University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Affluent teens and school stress: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Affluent teens and school stress: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 1

Affluent Teens and School Stress: An Evaluation Study

by

Casey Bell

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

Copyright 2019 Casey Bell
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 2

Dedication
I feel that if I completed this dedication with fidelity, the list would be as long as the
dissertation itself. There are so many people who loved, encouraged, and supported me through
this process, and I am so lucky to have a community of people who never questioned my ability
or sanity for taking on this project.
First, I would like to thank the incredible women who served on my dissertation
committee. Dr. Kathy Stowe, thank you for saying yes to a complete stranger! And thank you
also for being genuinely interested in my research and for bringing your vast wisdom to my
study. Dr. Alison Muraszewski, your passion, expertise, enthusiasm, and joy was so encouraging
and contagious as one of my first professors in this program. You have stoked the embers of my
interest in the subject of learning and motivation into a full-blown flame. Thank you for making
me a better educator, for encouraging me for the past four years, and for your APA hawk-eye!
Dr. Monique Datta, I truly believe that the only reason that I, and the rest of cohort 6, have made
it through is the sheer force of your will. Your constant drumbeat of “go, do, honor the process”
was the rhythm that enabled me to march on. I know that you sacrificed much to stick with and
support us, and I appreciate it more than I can say. Thank you for believing in me, pushing me,
and supporting me. I believe that if anyone will be as happy as us at our graduation, it will be
you!
To my colleagues in Cohort 6, I am so thankful to have been a part of this rag-tag group
of change agents. What an adventure to take with each of you. I am so inspired by you all.
Special thanks to my crew who got me though each class, each assignment, each semester, each
annoyance! Caron, Lorri, Jannah, Manoj, Mary, and Tammy, this process would have been
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 3

miserable and simply impossible without you. Your friendship has been one of the greatest gifts
of this program. I hope that our group texts go on forever!
To my friends, thank you for putting up with my anti-social self for these past four years,
reminding me that it will all be worth it, and for hosting the parties at your houses. Lisa and
Lesley, I’m ready to have lots of adventures now! I’d also like to thank Adele. For some reason,
I started listening exclusively to your albums 21 and 25 while writing, and they have kept me
company for the last four years and 31,000 words of this dissertation, plus all the other
assignments along the way. I don’t know when I’ll stop having a Pavlovian response to your
music, but I sure have enjoyed it!
To my colleagues at LCS, it was a joy to work with you for 13 years. Though I didn’t
think it was possible, I have gained an even deeper respect for you through this process. Your
commitment to your students and to the mission of LCS is rare and inspiring. The organization is
so lucky to have you on the front lines of the mission.
To my parents, thank you for your incredible support in every way through this process,
and through every other one in my life! But mostly, thank you for making me into the type of
person who believed that I could accomplish this, and any other crazy thing that I try. All that I
am is thanks to you.
To my darling boys, you guys are incredible. Thank you for going along on this journey
with me and putting up with Saturdays full of schoolwork and early bedtimes so that I could
make it to class. You two are the greatest gift in my life, and the way you have encouraged me
through this process has been so remarkable. Thanks for always telling me that you are proud of
me, and for probably rotting your brains by playing videogames while I worked on schoolwork. I
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 4

hope from this you have learned to value hard work, and education, and strong women. Or, at the
very least, USC football. You have been the best cheerleaders!
Finally, I would like to dedicate this to Drake, who made everyone better.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 5

Table of Contents

Dedication 2
List of Tables 7
List of Figures 8
Abstract 9
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 10
Introduction of the Problem of Practice 10
Organizational Context and Mission 10
Organizational Goal 12
Related Literature 12
Importance of the Evaluation 14
Description of Stakeholder Groups 15
Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals 15
Stakeholder Group for the Study 16
Purpose of the Project and Questions 17
Methodological Framework 18
Definitions 18
Organization of the Project 18
Chapter Two: Literature Review 20
Beyond Storm and Stress 20
School-Related Stress in Affluent Teens 21
Maladaptive Behaviors Associated with Stress 29
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework 33
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 6

Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences 32
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and 47
Motivation and the Organizational Context
Conclusion 50
Chapter Three: Methodology 51
Participating Stakeholders 51
Data Collection and Instrumentation 53
Data Analysis 56
Credibility and Trustworthiness 56
Ethics 57
Limitations and Delimitations 59
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 61
Research Question 1: To What Extent is the Organization Meeting its Goal? 63
Research Question 2: Faculty Knowledge and Motivation 64
Research Question 3: Recommendations for Organizational Practice 84
Synthesis 91
Chapter Five: Solutions and Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plans 92
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 92
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 103
Recommendation for Future Research 117
Conclusion 118
References 120
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 7

List of Tables
Table Title Page
1 Organizational mission, global goal and stakeholder goals 16
2 Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Types, and Knowledge Assessment 38
3 Motivation Influence, Motivation Types, and Motivation Assessment 43
4 Organizational Influence and Organization Assessment 46
5 Interview Participant Information 62
6 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 93
7 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 96
8 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 99
9 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 105
10 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 107
11 Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 108
12 Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 113
13 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program 114
14 Key Performance Indicators that will be Measured 116

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 8

List of Figures
Figure Title Page
1 Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within 49
Organizational Cultural Models and Settings
2 LCS Faculty Differentiation Practices 64
3 Faculty Conceptual Knowledge Related to Student Stress 65
4 LCS Faculty Procedural Knowledge 66
5 Faculty Attribution of Student Stress 74
6 Additional Faculty Attribution Influences 75
7 Faculty Response to Attribution of Students’ Stress 78
8 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Developing Assignments 79
9 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Assignments 80
10 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Curriculum Adaptations 80
11 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Creating Assessments 81
12 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Assessments 81
13 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Instruction 82
14 Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Homework 82
15 Organizational Influence Questions 1 87
16 Organizational Influence Questions 2 88

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 9

Abstract

Stress in adolescence is not a new or uncommon concept. However, for high-achieving, affluent
teens, the anxieties and pressures associated with high school academic success and being
accepted to a highly selective college can lead to unmanageable levels of stress. This study
sought to understand the knowledge and motivation of faculty members at an independent high
school in southern California as well as organizational influences within the school related to
reducing school-related stress. Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis served as the
general conceptual and methodological framework for the study. A mixed methods
explanatory sequential study was conducted using surveys, interviews, and document analysis.
The findings of the study revealed that there is a gap in the faculty’s knowledge and motivation
related to reducing student stress and there are organizational influences inhibiting the school’s
ability to be successful in their goal if reducing student school-related stress.
The study concludes with recommendations for context-specific solutions grounded in literature
and the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), as well as an
integrated implementation and evaluation plan, strengths and weaknesses of the study,
limitations and delimitations, and recommendations for future study.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 10

CHAPTER ONE:

INTRODUCTION

Introduction of the Problem of Practice
Adolescence is, by its very nature, a stressful time. However, for high-achieving, affluent
teens, the anxieties and pressures associated with high school academic success and being
accepted to a highly selective college can lead to unmanageable levels of stress. Teens who feel
pressure to succeed are more likely to experience stress, anxiety, and depression, as well as to
engage in non-suicidal self- injury (NSSI), suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and substance
abuse (Luthar & Becker, 2002; Pope, 2010). While these self-destructive behaviors are not
exclusive to affluent teens, the research indicated that for these populations, the pressure that
they feel to succeed is more closely related to self-destructive behaviors than for other
populations (Luthar & Becker, 2002). These teens report symptoms of depression at an
alarmingly high rate, up to 54% (Galloway, Conner, & Pope, 2009), and suicide rates for these
students continue to rise as well (Lubell, Kegler, Crosby, & Karch, 2008). These kids are literally
killing themselves to get into college.
While affluent teens have not historically been seen as an ‘at-risk’ group, the mental-
health and self-destructive behaviors related to school-related stress have reached epidemic
proportions (Luthar & Becker, 2002). It is imperative that schools examine the policies,
procedures, and processes that contribute to increasing student stress, and subsequently make
adjustments that will create a healthier, developmentally appropriate learning environment.
Organizational Context and Mission
Linwood Christian School (LCS) (pseudonym) is an independent, TK-12, college-prep,
Christian school located in Southern California. An independent school is one that is funded by
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 11

tuition and not supported by the government or a church organization. The mission of LCS is to
prepare students academically, personally, and spiritually for college and beyond.
1

LCS was opened in 1936 as Carter Academy (pseudonym) in Los Angeles, California. Its
founder, Dr. Mary Carter (pseudonym), had the goal of creating a college-prep, independent,
Christ-centered school. She began the school with just a few students in her living room, and the
enrollment steadily grew from the years between 1936 and 1968, when the Board of Trustees
made the decision to move the campus and purchased 105 acres in rural Southern California
(school website). Admission to LCS is moderately competitive (school website). Currently, there
are 865 students enrolled in grade TK-12, representing an age range of 4-19 and a total of 593
families. There are three distinct divisions at LCS; the elementary school serves students in
grades TK-5, the middle school serves students in grades 6-8, and the high school serves grades
9-12. There are 94 international students studying at LCS in grades 4-12, with the greatest
population enrolled at the high school. There are 116 employees at LCS, and the faculty is made
up of 74 teachers. One hundred percent of the classroom teachers have a bachelor’s degree, 42%
have a master’s degree, and two faculty members have earned doctorates.
As a moderately selective independent school, LCS implements a rigorous college-prep
curriculum. On average, 99% of students attend college after graduation, and 90% attend a 4-
year college. In this environment, students feel pressure to achieve and be accepted at highly
selective colleges and universities. In a recent survey, 70% of grade 5-12 LCS students felt
stressed between half and all of the time (School survey report, 2017). As a faith-based school,
LCS’s mission is to develop students academically, spiritually, and personally, and the
significant stress facing LCS students is currently working against LCS fulfilling its mission. If

1
From the school website. URL is omitted to protect the anonymity of the organization.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 12

LCS hopes to achieve its mission of preparing the whole child, then the school must make
programmatic changes in order to address the high levels of school-related stress that its students
are facing.
Organizational Goal
Linwood Christian School has a number of goals aligned with its current strategic plan.
Each division and department have their own goals as well. One of the goals is that LCS will
reduce school-related student stress by 60% by the year 2020. The high school administration
team established this goal in conjunction with the director of college counseling during the
development of the strategic plan two years ago. The achievement of LCS’ goal will be
measured by surveys, homework load evaluations, interviews, and assessments by the behavioral
support specialist. Evaluating the organization’s performance will enable stakeholders to gather
formative data that can be used in order to assess the organization’s programming decisions that
decrease student stress.
Related Literature

Stress during the teen years is not a new phenomenon. Adolescence is a stressful time in
life. However, for affluent teens who attend high-achieving college-prep high schools, a new
level of stress has become the norm. This section will explain the increase in the difficulty of
gaining admission at highly selective colleges and universities, the maladaptive behaviors that
affluent teens are engaging in to try to become what they believe is the perfect college applicant,
and the mental health issues that are associated with the stress faced by these students.
In the past decade, the selectivity of the top colleges has doubled. In 2014, the University
of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), received more applications than any other college in the
country. Students submitted 86,000 applications, which was double the number of applications
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 13

that UCLA received in 2005 (University of California, 2018). In 2003, Harvard and Princeton
shocked the nation when their admission rate dropped below 20%. Harvard’s and Princeton’s
admission rates as of 2014 were approximately 6%, and over a dozen colleges have admission
rates that have dropped below 20% (Snyder, de Brey, & Dillow, 2016). For many affluent, high-
achieving teens, these low admission rates have created an admission frenzy, forcing students to
apply to more colleges than ever before. In 2011, 29% of students applied to more than seven
colleges, while that number was only 9% in 1990. That statistic is undoubtedly higher at high-
achieving high schools (Edmonds, 2015).
The uncertainty of admission into the top colleges, coupled with the pressures that these
teens feel to gain admission, leads students to push themselves to achieve academic success at all
costs. Galloway et al. (2009) report high levels of cheating behavior at independent middle and
high schools, with as many as 94% of students reporting an instance of cheating behavior.
Additionally, affluent teens are engaging in self-destructive behaviors such as substance abuse
and self-injury at increasing rates, and at rates that are higher than their peers in lower socio-
economic status households (Luthar & Becker, 2002).
Students feel pressure to take rigorous course loads that require a significant amount of
nightly homework, to participate in multiple high-commitment extracurricular activities, and to
commit hours to standardized test preparation frequently at the cost of their physical, mental, and
emotional health (Galloway, Conner, & Pope, 2013). The research has indicated that for high-
achieving, affluent teens, the pressure to meet these difficult standards of success leads them to
anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and substance abuse (Galloway et al.,
2013; Pope, 2001; Rahdar & Galvan, 2014; Yates, Tracy, & Luthar, 2008). In a longitudinal
qualitative study of eight high school students from a high-performing school in the Bay Area of
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 14

