Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present well-being, leadership, and the development of each from a communal perspective in a Finnish primary school in the years 2000-2009.

The study included five sets of data. The quantitative research data were collected from the school staff using the Well-Being at Your Work index questionnaire in 2004 (n=36), 2005 (n=41), and in 2009 (n=34). In 2006, two group interviews were carried out with the school personnel (n=21), and in 2011, retrospective interview data were collected from an expert classroom teacher (n=1). Quantitative data were analysed statistically using descriptive statistics. The qualitative group interview data were analysed by an inductive content analysis, while the expert interview was analysed according to the methods of factual analysis.

During this period, several communal interventions were developed in the school to promote occupational well-being. Over the course of the study, staff members’ satisfaction with the actions and the support provided by the principal has improved, and leadership-related problems have decreased.

The results cover research findings from one school and therefore cannot be generalised to other Finnish school communities.

Schools’ work communities must be active in developing interventions to improve their own occupational well-being. Furthermore, leaders must be actively involved in the development of occupational well-being.

The purpose of this paper is to present the baseline results of a school development project where the aim was to improve school community staff's occupational wellbeing in co‐operation with occupational health nurses.

The Wellbeing at Your Work index form for school staff developed for the study aimed to account for occupational wellbeing and satisfaction in terms of the activities maintaining the ability to work as well as the working conditions, working community, worker and work and professional competence and the need to develop them.

The most problematic factors of occupational wellbeing were the urgency and pace of work at school and the problems in working space, postures and equipment. In addition, the activities supporting resources, including stress control, exercise, relaxation and mentoring, were inadequate at work.

The sample of school staff (n=271) consisted of 12 schools in Eastern Finland, and the results cannot be generalised widely due to the small and geographically defined sample. However, the results are suggestive for other schools elsewhere in Finland.

The content model for the promotion of occupational wellbeing presented in the article and the results obtained provide a broad and practical approach to the development of school staff's occupational wellbeing. Occupational health care services are meant to support school communities, and they should therefore provide better information of their services and develop their competence based on the content model of occupational wellbeing.

The work index form based on the content model serves as a good tool for schools and occupational health care in evaluating and developing occupational wellbeing.

This paper aims to present the baseline results of a research and development project targeted to improve the occupational well‐being of school staff and maintain their ability to work, in Finland and Estonia. It reveals the most problematic factors in the various aspects of the school community and professional competence and outlines development needs in the school communities.

The overall project design is action research, conducted during 2009‐2013 in the SHE (Schools for Health in Europe) network in Finland and Estonia. The baseline survey data were collected in 2009‐2010 with a web‐based Well‐being at your work index questionnaire and analysed statistically using descriptive statistics, sum variables of factors and Mann‐Whitney tests.

The general opinions of the Finnish school staffs were more affirmative than those of Estonian school staffs regarding their own personal occupational well‐being in comparison with the best in the profession (p=0.000). However, the Finns were more critical than the Estonians when estimating the general well‐being of the staff in their working community, maintenance of their ability to work, the aspects of the school community and professional competence and development needs in the school communities.

The results cannot be widely generalised due to the geographically defined samples, but they can be suggestive in comparable situations in Finland and Estonia.

There is a need to develop the occupational well‐being of school staff and maintenance of their ability to work in the school communities: specific interventions will be developed on the basis of the results obtained from the project schools.

This paper aims to present the process evaluation for a two‐year (2008‐2010) participatory action research project focusing on home‐school partnership in health learning, undertaken within the Schools for Health in Europe (SHE) in Eastern Finland.

Two intervention schools and two control schools (grade 5 pupils, parents, and selected school personnel) participated in a study. Process evaluation data were collected from intervention schools after 10 months of participation, by interviewing two classroom teachers and three families. In addition, program documents and relevant statistics were collected from schools during the intervention.

Teachers' opinions on the development process varied from more concrete expectations (School A teacher) to overall satisfaction to implementation (School B teacher). Parents believed that their children would benefit from the project later in life. The context and differences of the school environments were likely to affect the development process at the school level.

This paper demonstrates a process evaluation in two schools and, therefore, limits the generalizability of the findings.

The process evaluation was an essential part of this intervention study and may provide a useful structure and an example for process evaluation for future school‐based health intervention studies.

This study highlights the importance of planning the process evaluation structure before the start of the intervention, brings out the relevance of systematically assessing the process while it is ongoing, and illustrates process evaluation in an action research project.