td><td align="left">0.24</td></tr><tr><td align="left">White</td><td align="left">0.12</td><td align="left">NA</td><td align="left">NA</td><td align="left">NA</td></tr><tr><td align="left">Nonwhite</td><td align="left">−1.64</td><td align="left">NA</td><td align="left">NA</td><td align="left">NA</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 <emph>Note</emph>: <emph>N</emph> = 34; Significance: 0<sups>(***)</sups> 0.001<sups>(**)</sups> 0.01<sups>(*)</sups> 0.05<sups>(.)</sups>.</p> <p>There were no observable statistically significant differences to the STS mean by any of the predictor variables.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-27">Research question 2: Do levels of secondary traumatic stress vary for preservice educators ba...</hd> <p>To answer the second question, "Do levels of Secondary Traumatic Stress vary for preservice educators based on attending Trauma‐Informed Practices Seminars," we continued with the total levels of STS for all preservice educators. We ran an ANOVA with the variable that accounted for TIP Seminar attendance. Figure 5 has the mean differences for levels of STS for preservice educators who attended zero TIP seminars, one TIP seminar, and two or more TIP seminars. The ANCOVA and post hoc analysis indicated that the means for preservice educators were different at a statistically significant 0.05 level.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/PIS/01feb22/pits22610-fig-0005.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="pits22610-fig-0005.jpg" title="5 STS mean differences for TIP seminar attendance. STS, secondary traumatic stress; TIP, trauma‐informed practices" /> </p> <p></p> <p>The results show that preservice educators who attended zero TIP seminars had a higher mean, 54.86, of STS, meaning they experienced more elevated STS levels on average. Those that attended one TIP seminar had a lower mean, but this was not a statistically different level. Finally, those that attended two or more TIP seminars had a mean of 47.36, which was lower and statistically different from those who attended zero TIP seminars indicating that preservice educators that attended two or more TIP seminars experienced lower levels of STS than their counterparts that did not attend any seminars.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-29">DISCUSSION</hd> <p>The results of this pilot study provided a unique insight into how preservice educators experience STS. Teacher STS research is nascent and minimal in the field of education and attends to educators that are in classrooms. The pilot data showed an interesting difference seen in the research on teachers (Borntrager et al., 2012; Motta, 2012; Stevens et al., 2020). Preservice educators were experiencing drastically lower levels of STS than what was found in studies with classroom teachers. The pilot data show that preservice educators do experience STS. Still, the right skew of the curve on the levels of STS indicates that the bulk of preservice educators experience lower levels of STS, and demographics of these educators did not interact with their STS level. In other studies conducted with in‐service teachers, findings indicated that teachers experience much higher levels of STS than we found with preservice educators. Teacher demographic variables impacted STS level (see Borntrager et al., 2012; Schepers, 2017). There was also no difference in STS level when considering school type. In the previous study by Schepers (2017), findings indicated that teachers who taught in secondary schools had a significantly lower level of STS than their primary teacher counterparts. This study also found that white, middle‐class, and upper‐class teachers experience higher levels of STS. This difference in levels of STS might be because they are preservice educators. While preservice educators spend a great deal of time in the classroom with students, this time varies depending on whether students are residents (1 full year, three times a week) or student teachers (all day, every day for one semester).</p> <p>Further complicating the relationship with preservice educators and students, each PST shares the classroom with a teacher of record who takes the lead role in fostering a classroom environment. This positionality could account for PSTs showing lower levels of STS. The lack of knowing the students' lives and the students as people might protect them from experiencing as much secondary stress as practicing teachers.</p> <p>When conducting this study, we hypothesized that PSTs who attended TIP seminars would have lower levels of STS. Although the sample is relatively small compared to the total student–teacher and residency population, the findings of this pilot study indicate that students who complete multiple TIP seminars experience lower levels of STS than those who did not attend the seminars. Further, this difference was most striking when the PSTs had participated in more than one TIP seminar. This difference could be attributed to how the TIP seminars are conducted. The seminars cover different topics, and do not cover teacher resilience and coping skills in each seminar. As the seminars progress, there are resilience strategies for preservice educators implemented into the materials. Specifically, the last parts of the TIP seminar series attend to the model's resilience and empowerment guiding principles.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-30">Limitations</hd> <p>The most significant limitation is that the study is currently limited to the sample size of pilot data. We would have preferred to have a larger sample size but given the nature of starting a new program and developing the program and research strand concurrently, the initial available data was exploratory. The data were also collected during the pandemic, which certainly impacted the sample size as well. As with any survey methodology, one significant limitation is self‐selection bias. This particular survey captured two facets of self‐selection bias. The preservice educators all self‐selected into the TIP seminars and into the survey study, so we are unsure why people did or did not complete the survey and if those people are different somehow.