California, Pope (2001) demonstrated that students who were described by faculty and staff as
“model” or ideal students frequently had significant mental health issues, including self-injury.
Based on the research regarding this population of students, independent schools have a
responsibility to develop curriculum, support, and programming in order to address the stress
that these students face.
Importance of the Evaluation
Many affluent teens at high-achieving independent schools are frequently focused on
academic success at the cost of healthy physical, emotional, and socio-emotional development
(Gilman & Ashby, 2003). It is important to address and decrease the stress that affluent teens
experience, because it has been demonstrated that these students are engaging in substance abuse
and non-suicidal self-injury at an alarmingly high rate (Yates et al., 2008). Suicide rates also
continue to climb for children aged 10-17 (Lubell et al., 2008). As they grow up, these teens are
unlikely to outgrow the depression, substance abuse, and maladaptive perfectionism that they
have developed, and this will lead to a number of negative outcomes in their adult lives,
including continued substance abuse, incarceration, pregnancy prior to age 21, psychiatric
hospitalization, and overall lower global functioning (Bogard, 2005). Admission rates for top
colleges will continue to decline rapidly, making it more difficult for these students to achieve
their definition of success. High schools, colleges, and parents must all address the current
practices that are forcing students to sacrifice their mental well-being in order to achieve an
unachievable prize. The recent suicide clusters in Palo Alto, California serve as a warning to
educators in these affluent communities that solving this problem is critically important, a matter
of life and death (Canaday, 2016). It is important for a number of reasons to evaluate the
organization’s performance in relationship to the performance goal of reducing student stress. If
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 15

LCS does not address student stress, students will be more likely to engage in destructive
behaviors and substance abuse, and will be more likely to develop mental health issues (Leonard
et al., 2015). And perhaps most importantly, if student stress is not addressed, LCS will not be in
alignment with their whole-child, Christ-centered mission (LCS website).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There are four main stakeholder groups at Linwood Christian School. The first group of
stakeholders is obviously the students. As a school, the students are the primary stakeholder
group and the focus of the mission of the institution. As a K-12 school, students range in age
from four to 19 years old, and the mission must serve a wide age and developmental range. The
next stakeholder group is the faculty. The faculty at LCS is made up of the classroom teachers in
grades K-12. The LCS faculty is critical to the mission of LCS, as they are responsible for all
aspects of instruction and curriculum delivery. Another stakeholder group is the parents. LCS is
a private, independent school, and parents choose to enroll their children in the school and to pay
tuition. The parents support the school and its mission. The final stakeholder group is non-faculty
employees. This group is made up of administrators and staff members. The non-faculty
employees support the students, parents, and faculty members.
Stakeholders Groups’ Performance Goals
In order to achieve the mission of the school, each set of stakeholders has developed
goals that align with the overall mission of the school, as well as the goal of reducing school-
related stress. Table 1 describes the stakeholder goals for faculty, students, and parents at
Linwood Christian School.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 16

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Goals

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, for practical
purposes, the stakeholder group that was the focus of this study is the faculty. While all
stakeholder groups can contribute to increasing or reducing student stress, the teachers are in the
best position to create policy and curricular changes that will significantly reduce student stress.
The faculty is central to delivering the mission and achieving the goals of LCS.
In order to determine the stakeholder goal, the high school administrative team reviewed
the research regarding the biggest factors that had an impact on student stress. The high school
administrative team determined that homework load and assessments were the most significant
Organizational Mission

The mission of LCS is to prepare students academically, personally, and spiritually for college
and beyond.

Organizational Global Goal

By the year 2020, LCS will reduce school-related student stress by 60%.

Stakeholder 1

Faculty

Stakeholder 2

Students
Stakeholder 3

Parents
Stakeholder 1 Intermediate
Goals

By May 2020, the LCS
faculty will develop and
implement homework and
assessment policies that
utilize differentiation and
mastery learning in order to
reduce student stress.
Stakeholder 2 Intermediate
Goals

By May 2020, 100% of high
school students will
demonstrate strategies to
reduce stress.
Stakeholder 3 Intermediate
Goals

By May 2020, 100% of LCS
parents will have enrolled in a
school-sponsored parent
education course regarding
student stress.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 17

causes of school-related stress that could be controlled. Since SAT and ACT exams, as well as
college entrance decisions, are out of the control of the school, homework and assessments
became the focus of the stakeholder goal. The high school administrative team made the decision
that the entire faculty must work together in order to meet this goal and set the participation level
at 100%. The achievement of LCS’ goal will be measured by surveys, homework load
evaluations, interviews, and assessments by the behavioral support specialist. It is important for a
number of reasons to evaluate the organization’s performance in relation to the performance goal
of reducing student stress. If LCS does not address student stress, the students will be more likely
to engage in destructive behaviors and substance abuse, and will be more likely to develop
mental health issues (Leonard et al., 2015). Additionally, if student stress is not addressed, LCS
will not be in alignment with their whole-child, Christ-centered mission (LCS website).
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which Linwood Christian
School is meeting its goal to reduce school-related student stress. The analysis focused on
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational
goals. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical
purposes, the stakeholder to be focused on in this analysis was the faculty.
The following questions guided the evaluation study that addressed the knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational influences for the faculty of LCS:
1. To what extent is the organization meeting its goal?
2. What is the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to reducing student stress?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 18

Methodological Framework
The Clark and Estes (2008) framework can be used by organizations to identify
organizational and stakeholder goals and to identify whether a gap exists between the goals and
performance levels of the stakeholders. If a gap exists, this framework focuses on the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences that contribute to the gap between goals and
performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). Krathwohl (2002) identifies four types of knowledge: (a)
factual; (b) conceptual; (c) procedural; and (d) metacognitive. The KMO model looks at each
type of knowledge in order to determine whether the stakeholders know how to reach the stated
goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). The motivational indices that are evaluated are choice, persistence,
and mental effort, and the motivational constructs are self-efficacy, values, and attributions
(Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Organizational influences such as policies, processes,
culture, and resources are also evaluated as part of the gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Definitions
Affluent Teens: Teenaged students whose parents are upper-class, making over $150,000 (twice
the national median income), and generally with parents who have a high level of education
(Luthar & Barkin, 2012).
Independent School: A school that is independent in terms of its finances and governance,
funded by tuition paid by parents as well as donations (NAIS, 2018).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in the research relating to affluent teens and
school stress. The organization’s mission, goals, and stakeholders were introduced, along with
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 19

the framework for the project. Chapter Two provides a review of the current literature
surrounding the scope of the study, as well as the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
elements to be evaluated. Chapter Three details the methodology regarding choice of
participants, data collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and
analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and literature, for closing the perceived
gaps, as well as recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 20

CHAPTER TWO:

LITERATURE REVIEW

This literature review examines school-related stress faced by affluent teens (AT),
particularly in the area of college admission. The review begins with a historic look at school-
related stress and an examination of current stressors facing AT. Next will be a review of the
literature on the increase in stress-related mental health issues faced by AT. The literature will be
presented on the maladaptive behaviors associated with the stress that AT face. Following the
general research literature, the review turns to the Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual
Framework, and specifically the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on
teachers’ ability to reduce school-related stress among AT.
Beyond Storm and Stress
Stress in adolescence is not a new phenomenon. Since the late 19
th
century, when the
concept of adolescence was developed as a moratorium on taking on adult responsibilities (Kett,
2003), adolescents have faced stress (Hines & Paulson, 2007). As early as 1904, adolescence has
been characterized as a time of storm and stress (Hines & Paulson, 2007). However, teens living
in the 21
st
century, particularly AT and including those who attend rigorous, college-preparatory
high schools, face a level of stress that goes far beyond the normal adolescent stress that many of
today’s adults faced (Conner, Pope, & Galloway, 2009; Galloway et al., 2013; Pope, Brown, &
Miles, 2015). Research has indicated that these students are more likely to experience stress-
related symptoms such as anxiety and depression, self-injury and suicidal ideation, and substance
abuse (Lubell et al., 2008; Luthar & Becker, 2002; Pope, 2010; Pope et al., 2015). While these
issues are not exclusive to AT, research has indicated that for these teens, the pressure that they
feel to succeed in school and be admitted to a highly selective college or university can lead to
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 21

unmanageable levels of stress and the development of these maladaptive behaviors (Galloway et
al., 2013; Pope, 2001; Rahdar & Galvan, 2014; Yates et al., 2008).
School-Related Stress in Affluent Teens
History and Increase in Stress in Affluent Teens
While adolescence has always been a stressful time, the stress is even more significant
for affluent teens (APA, 2009; Galloway et al., 2013; Leonard et al., 2015; Levine, 2006; Luthar
& Becker, 2002; Perez-Pena, 2014). Affluent teens feel a tremendous pressure to be accepted to
college, and frequently to highly selective colleges, but admission to these colleges is
increasingly difficult to achieve. According to Snyder et al. (2016), college enrollment peaked in
2011, but the selectivity of the most selective colleges continues to increase. According to Liu,
Ehrenberg, and Mrdjenovic (2007), students continue to apply to more colleges than ever before.
In 1990, students who applied to more than seven colleges only made up 9% of the population,
but in 2011, 29% of students applied to more than seven schools. Perez-Pena (2014) posits that
the uncertainty of the specific selection criteria has created a scattershot approach to college
applications in what leads to an admission frenzy. Bound, Hershbein, and Long (2009) explain
that the ease of applying to many colleges with one application, as well as the preponderance of
students over-applying, perpetuates the college admission frenzy and actually misrepresents the
selectivity of colleges. The most selective colleges received 37% of college applications in 2015
but enrolled only 22% of students, and this statistic indicates that students are over applying to
selective colleges (NACAC, 2017). From 2005-2014, UCLA has doubled the number of
applications that it receives, now receiving 86,000 applications for a freshman class size of
approximately 4,000 (University of California, 2018). The admission rates of Stanford, Duke,
Northwestern, Cornell, and the University of Pennsylvania have been cut in half in the past 10
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 22

years (Snyder et al., 2016). Common and universal applications have led to a widespread
increase in the number of applications received (Liu et al., 2007).
Affluent youth attending highly competitive private high schools (also called independent
schools) are one such subgroup which is at particular risk for high rates of chronic stress and its
negative effects. A qualitative study of two private high schools in the Northeast United States
by Leonard et al. (2015) indicated that schoolwork, grades, and college admissions constituted
the greatest sources of stress for students. Students felt that they had to participate in
extracurricular activities, entrepreneurial activities, standardized test prep, and tutoring in an
effort to distinguish themselves from their high-achieving classmates. The research claimed that
the AT in the study had the goal of becoming the perfect college applicant.
The American Psychological Association (APA) conducted a survey on stress in 2009.
The survey targeted 1568 adults and 1206 children who were aged 8-17 years. This study
showed that 45% of teens (ages 13-17 years) report that they worried more this year than last
year. Twenty-six percent of tweens (ages 8-12 years) also worried more, and parents’ awareness
of children’s stress was significantly lower. Parents believed that their children were not highly
stressed. Furthermore, 44% of all students (8-12) indicated that school was a significant cause of
worry. The three items that topped the list of stressors for teen (ages 13-17 years) were: doing
well in school (44%), getting into a good college (29%), and physical appearance (26%).
Madeline Levine (2006), a leading researcher on stress in affluent teens, discovered that
22% of affluent teen girls suffer from clinical depression, a proportion that is three times higher
than the national average. By the time they graduate high school, as many and one-third of them
will suffer from clinical anxiety. Affluent boys in the same age bracket suffer from anxiety and
depression at a higher rate than the national average, but not as high as the teen girls. However,
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 23

