Addressing elementary school teachers' professional stressors: Practical suggestions for schools and adminstrators

Purpose: Given the preponderance of education reform since the No Child Left Behind Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2001), reform efforts have shaped the nature of the work and culture in schools. The emphasis on standardized testing to determine schools' status and student performance, among other factors, has generated stress, particularly for teachers. Therefore, district and school administrators are encouraged to consider the contextual factors that contribute to teacher stress to address them and to retain high-performing teachers. Research Methods/Approach: Participants were recruited from two types of schools in order to test hypotheses related to directional responding as a function of working in a more challenging (high-priority) or less challenging (non-high-priority) school environment. We employed content analysis to analyze 64 suburban elementary school teachers' free-responses to a prompt regarding their stress as teachers. We cross-analyzed our findings through external auditing to bolster trustworthiness in the data and in the procedure. Findings: Teachers reported personal and contextual stressors. Herein, we reported concrete examples of the five categories of contextual stressors teachers identified: political and educational structures, instructional factors, student factors, parent and family factors, and school climate. We found directional qualities and overlapping relationships in the data, partially confirming our hypotheses. Implications for Research and Practice: We offer specific recommendations for practical ways in which school administrators might systemically address teacher stress based on the five categories of stressors reported by participants. We also suggest means of conducting action research to measure the effects of implemented suggestions.

Impact of vaccines given during pregnancy on the offspring of women consulting a travel clinic: a longitudinal study

BACKGROUND: Little is known on the impact of travel vaccinations during pregnancy on child outcomes, in particular on the long-term psychomotor development. The objectives of the study were (1) to estimate the rate of premature births, congenital abnormalities, and mental and physical development problems of children born from mothers who had been vaccinated during pregnancy and (2) to compare these rates with those of children whose mothers had not been vaccinated during pregnancy. METHODS: Longitudinal study including (1) retrospectively pregnant women having attended our travel clinic before (vaccinated) and (2) prospectively mothers attending our clinic (nonvaccinated). We performed phone interviews with mothers vaccinated during pregnancy, up to 10 years before, and face-to-face interviews with nonvaccinated age-matched mothers, ie, women attending the travel clinic who had one child of about the same age as the one of the case to compare child development between both groups. RESULTS: Fifty-three women vaccinated during pregnancy were interviewed as well as 53 nonvaccinated ones. Twenty-eight (53%) women received their vaccination during the first trimester. The most frequent vaccine administered was hepatitis A (55% of the cases), followed by di-Te (34%), IM poliomyelitis (23%), yellow fever (12%), A-C meningitis (8%), IM typhoid (4%), and oral poliomyelitis (4%). Children were followed for a range of 1 to 10 years. Rates of premature births were 5.7% in both groups; congenital abnormalities were 1.9% in the vaccinated cohort versus 5.7% in the nonvaccinated one; children took their first steps at a median age of 12 months in both cohorts; among schoolchildren, 5% of the vaccinated cohort versus 7.7% of the nonvaccinated attended a lower level or a specialized school. CONCLUSION: In this small sample size, there was no indication that usual travel vaccinations, including the yellow fever one, had deleterious effect on child outcome and development

Social freezing in Switzerland and worldwide--a blessing for women today?

This is a critical review of the medical, ethical, judicial and financial aspects of the so called "social freezing", the cryopreservation of a woman's oocytes for non-medical purposes. The possibility of storing the eggs of fertile women in order to prevent age-related fertility decline is being widely promoted by fertility centres and the lay press throughout the world. Research data has shown that social freezing should ideally be performed on women around 25 years of age in order to increase their chances of a future pregnancy. In reality, it is mostly performed after the age of 35. Unfortunately, social freezing is in general not a solution for the underlying societal problems to fit in with professionally active women and having children. It only delays the existing problems. Furthermore, it creates a lot of potential new problems. A great deal more should be undertaken to offer real solutions to the underlying societal problems which are in part: pre-school education, care in the event of childhood illness, and the many weeks of school holidays, acceptance of professionally active women having children, and more job offers with a workload <100%.). Furthermore, society should be informed about the decreasing chances of pregnancy with increasing maternal (and paternal) age as well as the increasing risks of miscarriage and obstetric/neonatal complications. Detailed information for woman considering social freezing is crucial. Every doctor, proposing social freezing to his patients, should be up to date with all these details. Follow-up studies on the outcome of these children are needed.

A quasi-randomized group trial of a brief alcohol intervention on risky single occasion drinking among secondary school students.

OBJECTIVES: To show the effectiveness of a brief group alcohol intervention. Aims of the intervention were to reduce the frequency of heavy drinking occasions, maximum number of drinks on an occasion and overall weekly consumption. METHODS: A cluster quasi-randomized control trial (intervention n = 338; control n = 330) among 16- to 18-year-old secondary school students in the Swiss Canton of Zürich. Groups homogeneous for heavy drinking occasions (5+/4+ drinks for men/women) consisted of those having medium risk (3-4) or high risk (5+) occasions in the past 30 days. Groups of 8-10 individuals received two 45-min sessions based on motivational interviewing techniques. RESULTS: Borderline significant beneficial effects (p < 0.10) on heavy drinking occasions and alcohol volume were found 6 months later for the medium-risk group only, but not for the high-risk group. None of the effects remained significant after Bonferroni corrections. CONCLUSIONS: Group intervention was ineffective for all at-risk users. The heaviest drinkers may need more intensive treatment. Alternative explanations were iatrogenic effects among the heaviest drinkers, assessment reactivity, or reduction of social desirability bias at follow-up through peer feedback.