</p> <p>One technological limitation was the collection method. The surveys were delivered using the Qualtrics email feature. This feature may have caused the email to be sent to students' "Other" folder rather than treated as an internal email. In the future, the survey will be delivered using methods that allow all students to have the opportunity to see and take the survey readily. This limitation accounts for the low response rate. Since the email was treated as an external email, the survey response rate per survey methodological standards would end up being lower. Sending the initial email for completion of the survey through a sanctioned UA email in the future will ensure that we are able to capture a sample that is more reflective of internal collection, which aims to capture 30% of the population or higher. Ideally moving forward, we would be able to control for some of the self‐selection bias if more participants took the survey and if the survey sample included a larger percentage of those who had no exposure to or invitation to attend the TIP seminars.</p> <p>When considering the methods of data analysis, survey methodology often has a larger power analysis and effect size when many surveys are collected. Again, the low sample size could have impacted the results. However, a sample size of 34 still gives enough information to use the analysis of this pilot study to develop a more robust research study.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-31">Implications</hd> <p>The TIP initiative aims to demonstrate the value of addressing childhood trauma, teacher stress, and secondary trauma as an integral and foundational component of a teacher preparation program. Every teacher candidate at UA will eventually have exposure to these concepts, with opportunities to expand on learning through additional courses, certificates, or experiences. Learnings from this program implementation Year 1 pilot data will be shared with other education programs that seek to add TIPs seminars into their teacher preparation curricula.</p> <p>The long‐term hope of this project is that learning about TIP, STS, and protective factors for students and teachers alike will act as a long‐term barrier to STS as PSTs move into their first years of teaching and help keep new teachers from burnout. We also want to learn more about the long‐term implications of learning about TIP ‐ do these practices help keep students out of the office or help new teachers feel more competent at classroom management.</p> <p>Societal, psychological, and emotional issues that plague our public school teachers not only directly affect teachers' physical, emotional, and mental health, but more broadly impact education through teacher turnover (Barmby, 2006; Davis & Wilson, 2000; Gold & Roth, 1993). As the external stressors of the job have increased over the past decades so have the rates of teacher turnover. The turnover rate is at an all‐time high; at the same time, enrollment in teacher education programs is at an all‐time low (Harvey, 2014; Simon & Johnson, 2015). The mass exodus of teachers disproportionately impacts high‐need schools serving mostly students of color (Simon & Johnson, 2015; Wang et al., 2015) and affects teachers of color at a disparate rate (Watson et al., 2015). A recent review of teacher turnover indicated that while teacher turnover has remained constant, the rate of teacher turnover for white teachers was 15%, while the rate of turnover for Black and Hispanic teachers was 21.8% and 20.6%, respectively. Moreover, though the number of minoritized teachers has increased over the past few decades, their turnover rate grew by 28% (Ingersoll et al., 2014).</p> <p>Research in teacher turnover has been approached in various ways, few of which focus on internal stressors and their direct contribution to teacher turnover. The research typically focuses on factors of school organization, tests as a form of accountability, and occupational stress directly related to organizational factors (Gold & Roth, 1993; Ingersoll & May, 2011; Johnson, 2006). Researchers have mostly explored occupational stress on teachers through the use of self‐reported surveys, which have been a useful indicator of overall trends of this phenomenon. Teacher stress in various forms is a major factor contributing to teacher turnover. However, the emphasis on teacher stress from these studies has focused on school organizational factors such as policy implementation and teacher requirements (Košir et al., 2015). Further, it has not been explored STS that teachers face when working closely with children who have experienced trauma (Borntrager et al., 2012; Motta, 2012; Schepers, 2017). It is important to explore and document additional stressors that may be impacting teachers. By expanding the types of stressors that are studied in educational surveys, we acknowledge and validate the emotional distress that teachers experience and the traumas they experience vicariously.</p> <hd id="AN0154580212-32">CONFLICT OF INTERESTS</hd> <p>The authors declare that there are no conflict of interests.</p> <ref id="AN0154580212-33"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Students from MSU Denver will be referred to as preservice educators throughout the paper.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0154580212-34"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Alvarez, A. (2020). Seeing race in the research on youth trauma and education: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 90 (5), 583 – 626. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320938131</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Barmby, P. (2006). Improving teacher recruitment and retention: The importance of workload and pupil behaviour. Educational Research, 48 (3), 247 – 265.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Barr, J. J. (2016). Developing a positive classroom climate. IDEA Paper# 61. IDEA Center, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Borntrager, C., Caringi, J. C., van den Pol, R., Crosby, L., O'Connell, K., Trautman, A., & McDonald, M. (2012). Secondary traumatic stress in school personnel. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion, 5 (1), 38 – 50.