for older affluent teen boys, the alarming trend is the frequency and severity with which they
abuse substances. Levine’s research stated that between 30-40% of 12-18-year-olds from affluent
homes experience significant psychological issues, which meets the criteria for an epidemic.
Affluent teens have historically been seen as a low-risk group, but research over the past
15 years has shown AT to actually be at a significantly higher risk than any other adolescent
group for stress and stress-related symptoms (Galloway et al., 2013; Levine, 2006; Luthar &
Becker, 2002). In a qualitative study of 302 sixth and seventh grade students from an affluent
suburban community, Luthar and Becker (2002) found that these students demonstrated high
levels of stress, substance abuse, and delinquency. Within the fast-paced lifestyle of many teens
who have multiple scheduled extra-curricular activities in order to ensure the strength of their
college resume, many affluent families have decreased the practice of family dinners (Skeer &
Ballard, 2013). Luthar and Latendresse (2005) indicate that one reason why affluent teens
engage in risky behaviors is a perceived disconnection from their parents, and that stressed
students are even more likely to engage in self-destructive behavior. Levine (2006) pointed out
that what is most concerning about this population of students is that even though they are
experiencing depression, stress, sleeplessness, non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), and other
destructive behaviors, they still appear to the outside world as ideal children who have it all
together. However, adolescent suicide has quadrupled since 1950 (Levine, 2006).
Galloway et al. (2013) conducted a quantitative study of 4,317 suburban high school
teens from high-performing schools in upper middle-class communities and discovered that 72%
of students indicated that they are “often or always stressed over schoolwork” (p. 498). Further,
“eighty-two percent reported experiencing at least one physical symptom [of stress] in the past
month, with 44% of the sample experiencing three or more symptoms” (p. 499). This research
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 24

indicates a positive relationship between hours of homework and levels of stress. Students who
have high levels of stress show a “decreased ability to cultivate skills outside of schoolwork”
(Galloway et al., 2013, p. 499) and are more likely to quit extracurricular activities and hobbies
(Levine, 2006).
It is clear that affluent teens are more stressed than they have ever been in the history of
adolescence, and that they are more stressed about school than their peers from lower socio-
economic status households (Luthar, 2017; Luthar, Barkin, & Crossman, 2013; Luthar &
D’Avanzo, 1999). The next section will examine some of the causes of school-related stress.
Current Causes of School-Related Stress
It is clear that stress levels are increasing for affluent teens, and this section will review
the literature evaluating the current causes of school-related stress. Research related to
homework and standardized testing will be reviewed, followed by an understanding of the
pressures related to college admission. Finally, the literature regarding students’ perceived
pressure from home will also be discussed.
Homework. It is a simple formula: teens who do not get enough sleep are likely to
experience the negative symptoms of stress, and students who have heavy homework loads get
less sleep (Chang-Kook et al., 2005; Conner et al., 2005; Galloway et al., 2013; Galloway &
Pope, 2007). In two studies of independent school students, the average student had over three
hours of homework each night (Conner et al., 2009; Galloway & Pope, 2007). Appropriate levels
of sleep are critically important for proper adolescent development (Bryant & Gómez, 2015;
Gangwisch et al., 2010; Moore & Meltzer, 2008). Teens who do not get enough sleep have an
increased likelihood of experiencing anxiety and depression, as well as engaging in the risky and
maladaptive behaviors detailed in this literature review. Adolescents need between eight and ten
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 25

hours of sleep per night (Hirshkowitz et al., 2015), but students in affluent communities often
claim that their excessive homework loads require that they cut down on the number of hours of
sleep that they get (Chang-Kook et al., 2005). In fact, for many independent school students, the
lack of sleep is seen as a badge of honor (Levine, 2006). Sixty-eight percent of teens get 7 hours
of sleep or less per night (Eaton et al., 2010), and at high-achieving schools, over one-third get
six or fewer hours of sleep per night (Galloway & Pope, 2009). In Galloway and Pope’s (2009)
study, two-thirds of the students reported that schoolwork was a primary cause of their lack of
sleep. Over half reported difficulty sleeping due to their high levels of stress, and also that their
lack of sleep was also a cause of stress. Homework demands are the main reason students
provide for missing out on crucial hours of sleep (Chang-Kook et al., 2005).
Galloway and Pope’s (2007) study indicated that 67.8% of students claimed that the
things that caused the most stress in their lives was schoolwork done in class, preparing for and
taking tests, and homework assigned in the evenings. Furthermore, 65% of students reported that
they were always stressed by their homework. Due to the significant pressures of homework,
56% of students dropped a hobby or activity that they had previously enjoyed. Finally, this study
stated that the majority of students (77.4%) also reported having experienced one or more stress-
related physical problems in the month prior to the survey, with more than 50% reporting
headaches, difficulty sleeping, and/or exhaustion. Galloway et al. (2013) explain that studies that
have explored the relationship between homework and well-being indicate that number of hours
of homework each night is negatively associated with psychological well-being, physical health
symptoms, and sleep. Students in this study described their homework as overwhelming,
unmanageable, and more than they could handle. The researchers pointed out that homework
overload coupled with a lack of sleep inhibits a students’ ability to learn during school hours.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 26

Even though these students may be completing many hours of homework each night, the
research of Galloway et al. (2013) shows that students do not value homework and frequently
complete it only to get the points. Homework does not necessarily lead to real learning. As many
as 97% of students reported that they have cheated on their homework at some point in the past
year (Challenge Success, 2012).
Standardized testing. In addition to pressures to succeed in the classroom, affluent teens
face pressure to earn top scores on standardized tests such as the SAT, ACT, and AP exams
(Aurini & Davies, 2004; Buchmann et al., 2010; Levine, 2006; McDonough, 1997; McDonough,
1994). Parents are willing to pay a high price in order to prepare their student for high-stakes
college entrance testing. The uncertainty of college admission has driven parents to pay for
opportunities for their children, often hiring private SAT tutors and coaches to hopefully boost
their score (McDonough, 1994; McDonough, 1997). From 1994-2004, there was a 500%
increase in private tutoring companies in Canada (Aurini & Davies, 2004). According to
Buchmann et al. (2010), in 2009, The Princeton Review, one of the largest test-prep companies
in the country, earned $110 million on test preparation services. Roughly half of all American
students take the exam multiple times, and 15% take the test three or more times.
Students from more affluent backgrounds are more likely to take the SAT multiple times
and to engage in extensive test preparation (Vigdor & Clotfelter, 2003). The Princeton Review
and Kaplan Incorporated, two companies offering SAT preparation, offer products ranging from
online SAT courses to one-on-one tutoring. In 2007, The Princeton Review’s classroom courses
cost $1,000 to $1,200, and private tutoring ranged from $1,500 to $6,900. In either case, the
company guarantees a score increase or else customers can get the course fees refunded. Even
the College Board now sells test-prep products on its website, including test-prep books and
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 27

online courses (Buchmann et al., 2010). Levine (2006) warns that the intense preparation and the
focus on improving test scores creates competition among students that also increases stress
levels and is detrimental to positive social development. The significant financial investment and
the time that students take preparing for these tests increases the pressure to perform and adds yet
another commitment to students’ schedules.
College admission. Affluent teens feel tremendous pressure to become the perfect
college applicants at the cost of their physical, emotional, and psychological well-being. Leonard
et al. (2015) explain that students who attend independent schools are very clear on the explicit
expectations of their parents and their school to be admitted to a highly selective college or
university. They note that the substantial tuition that these families pay creates an added level of
pressure not felt by affluent teens who attend public schools (Leonard et al., 2015). Luthar and
Becker (2002) simply state that affluent teens are experiencing “excessive achievement pressure”
(p. 1594). The decreasing acceptance rates at top-tier colleges, coupled with the increased
pressure to be admitted to one of these colleges, has resulted in a perceived pressure to become
the perfect college applicant, while the definition of the perfect college applicant has
simultaneously become an impossible ideal.
Bound, Hershbein, and Long (2009) point out that the advent of popular college rankings
such as the US News and World Report has given parents and students a tool with which to
measure their success. Additionally, research has indicated that affluent teens perceive that their
parents value their achievements and extrinsic rewards like grades, standardized test scores,
honors and awards, and selective college admission (Levine, 2006; Luthar et al., 2013; Luthar &
Becker, 2002). In her longitudinal qualitative research study of eight teens at a high-achieving
college-prep school, Pope (2001) detailed the pressure that each student felt from different
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 28

members of their community, as well as self-imposed pressure. The students in Pope’s study
articulated their concerns that the sole aim of high school is to get into a good college, and that
upon graduation, they would be evaluated only by the college acceptance outcomes.
Perceived pressure from school and home. Leonard et al. (2015) indicated that for
students who attend private school, one of the ways that parents give the perception of pressure
is by reminding children of the cost of their tuition. The researchers stated that independent
school eleventh grade students experience very high levels of chronic stress, and that the
pressure to achieve academically in order to boost the chances of admission to top tier colleges
and universities constitutes the greatest source of stress. Parental expectations, coupled with
demanding academic curricula, appear to convey to students that the primary purpose of their
high school experience is admission to a selective college or university. This future-oriented
culture may push some students to use substances in order to cope with their stress.
In independent schools and affluent communities, parents tend to be more involved, even
over-involved (Levine, 2006). These parents encourage their children to participate in multiple
extra-curricular activities in order to ensure the strength of their college resume (Skeer &
Ballard, 2013). Despite the parental involvement, however, the practice of family dinners has
decreased among many affluent families, sending the message to children that their school
activities are of the utmost importance (Skeer & Ballard, 2013). The pressure to build a resume
and the financial commitment that these parents put into their children’s school, activities, and
test preparation translates into a perceived high pressure to achieve (Levine, 2006; Skeer &
Ballard, 2013). Bradley-Geist and Olson-Buchanan (2014) point out that that these “helicopter
parents” who become over-involved in order to mitigate negative outcomes or experiences and
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 29

ensure success actually diminish a student’s confidence in his or her own abilities and send the
message that an “at all costs” approach is necessary for ensuring success.
Maladaptive Behaviors Associated with Stress
Academic Dishonesty
The stress and pressure that students feel to earn high grades has led many students to
engage in academic dishonesty (Anderman, Griesinger, & Westerfield, 1998; Benenson Strategy
Group, 2009; Galloway et al., 2009; Josephson Institute, 2010; Ku, Dittmar, & Banerjee, 2012).
In Galloway et al.’s (2009) study, 90% of middle school students admitted to cheating at least
once in school. Ninety-seven percent of students admitted to cheating at least one time in the past
year, and 75% admitted to cheating four or more times in the past year. Twenty-six percent
admitted to being “repeat offenders” who admitted to cheating multiple times in a variety of
ways. According to the Josephson Institute (2010), a survey of 43,000 students from both public
and private high schools found that 59% of students surveyed admitted to having cheated on a
test in the past year. More than 80% admitted to having copied another student’s homework.
Furthermore, in an online survey of more than 1,000 teenage students, 35% of those who had cell
phones reported having used them to cheat at least once, and 65% said that they were aware that
others in their school cheat by using cell phones. Fifty-two percent of the students reported that
they had cheated using the internet (Benenson Strategy Group, 2009).
Anderman et al. (1998) point out that when students perceive that schools value
performance goals such as test scores and grades, they are more likely to justify and engage in
cheating. Additionally, when students perceive that they could earn a reward or privilege for
grades and scores, they are also more likely to cheat. Levine (2006) and Pope et al. (2015)
suggest that schools intentionally celebrate a broader definition of success beyond simply grades,
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 30

test scores, and college acceptances, and instead focus on character and the process of learning.
Intrinsic motivation is beneficial to student learning and achievement (Dweck, 2006; Levine,
2006; Mayer, 2011). Students who are offered an external reward for achievement are more
likely to cheat, and students who believe that their school values performance goals (e.g. grades,
test scores, college acceptances) are more likely to cheat and justify their cheating behaviors
(Anderman et al., 1998).
Ku et al. (2012) report that the attempt to motivate teens to be successful with the
promise of future financial success is counterproductive. They claim that those messages have
detrimental effects on mastery-oriented learning and discourage students from fully engaging in
learning, ultimately resulting in a deterioration of school grades over time. In an effort to nurture
intrinsic motivation, schools should celebrate students for achievements beyond performance
goal measures (Levine, 2006; Mayer, 2011).
Additionally, learning environments that focus on mastery learning and school
programming that focuses on collaboration, project-based learning, and appropriate homework,
and also one that varies assessments, would reduce the rate of cheating and combat the high
levels of stress, diminishing the effects of the “earn an A at all costs” mentality that is facing
affluent teens (Galloway & Pope, 2007). Learning is enhanced when students focus on mastery
learning (Mayer, 2011). A focus on a mastery goal orientation rather than a performance goal
orientation, as well as implementing an instructional design that encourages a mastery
orientation, shifts the focus away from grades and focuses instead on deep learning (Anderman,
Anderman, Yough, & Gimbert, 2010). Anderman et al. (2010) report that ever since the adoption
of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), the focus in terms of measuring academics
has been on achievement and progress. And this intense focus on success as determined by the
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 31

results of a set of tests has permeated school systems and directly influences the kinds of
achievement goals that students set for themselves.
Substance Abuse
The high level of stress, pressure, and lack of sleep for affluent teens has resulted in an
increase in the rate of substance abuse by these populations. Historically, affluent teens have not
abused substances at a higher rate than their peers from lower socio-economic status households,
but the reasons that they use them are different, as AT indicate that they abuse substances in
order to self-medicate and to avoid feelings of anxiety and depression (Luthar & D’Avanzo,
1999). New research has shown that substance abuse rates are on the rise for AT (Luthar, 2015).
From 1997 to 2013, high school students’ use of cigarettes and cigars in the U.S. dropped, but
marijuana use has more than doubled during the same period (Rolle et al., 2015). Affluent teens
also reported abusing legal and illegal stimulants in order to stay awake, focus, and to get high
(Galloway et al., 2009; Partnership for a Drug Free America, 2008; Wilens et al., 2008). In 2010,
25% of 12th grade students, 20% of 10th grade students, and 11% of 8th grade students reported
the use of illicit drugs within the previous 30 days. For 8th graders, this rate was up from 8% in
2009 (Johnston, O’Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2011).
Many of these teens claim that stress, pressure, depression and sleeplessness are among
the reasons that they abuse substances (Eaton et al., 2012). Seventy-three percent of students
listed academic stress as their primary reason for using drugs, yet only 7% of parents believe that
teens might use drugs in order to deal with stress. Sleep-deprived students also abuse substances
at a rate higher than well-rested teens; 50% of sleep-deprived teens used alcohol versus 37% of
non-sleep-deprived teens. One quarter of sleep-deprived teens report that they smoke, compared
to 15% among their well-rested counterparts. Students who are sleep-deprived are also two times
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 32

more likely to contemplate suicide and are more likely to smoke marijuana, engage in sexual
activity, and struggle with feelings of depression (Eaton et al., 2012).
Anxiety and Depression
The rates of children with anxiety disorders and depression are increasing. There are over
17 million children in the United States who have a diagnosable psychiatric disorder, and one
third of those are anxiety disorders (Child Mind Institute, 2010). Up to one quarter of teens in the
United States experience symptoms of emotional distress (Knopf, Park, & Paul Mulye, 2009).
The research of Luthar and Latendresse (2005) indicates that affluent teen girls are three times
more likely to suffer from clinical depression than their peers from lower socio-economic status
households. From 1995-2002, the number of children’s doctor visits that included reports of
depression had doubled (Ma, Lee, & Stafford, 2005). Depression and anxiety impact
approximately 20% of the teen population (Clarke & Harvey, 2012; Knopf et al., 2009), and at
high-achieving schools, these numbers are higher and continue to climb (Galloway & Pope,
2007; Levine, 2006).
Suicide, Suicidal Ideation, and Non-Suicidal Self-Injury
In addition to increasing rates of anxiety and depression, rates of suicide, suicidal
ideation, and non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) are also on the rise. In 2011, 15.8% of high school
students seriously considered attempting suicide at some point within the previous 12 months.
Twelve percent of high school students planned how they would attempt suicide, and 7.8% of
students attempted suicide one or more times (Eaton et al., 2008). These alarming rates are even
higher among affluent teens (Levine, 2006). Between 2003 and 2004, the rate of suicide
increased 32% among young women aged 15-19 (Lubell, Kegler, Crosby, & Karch, 2007), and
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 33

suicide is the fourth largest cause of death among people between the ages of 10 and 24
(National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2007).
The Clark and Estes Gap Analytic Conceptual Framework
The knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in the Clark and Estes (2008)
gap analysis will be addressed as they relate to the organizational and stakeholder goals of
Linwood Christian School. The first section will discuss knowledge influences impacting
Linwood faculty achieving their goal. The next section will discuss motivational influences
present within the Linwood faculty. Finally, the organizational influences within Linwood
Christian School will be examined.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
Knowledge and Skills
In order for the Linwood Christian School (LCS) faculty to achieve their goal of
developing and implementing homework and assessment policies that utilize differentiation and
mastery learning to reduce school-related stress, they must possess the knowledge and skills with
which to implement the necessary changes. This section will review literature that focuses on
knowledge-related influences that are pertinent to the achievement of the goals of the faculty at
LCS. It is important to examine whether employees have the appropriate knowledge and skills,
because research has indicated that gaps in knowledge and motivation can influence an
organization’s ability to achieve its goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Knowledge influences. This section will examine literature relevant to LCS’s
stakeholder goal of developing and implementing homework and assessment policies that utilize
differentiation and mastery learning that will reduce student stress. Krathwohl (2002) defines the
four types of knowledge as factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 34

knowledge is the knowledge of the facts, details, and elements relating to a discipline or subject.
Second, conceptual knowledge is knowledge about the interrelationships between elements and
how they function together. In the third type, procedural knowledge, there is a movement from
“what” into “how,” referring to the method, process, or how-to. Finally, metacognitive
knowledge is the awareness of one’s own cognition; in other words, thinking about thinking.
In an effort to analyze the knowledge and skills necessary for the LCS faculty to achieve
their goals, the knowledge influences will be categorized. It is important to categorize the
knowledge influences in order to be able to appropriately address any gaps in knowledge (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Faculty awareness. The first knowledge influence associated with LCS’s faculty goal is
a conceptual knowledge issue. While teachers may be aware of the workload in their particular
class and have an understanding of the general stress levels of their students, they do not
understand the overwhelming pressure that students face coming from multiple directions at once
(Luthar & Becker, 2002; Pope et al., 2015; Pope, 2010).
In 1989, Penelope Eckert made the statement that “ignorance about adolescents leads us
to trivialize their experience” (p. 23). In the 30 years since, there has been more research on
adolescents and their high school experience, and while most teachers understand that high
school is a stressful time for students, research shows that faculty at high-achieving high schools
do not have a complete understanding of the significant level of stress that students face (Luthar
& Becker, 2002; Pope et al., 2015; Pope, 2010). In fact, in one qualitative study of affluent teens
in the Bay Area of California, many of the students who were identified by the faculty as model
students or in some way ideal were actually struggling with serious mental health issues,
including depression, anxiety, and self-harm (Pope, 2001).
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 35

Pope et al. (2015) point out that not all stress is bad. Eustress, the normal stress
associated with daily living, can be healthy. These are the little butterflies before an oral
presentation, the natural adrenaline that helps performance. However, teachers are urged to not
mistake or dismiss the significant, oppressive, and long-term stress that these students face with
their homework, extracurricular activities, and standardized test prep as simply eustress.
The amount of time that students spend on homework has steadily increased over the past
20 years (Challenge Success, 2012). At high-achieving schools, students do on average 3.07
hours of homework per night (Conner et al., 2009). The research also indicated that, at the high
school level, the association between homework and student achievement disappears after two
hours of homework (Cooper, 2007; Cooper, Jackson, Nye & Lindsay, 2001; Cooper &
Valentine, 2001). It is no surprise based on the many hours spent on homework and
extracurricular activities (Pope et al., 2015) that the average teen at these high-achieving schools
only sleeps six hours per night, which is two thirds of the recommended amount of sleep for
adolescents (American Academy of Pediatrics/AAP, 2014; Carskadon, 1999).
The pace of life is faster today than it was 20 years ago when the average Linwood
Christian High School teacher was in school (School human resources document). The number
of AP courses has increased from 11, when the courses were initially developed, to 38 courses
offered today. Additionally, the number of students enrolled in AP courses doubled from 2003-
2013, while prior to that, it had taken 50 years for the enrollment in such courses to double
(Collegeboard, 2014). It is important that educators do not trivialize student stress and instead
learn how they can make positive changes to their classrooms and coursework that can address
student stress.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 36

Faculty knowledge. Teachers do not know the strategies that they could use to
successfully adapt the curriculum to differentiate learning and homework and to focus on
mastery learning. This knowledge influence relates to procedural knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002;
Rueda, 2011). Procedural knowledge is related to knowing how to do something, from the
process of completing a task to the “particular methodologies that are required to accomplish
specific activities” (Rueda, 2011, p. 28). If the LCS faculty is going to meet its goal of reducing
student stress associated with schoolwork, then they must learn how to adapt their curricula in
order to differentiate learning and homework and to focus on mastery learning.
The practice of differentiating instruction simply means treating different groups of
students differently in terms of instruction, delivery, and assessment. The main reason to
differentiate is to best meet students’ academic needs (Rice & Simile, 2014). Differentiation can
improve student learning and reduce stress (Tieso, 2004).
The first step for the LCS faculty to address school-related stress is for them to learn and
understand cognitive load theory (Kirschner, Kirschner, & Paas, 2006; Mayer, 2011) and
information processing theory (Mayer, 2011; Schraw & McCrudden, 2006) so that they can
adjust and adapt their curriculum using strategies that align with current research on student
learning. Some of these strategies include assessing students’ prior knowledge, avoiding
overloading students with extraneous material, breaking information into smaller parts (Mayer,
2011), understanding how to assess students’ prior knowledge in order to connect new
knowledge to prior knowledge, and helping them to develop mastery by acquiring, practicing,
and applying skills (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Though LCS does have an admission entrance test (school website), students do not come
to each course with the same prior knowledge. Research shows that when prior knowledge is not
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 37

taken into consideration in the design and implementation of new content, one could potentially
increase the cognitive load and stress levels of the students in the class (Kirschner et al., 2006).
Instruction should be centered within a student’s zone of proximal development (ZPD), which is
what they can accomplish with little to no assistance; since students within a classroom may
have very different ZPDs, differentiating the curriculum will increase learning and reduce stress
(Scott & Palinscar, 2006).
Within the classroom, differentiation can be achieved through a number of pedagogical
strategies, including team-based learning, active learning, and problem-based learning. Research
confirms that this differentiation leads to improved student achievement and reduces stress
(Yuretich, & Kanner, 2015). In his seminal work, On the Design and Evaluation of School
Programs, Elliot Eisner (2002) explains John Dewey’s progressive education:
This model of teaching and learning is formidable. Recipes are much easier and
much more comforting to those who require direction regarding what to do. If
students were uniform in background, desires, and aptitudes, recipes might be
useful. Children are not uniform, hence recipes simply will not do. (p. 14)
Differentiating in-class instruction is challenging and requires a great depth of
pedagogical knowledge. Homework is easier to differentiate. Pope et al. (2015) point out that if
everyone in class is assigned the same 30 math questions, but one student zips through it easily
while another struggles for 20 minutes to answer the first two questions, the homework is not
valuable for either student. Thus, they recommend that teachers differentiate homework for each
student in order to maximize learning by providing the right level of challenge for each student.
The benefits of differentiation are clear (Kirschner et al., 2006; Pope et al., 2015; Scott &
Palinscar, 2006). However, professional development time for the faculty is limited, and teachers
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 38

often choose more easily adopted or more interesting topics. But if LCS wants to achieve its goal
of reducing school-related stress, then the faculty will need to understand the benefits of
differentiation and choose to pursue professional development in that area. Differentiating
coursework and homework will be an important step toward helping the LCS faculty meet their
goal of reducing school-related stress.
Table 2 provides the organizational mission, organizational goal, and knowledge
influences, knowledge types, and knowledge influence assessments.
Table 2
Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Types, and Knowledge Assessment

Organizational Mission

The mission of LCS is to prepare students academically, personally, and spiritually for college
and beyond.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 39

Table 2 (continued)
Motivation
Knowledge and motivation are deeply interconnected, and both influences are necessary
for the LCS faculty to meet their goals. This section will review literature related to motivation
influences that relate to LCS faculty being able to reduce student stress. Motivation is a difficult
influence to measure, but research has indicated that it can be assessed by looking at one’s
choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). Choice relates to making the active
Organizational Global Goal
By the year 2020, LCS will reduce school-related student stress by 60%.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, the LCS faculty will develop and implement homework and assessment policies
that utilize differentiation and mastery learning in order to reduce student stress.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type (i.e.,
declarative (factual or
conceptual),
procedural, or
metacognitive)

Knowledge Influence Assessment
Teachers need to be aware of
the level of stress that our high
school students experience.
Conceptual Interview Questions:
1. Do you think LCS students
are stressed?
2. From your perspective,
how stressed are LCS
students?
3. In what ways do you see
students demonstrating that
they are stressed?
Teachers need to know the
strategies with which to
successfully adapt the
curriculum in order to
differentiate learning and
homework and focus on
mastery learning.