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bride, B. E., Robinson, M. M., Yegidis, B., & Figley, C. R. (2004). Development and validation of the secondary traumatic stress scale. Research on Social Work Practice, 14 (1), 27 – 35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731503254106</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Caringi, J. C., Stanick, C., Trautman, A., Crosby, L., Devlin, M., & Adams, S. (2015). Secondary traumatic stress in public school teachers: Contributing and mitigating factors. Advances in School Mental Health Promotion, 8 (4), 244 – 256.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Chang, M. L. (2009). An appraisal perspective of teacher burnout: Examining the emotional work of teachers. Educational Psychology Review, 21 (3), 193 – 218.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Davis, J., & Wilson, S. M. (2000). Principals' efforts to empower teachers: Effects on teacher motivation and job satisfaction and stress. The Clearing House, 73 (6), 349 – 353. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650009599442</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> De Royston, M. M., Vakil, S., Ross, K. M., Givens, J., & Holman, A. (2017). He's more like a 'brother' than a teacher: Politicized caring in a program for African American males. Teachers College Record, 119 (4), 1 – 40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Figley, C. R. (1995). Compassion fatigue: Toward a new understanding of the costs of caring. In B. H. Stamm (Ed.), Secondary traumatic stress: Self‐care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators (pp. 3 – 28). The Sidran Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallagher, E. K., Dever, B. V., Hochbein, C., & DuPaul, G. J. (2019). Teacher caring as a protective factor: The effects of behavioral/emotional risk and teacher caring on office disciplinary referrals in middle school. School Mental Health, 11 (4), 754 – 765.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gold, Y., & Roth, R. A. (1993). Teachers managing stress & preventing burnout. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harvey, J. (2014). Getting beyond the blame game. Educational Leadership, 71 (5), 24 – 29. https://<ulink href="http://www.ascd.org/el/articles/getting-beyond-the-blame-game">www.ascd.org/el/articles/getting-beyond-the-blame-game</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ingersoll, R., & May, H. (2011). Recruitment, retention, and the minority teacher shortage. Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania and Center for Educational Research in the Interest of Underserved Students, University of California.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ingersoll, R., Merrill, L., & Stuckey, D. (2014). Seven trends: The transformation of the teaching force. Updated April 2014. CPRE Report.# RR‐80. Consortium for Policy Research in Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson, S. M. (2006). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools. Jossey‐Bass.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Košir, K., Tement, S., Licardo, M., & Habe, K. (2015). Two sides of the same coin? The role of rumination and reflection in elementary school teachers' classroom stress and burnout. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 131 – 141.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin, A. D. (2020). Tensions and caring in teacher education: A self‐study on teaching in difficult moments. Studying Teacher Education, 16 (3), 306 – 323. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2020.1783527</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Motta, R. W. (2012). Secondary trauma in children and school personnel. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 28 (3), 256 – 269. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2012.695767</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN). (2020). Secondary traumatic stress. https://<ulink href="http://www.nctsn.org/trauma-informed-care/secondary-traumatic-stress">www.nctsn.org/trauma-informed-care/secondary-traumatic-stress</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Salston, M., & Figley, C. R. (2003). Secondary traumatic stress effects of working with survivors of criminal victimization. Journal of Trauma Stress, (2), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022899207206</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schepers, O. (2017). A teacher at risk: Giving voice to teacher secondary traumatic stress (Doctoral dissertation). University of Colorado, Boulder. https://scholar.colorado.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/3x816m761</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Simon, N. S., & Johnson, S. M. (2015). Teacher turnover in high‐poverty schools: What we know and can do. Teachers College Record, 117 (3), 1 – 36.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sprang, G., Ford, J., Kerig, P., & Bride, B. (2018). Defining secondary traumatic stress and developing targeted assessments and interventions: Lessons learned from research and leading experts, Traumatology 25 (2), 72 – 81. https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000180</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stamm, B. H. (2005). The proQOL manual. Retrieved July, 16, 2007. <ulink href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.470.313&rep=rep1&type=pdf">http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.470.313&rep=rep1&type=pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stevens, T., Barnard‐Brak, L., Roberts, B., Acosta, R., & Wilburn, S. (2020). Aggression toward teachers, interaction with school shooting media, and secondary trauma: Lockdown drills as moderator. Psychology in the Schools, 57 (4), 583 – 605. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22329</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor, J. K. (2020). Classroom culture: Stories of empathy and belonging. In A. M. Ellsworth (Ed.), Cases on emotionally responsive teaching and mentoring (pp. 127 – 139). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-2971-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tehrani, N. (2007). The cost of caring–The impact of secondary trauma on assumptions, values and beliefs. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 20 (4), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070701690069</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tehrani, N. (2010). Compassion fatigue: Experiences in occupational health, human resources, counseling, and police. Occupational Medicine, 60 (2), 133 – 138. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqp174</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ting, L., Jacobson, J. M., Sanders, S., Bride, B. E., & Harrington, D. (2005). The Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (STSS). Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 11, 177–194.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tyack, D. B. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education. Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wang, H., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2015). Self‐efficacy and causal attributions in teachers: Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 120 – 130.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watson, A., Bristo, T., & White, T. (2015). Recruiting and retaining educators of color. Albert Shanker Institute, Blog Contributor. <ulink href="http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/recruiting-andretaining-educators-color">http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/recruiting-andretaining-educators-color</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weems, G. H., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). The impact of midpoint responses and reverse coding on survey data, measurement and evaluation. Counseling and Development, 34 (3), 166 – 176. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2002.12069033</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Williams, M. (2018). Social and emotional learning strategies in the elementary classroom and their impact on student success. School of Education Student Capstone Projects, 232. https://digitalcommons.hamli</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson, M. (2004). Constructing Measures: An Item Response Modeling Approach.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Ofelia Castro Schepers and Kathryn S. Young</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1323613
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Mitigating Secondary Traumatic Stress in Preservice Educators: A Pilot Study on the Role of Trauma-Informed Practice Seminars
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Castro+Schepers%2C+Ofelia%22">Castro Schepers, Ofelia</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5255-4812">0000-0001-5255-4812</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Young%2C+Kathryn+S%2E%22">Young, Kathryn S.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Psychology+in+the+Schools%22"><i>Psychology in the Schools</i></searchLink>. Feb 2022 59(2):316-333.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preservice+Teachers%22">Preservice Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Trauma%22">Trauma</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Practices%22">Educational Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Stress+Variables%22">Stress Variables</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Coping%22">Coping</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Correlation%22">Correlation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Seminars%22">Seminars</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Stress+Management%22">Stress Management</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Education+Programs%22">Teacher Education Programs</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Colorado+%28Denver%29%22">Colorado (Denver)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/pits.22610
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0033-3085
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: In this study, explore secondary traumatic stress (STS) in preservice teachers (PSTs) and if trauma-informed practices (TIPs) have the potential to mitigate STS. We hypothesize that PST who have had consistent and extensive exposure to TIP will experience lower levels of STS in their student teaching or residency than students who have not had this exposure. Thirty-four PST participated in the study. Twenty-one were women, 12 men, and 1 identified as nonbinary. Their average age was 31 years. Participants were 73.1% Caucasian. A survey design was used. Surveys went out to all Metropolitan State University of Denver School of Education Students. Early results demonstrate a positive causal relationship between an increase of TIP seminars and decreased STS. By integrating TIP seminars and principles into teacher preparation programs, new teachers will enter the workforce better equipped to address their own needs and the needs of the children and families they serve.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1323613
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1323613
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/pits.22610
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 316
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Preservice Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Trauma
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Stress Variables
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Coping
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Correlation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Seminars
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Stress Management
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Education Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Colorado (Denver)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Mitigating Secondary Traumatic Stress in Preservice Educators: A Pilot Study on the Role of Trauma-Informed Practice Seminars
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Castro Schepers, Ofelia
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Young, Kathryn S.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0033-3085
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 59
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Psychology in the Schools
              Type: main
ResultId 1