Procedural Interview Questions:
1. What are some strategies
you use in your classroom
to differentiate classwork?
What about homework?
2. In looking at your
curriculum, what are some
ways that you have
adjusted the curriculum to
focus on mastery learning?

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 40

choice to engage in an activity or pursue a goal. Persistence relates to whether an individual is
able to continue to work toward a goal, ignoring distractions and competing goals. Mental effort
refers to the energy and effort that one puts into accomplishing a task or goal (Clark & Estes,
2008).
For LCS to be successful in accomplishing its goal, it is critical that both the knowledge
and motivation influences must be addressed in the faculty. Based on the stakeholder goals for
the LCS faculty, two assumed motivational influences have been identified. The first
motivational influence relates to faculty attribution and attribution theory (Anderman &
Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011). The second assumed motivation influence involves faculty self-
efficacy (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). Details about each theory and how they affect LCS’s
ability to meet its goals are provided in the following sections.
Attribution theory. Attribution theory is an important construct to examine when
evaluating motivation. Attributions, or control beliefs (Rueda, 2011), examine individuals’
beliefs about the causes of success or failure (Anderman & Anderman, 2009). After an
achievement-related event, the participant will evaluate the causes of the outcome. In attribution
theory, there are three dimensions: stability, locus, and controllability (Anderman & Anderman,
2009; Rueda, 2011).
Stability versus instability refers to whether the attribution is permanent, temporary, or
changeable (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011). For example, if two students did
poorly on a math exam and one student attributed his/her poor grade to the fact that he/she is bad
at math, that is a stable attribution. But if the other student felt that he/she had been unsuccessful
on the exam because he/she were ill at the time of the test, that would be a temporary, or
unstable, attribution (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011).
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 41

Locus refers to whether the cause of the outcome is internal or external (Anderman &
Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011). In the example above of the two students who failed a math test,
the first student who thinks he/she is bad at math has an internal attribution. If the other student
believed he/she failed the test because the teacher did a poor job of teaching, he/she has an
external attribution (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011).
Finally, controllability refers to the perception of whether the outcome is in the control of
the individual (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011). In the same previous math test
example, if one student felt that he/she failed because he/she is bad at math, that is an outcome
outside of his/her control. If the other student felt that he/she failed the test because he/she did
not study enough, that outcome is within his/her control. It is important to know that the
attributions do not have to be accurate in order to impact motivation; the attributions are simply
the individual’s beliefs, correct or not (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011).
Attributions greatly affect motivation, because if one believes that the outcome of an
activity is out of one’s control, he/she will be unlikely to be motivated, since he/she does not
believe that their effort will affect the outcome. Conversely, if an individual believes that they
are in control of an outcome, they will be highly motivated (Anderman & Anderman, 2009;
Rueda, 2011).
Faculty attributions. According to cognitive load theory, all information is processed
through one’s schema, which is a mental framework for remembering and processing
information (Kirschner et al., 2006). As such, teachers have unconscious assumptions and beliefs
about both their teaching and their students (Kagan, 1992). While there is not significant research
on teachers’ beliefs about student stress, there is clear research that teachers’ beliefs, or
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 42

attributions, greatly affect their teaching practice (Duffy & Roehler, 1986; Kagan, 1992; Stipek,
Givven, Salmon & MacGyvers, 2001).
Kagan’s (1992) research indicated that “teachers’ beliefs appear to be relatively stable
and resistant to change” (p.66). These beliefs can be regarding students’ ability, the material to
be taught, the effectiveness of teaching, or their own teaching ability. Stipek et al. (2001) point
out that teachers’ beliefs affect their classroom behavior, which aligns with attribution theory
(Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011). If teachers believe that their instruction does not
have an impact on student stress, they will likely not be motivated to change. And research has
indicated that teachers in general are resistant to change their instructional strategies (Aguirre &
Speer, 2000; Duffy & Roehler, 1986; Kagan, 1992; Stipek et al., 2001).
In order for the LCS faculty to meet their goal of developing and implementing a
homework and assessment plan that will reduce student stress, it will be essential that they
address teacher beliefs and attributions regarding students’ stress levels (Anderman &
Anderman, 2009; Stipek et al., 2001).
Self-Efficacy. Another important construct to examine when evaluating motivation is
self-efficacy. Self-efficacy, or competence beliefs, are the beliefs that individuals hold about
their capabilities (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). It is important to differentiate self-efficacy from
self-confidence, which is an overall perception of one’s self (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). Self-
efficacy relates to how an individual believes that they will be able to perform on a task (Pajares,
2006; Rueda, 2011). Self-efficacy relates to motivation in that individuals who have a high-self
efficacy for a task will be more likely to be motivated to accomplish it. It is important to note
that, like attributions, one’s self-efficacy does not have to be accurate for it to impact motivation
(Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011).
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 43

Faculty self-efficacy. Self-efficacy beliefs drive actions and motivation (Knoblauch &
Chase, 2015; Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). Knoblauch and Chase (2015) state that “teachers with
a strong sense of efficacy are more willing to learn and apply innovative and complex strategies”
(p.105). As stated above, self-efficacy is task-specific, and while there is little to no research on
teachers’ efficacy for adapting curriculum, the research is clear on the fact that if teachers do not
believe that it is valuable (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003), and do not think that they can make an
impact on the problem or are capable of the task at hand (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011), then they
are not likely to be motivated to adapt the curriculum in a meaningful way.
Table 3 provides the organizational mission, organizational goal, and motivational
influences, motivational types, and motivation influence assessments.
Table 3
Motivation Influence, Motivation Types, and Motivation Assessment
Organizational Mission

The mission of LCS is to prepare students academically, personally, and spiritually for college
and beyond.

Organizational Global Goal
By the year 2020, LCS will reduce school-related student stress by 60%.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, the LCS faculty will develop and implement homework and assessment policies
that utilize differentiation and mastery learning in order to reduce student stress.
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivational Influence Assessment

Attribution Theory - Teachers need to know that
students’ high levels of stress can be impacted by
instructional practices rather than students’ lack
of ability to manage the load.
Written survey item: “Student stress is
strongly influenced by the amount of effort I
put into adapting the lesson.” (strongly
disagree-strongly agree)
Interview item: “What are some of the
causes for low academic performance in your
class?”
Self-Efficacy - Instructors need to believe that
they are capable of effectively developing
Written survey item: “I am capable of
developing assignments that focus on
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 44

Organization
General theory. Understanding the LCS faculty’s knowledge and motivation is important to
achieving the goals of LCS. However, while faculty members’ knowledge and motivation are
important to address, it is also necessary to look at the organizational influences within LCS that
contribute to or hinder the faculty from being able to meet its goals. This section will review
literature related to organizational influences that impact LCS faculty achieving its goal of
reducing student stress.
Clark and Estes (2008) define culture as “the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and
processes learned as people develop over time” (p.108). Cultural setting refers to the visible,
concrete, and articulated policies and procedures that exist within an organization (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001). The cultural model refers to the invisible values, beliefs, and attitudes that
are present within an organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda, 2011; Schein, 2004).
In order to understand an organization’s culture, both the cultural models and cultural settings
must be analyzed (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Stakeholder-specific factors. The cultural setting and cultural models within LCS may
be affecting the faculty’s ability to meet their goal of reducing student stress. As detailed in the
literature review, one of the contributors to student stress is celebrating achievements or
outcomes such as Advanced Placement exam scores, acceptance to highly selective colleges and
universities, grade point averages, and SAT/ACT scores (Buchmann, Condron, & Roscigno,
2010; Levine, 2006; McDonough, 1994). The literature also points out that differentiating
assignments that focus on mastery, learning, and
understanding.
mastery, learning, and understanding.”
(strongly disagree-strongly agree)
Interview item: “How confident do you feel
about creating assignments that focus on
mastery?
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 45

schoolwork, assessments, and homework can reduce student stress (Conner et al., 2009;
Galloway et al., 2013; Galloway & Pope, 2007). Finally, an important step toward reducing
student stress is to educate parents on its seriousness and causes (APA, 2009; Bradley-Geist &
Olson-Buchanan, 2014; Conner et al., 2009; Leonard et al., 2015; Levine, 2006; McDonough,
1994). It’s not enough for the faculty to simply have the knowledge and motivation about
reducing student stress. The organization as a whole must also ensure that there are not any
organizational practices impeding the goal. Table 4 provides the organizational mission,
organizational goal, and motivational influences, motivational types, and motivation influence
assessments.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 46

Table 4
Organizational Influence and Organization Assessment
Organizational Mission
The mission of LCS is to prepare students academically, personally, and spiritually for college
and beyond.

Organizational Global Goal
By the year 2020, LCS will reduce school-related student stress by 60%.

Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, the LCS faculty will develop and implement homework and assessment policies
that utilize differentiation and mastery learning in order to reduce student stress.
Assumed
Organizational
Influences

Organizational
Influence Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation
or Solution
Principle

Proposed Solution
The organization needs
to celebrate students for
process and character,
not simply outcome-
based results such as
Advanced Placement
scores, grade point
averages, and
admission to selective
colleges, SAT/ACT
scores. (Cultural
Setting)
• What are the
main reasons
that students are
celebrated at
LCS?
• Tell me about
your experience
with
standardized
tests. Do you
believe that the
school considers
these scores as a
reflection of
you, the
teacher?
Organizational
effectiveness
increases when
leaders identify,
articulate, focus,
and reinforce the
organization’s
vision (Waters,
Marzano, &
McNulty, 2003).

Clark and Estes
(2008) state that
when policies and
procedures are
aligned and
communicated with
all stakeholders,
performance
increases.
Broaden the
categories for
celebrating student
success and
increase the
frequency of
celebrating students
for non-academic,
mission-aligned
reasons.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 47

Table 4 (continued).

The organization needs to
provide professional
development that enables
faculty to differentiate
assignments and
assessments.
(Cultural Model)
• Tell me about the
professional
development you
have done in the
past 3 years.
• Tell me about any
professional
development
experiences you
have relating to
differentiation.
Organizational
effectiveness
increases when
leaders ensure that
employees have the
resources needed to
achieve the
organization’s goals
(Waters et al., 2003).
Differentiate
schoolwork,
assessments, and
homework in order
to reduce student
stress.
The organization needs to
provide events to educate
parents on levels of
student stress.
(Cultural Model)
• What sort of
parent education
events has the
school provided?
• What experiences
have you had
educating parents
on how to help
their children
navigate stress in
your classroom?

Effective leaders are
knowledgeable about
the use of effective
communication skills
to facilitate change
and enhance
organizational
capacity (Conger &
Jay, 1991; Denning,
2005; Lewis, 2011).
An important step in
reducing student
stress is to educate
parents on the
seriousness and
causes of student
stress.

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
A conceptual, or theoretical, framework is the structure, frame, underlying thoughts,
theories, concepts, and ideas that inform a researcher and a research study (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Maxwell (2013) explains that a conceptual framework is a model of
what information exists in the literature related to a particular study, and how these items interact
with one another. While each potential influence listed in the influencer tables was presented as a
separate influence on the goals of the faculty at LCS, the influences in reality do not remain in
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 48

isolation from each other, and each influence must therefore be evaluated through a conceptual
framework that explains how they interact with each other. In addition to explaining how the
influences relate to each other within this study, the conceptual framework justifies the research
and helps define the best methods for research.
The conceptual framework for this study evaluated previous literature related to student
stress associated with schoolwork and college admission, as well as how the research related to
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences present at LCS. The framework placed
the goals of Linwood Christian School in the context of the general literature related to student
stress and informs the researcher on which methods should be used to complete the study.
In addition to the conceptual framework, a worldview is also present when constructing a
study. A worldview is a basic set of beliefs or assumptions that inform action (Creswell, 2014).
The worldview associated with this study is a postpositivist worldview, which is a deterministic
philosophy in which there is a cause and effect relationship (Creswell, 2014). As the general
literature points out, there are clear practices relating to homework, coursework, assessments,
and college preparation that contribute to or reduce student stress. A positivist worldview starts
with the assumption that there is a truth or reality that can be defined (Creswell, 2014), and that
aligns with the idea of this study that there are previously defined actions that can be taken to
assist LCS in achieving its goal.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 49

Figure 1. Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within
Organizational Cultural Models and Settings.

By May 2020, the LCS faculty will develop and
implement homework and assessment policies
that utilize differentiation and mastery learning
in order to reduce student stress.

Key

Organization

Stakeholder

Stakeholder
Influences

Influences
Interact

Influences
Lead to

Goal
Linwood Christian School
Cultural Settings and Cultural Models

LCS Faculty

Faculty
Knowledge:
• Conceptual
• Procedural
Faculty
Motivation:
• Attributions
• Self-efficacy

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 50

This figure explains the relationship between the organizational influences present at
LCS and how they interact with the faculty’s knowledge and motivation related to reducing
student stress, as well as how each of these work together to contribute to or prevent the LCS
faculty from achieving its goal.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the knowledge and motivation of the LCS
faculty, as well as the organizational influences present, that may support or hinder LCS in
achieving its goal of reducing student stress. The literature presented in Chapter Two reviewed
the current level and causes of stress in affluent teens, as well as strategies that can generally
reduce stress for students. Additionally, Chapter Two presented the LCS faculty’s knowledge,
motivation, and the organizational influences related to LCS achieving its goal. Finally, the
study’s conceptual framework was presented. Chapter Three will present the study’s
methodological approach.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 51

CHAPTER THREE:
METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the quantitative and qualitative approaches that were used to
conduct this study, including the research design, sampling strategy, data collection, and
instrumentation methods. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which
Linwood Christian School is meeting its goal of reducing school-related student stress. The
analysis focused on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving
the organizational goals. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all
stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder focused on in this analysis was the faculty.
These are questions that guided the evaluation study that addressed the knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational influences for the faculty of LCS:
1. To what extent is the organization meeting its goal?
2. What is the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to reducing student stress?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Participating Stakeholders
LCS has a number of stakeholders that contribute to the mission of the school, and
although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups, for practical purposes, the
stakeholder group that was the focus of this study was the high school faculty. While all
stakeholder groups can contribute either to increasing or reducing student stress, the teachers are
in the best position to create policy and curricular changes that will significantly reduce student
stress. The faculty is central to delivering the mission and achieving the goals of LCS.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 52

Survey Sampling Criteria
Criterion 1. Participants need to be full-time faculty members at Linwood Christian
School.
Survey Sampling Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
The stakeholder population of focus for this study was the high school faculty of
Linwood Christian School. Because the faculty of LCS is comprised of a relatively small number
of individuals (31), a census approach (Johnson & Christensen, 2015) was taken for the initial
survey, and a smaller sample was selected for interviews. Johnson and Christensen (2015)
indicate that a sample should be representative of the larger population, but if the population is a
small number, using a census or studying the whole population is preferable. As stated in the
methodological framework, this study was a mixed-methods study (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell,
2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) with an explanatory sequential approach (Creswell, 2014). The
initial collection of data was a quantitative survey of all LCS high school faculty members, and
the second round of data collection involved interviews with a smaller sample of the LCS high
school faculty members.
Interview Sampling Criteria
Criterion 1. Participants need to be full-time faculty members at Linwood Christian
School.
Criterion 2. Participants need to be faculty members who represent a cross-section of
age, gender, ethnicity, teaching department, and tenure at LCS.
Interview and/or Focus Group Sampling Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
The sampling selection for the qualitative interview portion of the study used purposeful
sampling (also known as criterion-based or purposive sampling). In purposeful sampling, the
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 53

researcher sets the criteria for inclusion (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). For this study, the
researcher selected interview candidates who represented the overall LCS high school faculty
based on age, department, ethnicity, gender, grade(s) taught, tenure at LCS, and tenure teaching.
The researcher selected 10 candidates based on the criteria listed above, with the help of the
human resources department.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
This project employed a mixed methods data gathering and analysis. A mixed methods
design involves combining qualitative and quantitative research methods (Creswell, 2014;
Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The mixed methods research approach is relatively
new and can be helpful in terms of comparing different perspectives and developing a more
complete understanding of the complexities of the problem (Creswell, 2014). Maxwell (2013)
points out that one of the benefits of a mixed methods study is triangulation, or the use of
multiple types of research in order to support a single conclusion and reduce bias that may be
associated with using a single method. He goes on to add that another benefit of a mixed
methods approach is learning about different aspects of the research problem.
This study followed an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. According to
Creswell (2014), an explanatory sequential design involves two phases of research collection.
The first phase is quantitative data collection, generally in the form of a survey. The quantitative
data is analyzed and then allows the researcher to plan the qualitative research. Creswell (2014)
indicated that an explanatory sequential mixed methods design is a preferable research method
when the goal is to develop an understanding of cultural relevance and an in-depth understanding
of quantitative research. Using this model, Linwood Christian School’s faculty performance was
assessed in relationship to the organizational goal using surveys, document analysis, and
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 54

interviews. Research-based solutions were recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive
manner.
Surveys
The surveys were sent to all LCS high school faculty members via email. The email
included a link to an anonymous survey using the Qualtrics survey platform. For those who did
not complete the survey, two reminder emails were sent. The survey was comprised of 40 survey
questions that sought to discover the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
within the faculty that could either contribute or prevent LCS from achieving its goal of reducing
student stress. In order to ensure the validity of the survey items to measure motivation,
knowledge, and organization, the questions were tested on a small group of the middle school
faculty members who served as experts to ensure content validity. Content validity ensures that a
sampling of items reflects an entire universe of items regarding a particular topic (Salkind,
2016). The middle school faculty test sample also reviewed the survey for any confusing
language or concepts.
Interviews
Interview protocol. The interview protocol used in this study was a semi-structured
interview. Merriam and Tisdale (2016) explain that in a semi-structured interview, the questions
are less formally worded, or the interview is a mix of both formally and flexibly worded
questions. Due to the researcher’s relationships with each of the interviewees as a colleague for
many years, the semi-structured option was the most natural approach because it allowed the
researcher to have a set of specific questions and topics but also allowed the researcher to
respond to the ideas and worldview presented by the interviewee (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). As
the purpose of the study and the research questions surround faculty members’ knowledge and
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 55

motivation in terms of reducing student stress, semi-structured interview questions that focused
on general topics without leading or ignoring new information presented in the interviewees’
answers were the best method for gathering information (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016).
Interview procedures. For the qualitative data collection section, the interviewees were
selected as a purposeful sample. According to Maxwell (2013), when the sample size is small, it
is preferable to purposefully select a representative sample to interview. Ten faculty members
were asked to participate in interviews, and eight faculty members actually completed
interviews. The faculty selected were a representative sample of the entire LCS faculty based on
age, gender, length of employment, department, and education. The interviews were conducted
as formal interviews and took place individually via an online video conference. The video
conferences were recorded.
Documents and Artifacts
Documents and artifacts are ready-made sources of data that can be analyzed by a
researcher (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). While it would be interesting to collect a cross-section of
students’ work and assignments for evaluation in relation to the stated goals and policies, this
task is beyond the scope of this study, as well as the expertise of the researcher. However, LCS
generates a number of documents and artifacts each year that were analyzed as part of the
qualitative research in this study. The documents that were evaluated as part of this study were
the college profile, the Awards Night and Graduation programs, and school newsletters. These
documents are created annually by LCS and provide details on average test scores, colleges of
acceptance, awards given by the school, and other categories that are highlighted as successes for
LCS students. Additionally, LCS administers three annual student surveys were analyzed by the
researcher.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 56

Data Analysis
Quantitative Data
Surveys were sent to all 31 high school faculty members. Twenty-eight faculty members
responded to the survey. In order to analyze the quantitative data, the data was first cleaned and
imported into Excel and reviewed to make sure that all data was present and accurate. Each item
was then evaluated to determine which, if any, descriptive statistics were run for each of the
questions. Due to the nature of the questions, the only statistic that was meaningful for the study
was frequency. Finally, based on the data, the researcher used the survey results to guide the
semi-formal interviews.
Qualitative Data

Ten LCS faculty members who made up the purposeful sample for the interviews were
asked to participate in interviews. Eight faculty members participated in interviews. All of the
interviews took place via an online video conference and were recorded and submitted to an
online transcription service. All of the transcripts were read for accuracy and initial review and
impressions. Following the initial review, a thorough review of each transcript was conducted. A
codebook was created using a priori and in-vivo coding. Patterns and themes were identified, and
the codebook and transcripts were annotated accordingly. Once all of the transcripts had been
evaluated and coded, the researcher engaged in axial and analytic coding. Finally, the themes
present were evaluated and the subsequent analysis was created.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

Credibility and trustworthiness are inherently difficult to discern in a qualitative study
(Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). Qualitative researchers cannot claim that they have uncovered an
objective truth when they have actually only identified the research subjects’ perception of the
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 57

truth (Maxwell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). Maxwell (2014) points out that the two biggest
threats to validity in a qualitative study are researcher bias and reactivity. Researcher bias occurs
when the researcher selects only the data that fits his or her own theories, ideas, or hypotheses.
Reactivity relates to the impact that the researcher has on the environments that they are studying
(Maxwell, 2014). Many researchers warn that there is no magic bullet that can be used to ensure
credibility and trustworthiness (Maxwell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). However, there are a
number of strategies that can be implemented in order to increase the credibility and
trustworthiness of a study (Maxwell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). In this study, the
following strategies were used in order to increase the credibility and trustworthiness of the
qualitative data collection and analysis: respondent validation, rich data, and triangulation.
Respondent validation, also known as member checks, is the practice of getting systematic
feedback from the participants regarding any conclusions or data (Maxwell, 2014). Second, the
strategy of collecting and analyzing rich data, rather than just the information that the researcher
felt was important, was necessary in order to maintain credibility and trustworthiness. Keeping
verbatim transcripts of interviews and thorough, rich notes of all data collection ensured that the
researcher was able to see the entire picture of what the interviews revealed (Maxwell, 2014).
Finally, triangulation was also used in order to increase credibility. Triangulation is the
collection of information from a diverse group of individuals and methods (Maxwell, 2014;
Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). Using a purposeful sample of interview subjects and evaluating the
data while examining documents and surveys increased the credibility of this study.
Ethics
As a researcher working with human subjects, it is important to follow ethical guidelines
at every step of the research design and implementation (Glesne, 2011; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016;
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 58

Rubin & Rubin, 2012). Creswell (2014) identifies specific areas for ethical consideration,
including permission from gatekeepers, power balances, anonymity, disclosures, and
Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. The following narrative describes these
considerations and how they impacted the researcher-participant relationship and research
methodology of this project.
The researcher for this study had been a staff member at LCS for 13 years. At the time of
the quantitative data collection, her current title was Chief Advancement Officer. Though she has
no authority over the faculty members, she has worked closely with the faculty as a colleague
and is deeply embedded in the study site, which can complicate the researcher-participant
relationship. However, the researcher moved to a new state and school during the data collection.
The researcher has taken all reasonable actions in order to minimize bias throughout the study.
The researcher was granted permission in writing by the Head of School, the senior
administrator of Linwood Christian School, and submitted the study to the Institutional Review
Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California (USC). The IRB reviewed and approved
the project with the goal of minimizing risks to the participants (Rubin & Rubin, 2012) prior to
any data being collected. The nature of the questions in this survey surrounded faculty members’
instructional design practices and posed no emotional risks to the participants.
Despite the non-sensitive nature of the research, informed consent was given to all
Linwood Christian High School faculty members before the beginning of the data collection.
Informed consent ensures that all participants understand that their participation is voluntary and
that they can cease participation in the research at any time (Glesne, 2011; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016; Rubin & Rubin, 2012). This research project was a mixed methods study involving a
survey instrument and one-on-one interviews with faculty members at Linwood Christian High
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 59

School. Participants were made aware of the purpose of the study, the ability to withdraw from
the study at any time without penalty, alternatives to participation, and confidentiality, and
researcher contact information was also provided to each participant before data collection. A
separate informed consent was given to each interview subject prior to his or her interview. No
incentive was offered to participants at the start of the interview, but the researcher sent a note of
thanks and a small gift certificate to all participants after the interview to thank them for their
time.
Finally, the anonymity of the participants was to be strictly preserved. The quantitative
survey instrument was to be submitted electronically, and contained no identifying questions.
The researcher ensured that when including quotes, no identifying remarks were included.
Additionally, in the qualitative data collection, the interviewees were given pseudonyms, and all
interview notes, transcripts, and recordings were saved under the pseudonym in a password-
protected computer. All notes and documents from the research will be destroyed one year after
the completion of the study.
Limitations and Delimitations
This research study aligns with an explanatory sequential research approach and involved
the use of surveys, interviews, and document analysis as the primary methods of data collection.
Limitations to the study exist, which are potential weaknesses out of the control of the
researcher. The limitations of this study include the truthfulness of the participants in their
survey responses and interviews. This study was limited by time and is only representative of the
specific time frame of the research project. The study was also limited to the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that the researcher chose when designing the
conceptual framework. The delimitations, or the choices and boundaries that the researcher
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 60

selected in the design of the project, were the questions asked in the interviews, the specific
focus of the survey, and the limited number of participants. Each of these choices limited the
scope of the study. The results were limited by the experiences and opinions shared in the
interviews with the LCS faculty members. The results of this study cannot be generalized to a
larger population because of its small sample size and specific organizational focus, but the
results will be able to inform practices at LCS.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 61

CHAPTER FOUR:

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

This chapter presents the key findings and results using the study’s framework and
research questions. As a reminder, the purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which
Linwood Christian School is meetings its goal of reducing school-related student stress. The
analysis focused on knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to achieving
this organizational goal. While a complete performance evaluation would have focused on all of
the stakeholders, for practical purposes, the stakeholder to be focused on in this analysis was the
high school faculty.
The questions that guided the evaluation study and which address the knowledge and
skills, motivation, and organizational influences for the faculty of LCS were:
1. To what extent is the organization meeting its goal?
2. What is the stakeholder knowledge and motivation related to reducing student
stress?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through surveys and interviews. The
surveys were sent to 31 high school faculty members, and 28 responded. The criteria for
validation was 50% or greater of the survey respondents and being affirmed in the interview
data. Ten faculty members were asked to complete interviews, and eight faculty members
actually participated in interviews. The interviewees were selected as a representative sample of
the LCS faculty. Each interviewee has been given a pseudonym in the presentation of their
interviews. Further demographic details have been withheld in order to protect the anonymity of
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 62

the participants. Due to the small size of the LCS high school faculty, any demographics would
be identifying.
This chapter begins with the results and findings regarding the first research question.
Next, the results and findings from questions about the faculty’s knowledge and motivation will
be analyzed in order to answer the second research question. Third, the results and findings from
organizational questions will be presented in order to answer the third research question. From
the quantitative survey, the results are broken down into the categories of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences. Finally, the chapter will end with a synthesis of the
data. Table 5 presents details on the interview participants no demographic information is
included to protect the anonymity of the participants.
Table 5
Interview Participant Information
Pseudonym Male/Female Teaching
Credential y/n
Years Teaching Years at LCS
Anna Female Yes 14 7
Debbie Female No 3 3
Jeremy Male Yes 8 6
John Male No 2 2
Karen Female Yes 17 3
Katie Female Yes 2 2
Marilyn Female No 15 13
Nathan Male Yes 9 8
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 63

Research Question 1: To What Extent is the Organization Meeting its Goal?
Results
The academic leadership of Linwood Christian School has growing concern about
student stress and how that stress will impact their ability to deliver on the school’s mission. As
such, they set a global goal that LCS will reduce school-related student stress by 60% by the year
2020, as well as a stakeholder goal that the LCS faculty will develop and implement homework
and assessment policies that utilize differentiation and mastery learning designed to reduce
student stress by May 2020.
The results of the student survey conducted by the school indicate that LCS students
experience a high level of stress. In the 2017 school survey, 70% of 5-12 grade LCS students felt
stressed between half and all of the time (School survey report, 2017). The results of the research
for this study indicate that the LCS faculty is not widely implementing homework and
assessment strategies (differentiation, mastery-orientation, student-choice) that would reduce
student stress. In response to the question, “I regularly differentiate homework for my students,”
19 faculty members answered in the affirmative, and nine disagreed. The responses were the
same for the question, “I regularly differentiate assessments for my students.” The knowledge
section of this chapter will further expand upon these responses. When asked about student
choice, the faculty indicated less participation in that practice. To the question, “I regularly allow
student choice in homework assignments,” six faculty members agreed and 23 disagreed, with
seven of those disagreeing strongly. Similarly, when asked whether they allowed student choice
in assessments, three agreed and 25 disagreed. Figure 2 details the responses to the questions
regarding differentiation practices.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 64

Figure 2. LCS Faculty Differentiation Practices.
Findings
The findings indicate that LCS is not currently meeting its goal of the LCS faculty
developing and implementing homework and assessment policies that utilize differentiation and
mastery learning in order to reduce student stress. Further details of the faculty’s knowledge and
motivation related to reducing student stress will be addressed in the next section. Students
indicate a high level of school-related stress, and the faculty indicates an inconsistency in
training, philosophy, and expectations regarding differentiation. The organization does not have
a clear and consistent homework and assessment policy that aligns with research-based best
practices for reducing student stress.
Research Question 2: Faculty Knowledge and Motivation
This section will present the results and findings related to faculty knowledge and
motivation. First, the results from the faculty survey will be presented. Then the procedural
knowledge and conceptual knowledge findings will be discussed. Next, the results related to
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
I regularly differentiate
homework for my
students
I regularly differentiate
assessments for my
students
I regularly allow student
choice in homework
assignments
I regularly allow student
choice in assessments
LCS Faculty Differentiation Practices
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 65

faculty motivation from the survey will be presented. Finally, faculty self-efficacy and attribution
will be discussed.
Knowledge Results
The survey results indicate that, in general, the LCS faculty has the conceptual
knowledge of student stress at LCS and the procedural knowledge regarding how to adapt the
curriculum in a way that would reduce student stress. There were 10 survey items specifically
focused on the faculty’s knowledge regarding student stress. When asked if LCS students were
experiencing a very high level of school-related stress, 22 of the 27 responders answered in the
affirmative, with eight strongly agreeing and 14 agreeing. The responses to the question asking
whether students were significantly stressed about schoolwork yielded similar results, with 21
responders answering in the affirmative. Similarly, when asked about homework stress, five
responders indicated they strongly agreed, while 18 agreed. Figure 3 shows the responses to
questions related to student stress.

Figure 3. Faculty Conceptual Knowledge Related to Student Stress.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
LCS students are experiencing a
very high level of school-related
stress.
LCS students are significantly
stressed about schoolwork
Homework is a significant cause of
stress for LCS students.
Faculty Conceptual Knowledge Related to Student Stress
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 66

There were similar results to the questions about procedural knowledge. When asked
whether they understood the process regarding how to differentiate instruction, 100% of the
respondents answered in the affirmative, 10 strongly agreed, and 17 agreed. Similarly, the
faculty answered that they knew how to adapt the curriculum to focus on mastery learning, with
only three of the 27 respondents disagreeing with that statement. One hundred percent of the
respondents also agreed that they knew how to create assessments in order to determine whether
a student has mastered a concept. Figure 4 details the responses to these procedural knowledge
questions.

Figure 4. LCS Faculty Procedural Knowledge.
Conceptual knowledge. The results of the faculty survey clearly indicate that they are
aware of student stress, with 86% of respondents indicating that the students at LCS are
experiencing a very high level of school-related stress and that homework is a significant cause
of stress for LCS students, while 85% of respondents agreed that LCS students are significantly
0
5
10
15
20
25
I understand the process to
differentiate instruction.
I know how to adapt the curriculum
to focus on mastery learning.
I know how to create assessments
that determine if a student has
mastered a concept.
LCS Faculty Procedural Knowledge
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 67

stressed about schoolwork. Though students were not surveyed for this study, a 2017 survey of
fifth- through twelfth-grade LCS students indicated that 66.9% of students felt stressed about
school half the time or more. Nineteen percent of students felt stressed about half the time,
21.7% felt stressed most of the time, and 26.1% felt stressed always. Additionally, a review of
the annual report from the Linwood Behavior Support Specialist (BSS) indicates a 15% year-
over-year increase in crisis support and an 18% increase of students seeking counseling support.
While a full analysis of the student experience of stress is beyond the scope of this study, there
are clear indicators that LCS students are experiencing stress at an increasing and potentially
unhealthful level.
The results of the survey indicated that the LCS faculty understands that students are
stressed, but the findings from the qualitative interviews with eight LCS faculty members
provided greater insight into the faculty’s perception of student stress. One hundred percent of
the interviewees indicated that LCS students are stressed, and though there were slight variations
in the responses regarding why students are stressed and how they demonstrate their stress, the
general responses indicated that schoolwork was not the primary reason for stress. This belief
that student stress is unrelated to schoolwork is in contrast to the 2017 student survey
administered by Linwood, as well as the research presented in Chapter Two. Only two
respondents indicated concern that this high level of stress might be in conflict with LCS’ Christ-
centered mission. Attribution will be discussed in the motivation findings section, but based on
the interviews and surveys, the LCS faculty understands that students are stressed, but do not
believe that the primary reason is school-related.
Procedural Knowledge. One theme that emerged during the course of the interviews
was that there is an inconsistency in training and expectations for faculty regarding homework,
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 68

instruction, and assessments. Because there is not a clear policy or philosophy, and because the
training in these areas is limited or non-existent, there is a lack of understanding of the process or
benefits to differentiation. Each of the interviewees indicated that their department chair
reviewed their lesson plans and online gradebook, but there was not a clear consensus on the
amount of homework that should be assigned, expectations on strategies such as differentiation
or student choice, or training regarding developing lesson plans. Each interviewee described a
different experience in their training when they were hired and in how they currently approach
developing lesson plans and teaching. Though all of the interviewees mentioned trying to vary
instructional strategies and appeal to different learning styles throughout the year, the consensus
of all interviewees was that there is not a clear set of goals or expectations regarding the
implementation of homework and assessment strategies that will reduce student stress.
Debbie, who teaches in two different departments, explained that the school started a
conversation about homework load last year, but “to be frank, I have no idea if that conversation
is still going on, or if, I don’t know where that went or what’s happening … it’s kind of been
dropped.” Debbie was hired as a brand-new teacher with no teaching credential. When asked
whether there was specific training regarding lesson planning or how to adapt or adjust or deliver
the curriculum, she said, “No. Nope. Nope. Nope. I just kind of figured it out.” John, also a new
teacher without a teaching credential, explained that his supervisor indicated on his evaluation
last year that he could improve in the area of differentiation. When probed on what resources the
school provided for him in order to improve in that area, he stated, “Um, she, like suggested that
I look up YouTube videos for it.” He went on to explain that when he was hired, “I didn’t really
get much training on how to, actually, create a lesson.”
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 69

When asked about how he teaches all of the ability levels in his class, Nathan explained
that “the way I have experienced them being successful is them coming in and me working with
them one on one on test and quiz prep.” When asked whether he has time built into his schedule
for this level of support, he indicated that he works with these students before and after school,
as well as at break and during lunch.
The general sense from the faculty interviews is that the training, goals, and expectations
are very inconsistent. The LCS faculty does not have the procedural knowledge regarding how to
appropriately differentiate coursework, homework, and assessments. It is the lack of a shared
understanding of the strategies that would reduce student stress, as well as a lack of training for
faculty to help them understand and apply those concepts, that is contributing to the school’s
inability to reach its goal of reducing student stress.
Knowledge Findings
The questions focusing on the knowledge of differentiation and mastery learning
strategies yielded interesting results. One hundred percent of the survey respondents agreed with
the statement, “I understand the process to differentiate instruction,” and only one respondent
disagree with the statement, “I know how to develop differentiated assessments.” Only three
disagreed with the statement, “I know how to adapt the curriculum to focus on mastery
learning.” Once again, the content of the interviews helped to explain faculty’s understanding of
these concepts. As described in the literature review, the process of differentiation that can
decrease student stress is
curriculum differentiation, which includes the extensive use of preassessment to
determine students’ strengths, interests, and learning styles; flexible grouping
practices that necessitate the creation of small groups based on those preassessed
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 70

areas; and the differentiation of existing curricula by increasing their breadth
(interest, choices, and learning style variation) and depth (“tiering” lessons for
different ability levels). (Tieso, 2004, p. 60)
There were two main themes that emerged when the interviewees were asked about
differentiation. First, the respondents referred to pedagogical practices, such as creating lesson
plans, that focused on different learning styles and having multiple types of coursework,
homework, and assessments throughout the year, not specifically differentiated to each student or
ability groups. The LCS faculty incorrectly believes that differentiation means that they will have
assignments and assessments throughout the year that cover the various learning styles, rather
than differentiating learning as described by Tieso (2004). Second, the respondents discussed
accommodations that were provided for students with learning differences and/or students who
were enrolled in LCS’s academic support class. The faculty does not have the conceptual
knowledge of appropriate differentiation strategies, nor the procedural knowledge of how to
differentiate.
When asked about differentiation, one interviewee, Nathan, explained that the main way
he understood differentiation was through the academic assistant principal who works with
students who have Individual Academic Plans (IEP) or modifications. Other interviewees had
similar comments. Anna stated, “We have some students that, um, for whatever reason we have
altered homework requirements, or testing settings, made accommodations for them.” Karen
voices a similar interpretation of differentiating indicating that students in the SWAG program:
Get a longer time to finish … [or] they will come in and do it in smaller pieces.
Also, there’s been times when we’ve had a student that just like, they know the
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 71

material, but it’s writing it down on the paper that’s the problem and so they’ll
come in and we’ll do it orally.
When asked about differentiation, every single interviewee mentioned individual education plans
(IEPs) or the LCS academic support class, SWAG.
Six of the eight interviewees also mentioned different pedagogical strategies or
addressing different learning types when asked about differentiation. Marilyn explained, “So,
some are auditory learners. Some are visual, you know. So, I try to mix it up.” Karen also
explained that a way she differentiates learning is by “providing it in different methods.”
Similarly, Jeremy indicated the following:
As far as like the basics, just different modalities and how you learn, like
kinesthetic, auditory versus visual learners. I try to incorporate in every lesson
some of those modalities into it. Whether it’s images along with words, along
with examples and practice problems for them to do on their own.
Debbie, a teacher with a few years of teaching experience who has not completed a credential
program, explained that she had “heard of differentiation,” and that the Academic Dean had
discussed differentiating instruction in order to suit all of the various learning modalities and
capacities of the students. But she also said, “As far as assessments go, I would not say I’ve
received sufficient instruction in that. So, it’s basically me trying, kinda trial and error how to
differentiate assessments.”
Based on the responses from the interviewees, none of them were engaging in intentional
differentiation as described by Tieso (2004). While none of the interviewees could name any
differentiation strategies that they used when specifically asked about differentiation, four of the
eight interviewees, when discussing homework, mentioned strategies that they have employed
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 72

that implemented these principles, but they did not specifically identify them when asked about
differentiation. For example, Anna described a math practice program that she uses with her
class that,
for example, they just have to get five right. If it takes them five, they can do it
and they’re done, and if it takes them 10 or 20 questions just to get five right,
they’re not penalized, but they’re going to keep going until they get it right.
In this case, Anna is describing a differentiation strategy that aligns with strategies that
would reduce student stress, but she did not identify it as a differentiation strategy. Based
on this, some LCS faculty are engaging in differentiation strategies, but they are not
aware of the difference between differentiation and other varied pedagogical strategies.
Both Nathan and John mentioned strategies that they employed which they read about in
the book, Teach Like a Champion, which had been the required faculty reading in the summer of
2017. Both Nathan and John explained that Teach Like a Champion had been very impactful on
their teaching practices, and though they both had implemented the strategies, it had not been
widely communicated as an expectation across the board for the faculty. When asked if the
whole faculty has embraced strategies from Teach Like a Champion, Nathan said, “Um, no.” He
went on to say, “For those of us who are reading it and living it … we’re seeing some really cool
things, but I’d say it’s a couple years off before it’ll be fully embraced.” The academic leadership
at LCS took a step toward introducing teaching strategies that would reduce student stress in the
faculty summer reading assignment, Teach Like a Champion, but it was not widely embraced by
faculty, nor was it consistently expected by academic leadership.
An additional challenge mentioned by seven of the interviewees were simply logistical
challenges. They mentioned that they would love to implement some of the strategies that they
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 73

had learned about in professional development, but the challenges of getting through the
curriculum, class size, or number of courses for the teacher made it impossible to implement
some of these practices.
Marilyn, Karen, Jeremy, and John, who all teach AP courses, indicated that the pressure
to get through the curriculum in time for the AP exams was a key reason that they were not able
to implement some of these differentiation strategies. Nathan summed it up best when he said,
“Then there’s also my workload … if I was able to create differentiated assessments and
assignments for all 140 students, then you’d be doing your dissertation on stressed-out faculty
members.”
Motivation Results
The results to the 24 questions that were asked about the faculty’s motivation regarding
student stress were less homogenous. Though they still indicated generally positive motivation to
implement strategies to reduce student stress, there was a greater deviation in the responses.
Questions were asked regarding the faculty’s self-efficacy related to adapting curriculum,
differentiation, and mastery learning, as well as the faculty’s attribution regarding student stress.
The questions surrounding attribution were of particular interest. While 100% of the faculty
indicated that their students were capable of managing the academic load in their classes, a large
number of the faculty indicated that the cause of school-related stress students experience is
largely due to poor study habits, poor time management, and parents. Figure 5 details the
responses to these attribution questions. While the faculty agree that homework contributes to
student stress, they indicated that homework was not a significant contributor to student stress.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 74

Figure 5. Faculty Attribution of Student Stress.

The survey asked faculty to respond to more questions focused on faculty attribution and
asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statements:
1) Students are stressed not because of the homework I give, but because they don’t
manage their time well.
2) Students would not be stressed if they managed their time better.
3) The reason students are stressed about schoolwork is because they have not developed
good study habits.
In responding to these statements, the faculty overwhelmingly agreed that time
management and poor study habits were responsible for students’ feelings of stress. Figure 6
shows the breakdown of the responses. When asked whether parents and extra-curricular
activities were responsible for student stress, the respondents were split in their responses, with
half stating parents and extra-curriculars played a significant role in terms of creating student
stress, and half disagreeing.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Students' stress level is
impacted by my instructional
design.
The homework that I give
contributes to student stress.
The homework that I give is a
significant contributor to
student stress.
Faculty Attribution of Student Stress
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 75

Figure 6. Additional Faculty Attribution Influences.

The last two questions of the survey were open-ended, asking the faculty to list what they
believed to be the biggest causes of stress, as well as whether they had any other thoughts related
to student stress. The open-ended questions revealed that the faculty members believe that
students are overscheduled, have poor time management, feel pressure from social media and
their parents to achieve at a high level, and have unrealistic expectations. Of the open-ended
responses, there were no comments about the faculty’s influence on student stress.
Motivation Findings
Each of the interviewees communicated a deep and genuine care both for their students
and for the mission of the school. All interviewees made some remark about the Christ-centered
mission being a driving force for their work at LCS, as well as their desire to have their students
learn about or grow in their relationship with Christ. This aligns with the results from student
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Students are stressed not because of
the homework I give, but because
they don’t manage their time well.
Students would not be stressed if
they managed their time better.
The reason students are stressed
about schoolwork is because they
have not developed good study
habits.
Additional Faculty Attribution Influences
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 76

surveys (School survey report, 2017). LCS students feel a high level of care and concern from
their teachers, and it is clear from the conversations with the interviewees that they all have a
strong desire to decrease student stress. This section will discuss the LCS faculty’s motivation
associated with reducing student stress.
Faculty motivation to reduce student stress. As defined in Chapter Two, motivation is
a difficult influence to measure, but research has indicated that one can assess motivation by
examining choice, persistence, and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). The motivation
influences that were evaluated in the survey and interviews were attribution and self-efficacy.
Attributions, or control beliefs (Rueda, 2011), examine individuals’ beliefs about the causes of
success or failure (Anderman & Anderman, 2009). Self-efficacy, or competence beliefs, are the
beliefs that individuals hold about their capabilities (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). When asked
about the causes of student stress, the interviewees’ responses aligned with the responses from
the survey data. They believe that students at LCS are living under a high level of stress, but in
general, the LCS faculty does not assume responsibility for the fact that students’ stress is
impacted by their instructional practices, and they do not assume responsibility for student stress.
As previously discussed, in the survey, the faculty overwhelmingly agreed that time management
and poor study habits were responsible for students’ feelings of stress.
Anna stated, “They’re stressed in lots of different ways, and in different, you know,
pieces of their life, but I would say most kids live each day under high levels of stress.” When
asked to elaborate upon why they are stressed, she said the primary reason was “social pressure
of what everyone else thinks.” Nathan explained that the biggest causes of student stress at LCS
are “unrealistic expectations that parents have and place upon their children.” He goes on to add
that “we are a small school that has a lot of programs that compete for students’ time and
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 77

attention.” John agreed, stating that the reasons LCS students are stressed is that they have poor
time management, they spend too much time on their phones, and they are spread too thin. He
indicated that the school pressures students to participate in many different activities so that they
will be attractive to colleges. Marilyn’s response echoed that of her colleagues. She stated the
following regarding the reason that she believes LCS students are stressed:
They’re all involved in everything. Especially the students I teach are the
overachievers… They’re not sleeping. But also, I think the pressure that they feel,
that they put on themselves or their parents put on them to always be at the top. It
stresses them out.
Karen agreed, stating that “high expectations placed on them by their parents” and that this was a
key contributor to student stress, as well as the high-level of involvement in activities. She
elaborated with the following statement:
The students are, especially the ones I see in the Honors AP classes, they’re in
everything... So, they’re very involved. And it strikes me that the level of
involvement for this generation of high-schoolers is higher than what I would say,
like my own age group experienced.
Jeremy’s responses were similar to those of his colleagues, explaining that students are stressed
for a variety of reasons, including the fact that they are “overachievers” who have “probably a
borderline excessive amount of APs.” He also explained they LCS students are “overbooked”
and that even if they are “not the most academically inclined, maybe their parents have put them
into, you know, two or three things after school every day.” He also indicated that poor “time
management and procrastination” are causes of stress for LCS students.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 78

Only one interviewee specifically mentioned the workload when asked about the causes
of student stress. This faculty member is the teacher of the academic support class. She explained
that the rigor of the coursework and the frequency of tests and quizzes were stressful to students.
She stated, “From a student’s stress perspective, I think it can feel a little bit like a wave of
another test, another quiz, another test. And then you multiply that by the fact that at [Linwood]
we have seven classes.” It seems that her position teaching and practice of supporting students in
the academic support class has given her a perspective that not all the interviewees shared.
Overall, the responses by the interviewees mirrored the responses of the survey. Figure 7
details the responses to one of the attribution questions on the survey.

Figure 7. Faculty response to attribution of students’ stress.

The overall feeling by the interviewees is that students are stressed because they are overbooked,
don’t manage their time well, and receive unrealistic pressure from their parents. The LCS
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Stronly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Students are stressed not because of the homework I give,
but because they don’t manage their time well.
LCS Faculty Responses
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 79

faculty attributes student stress to students and parents, and therefore do not exhibit a high level
of motivation to implement strategies that may reduce student stress.
Faculty self-efficacy. In both the survey and the interviews, the LCS faculty indicated a
strong self-efficacy in their ability to differentiate and adapt curriculum in order to focus on
mastery learning. The results from the quantitative data overwhelmingly showed that faculty
members felt that they knew how to differentiate schoolwork. One hundred percent of the
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are “capable of developing assignments that
focus on mastery, learning, and understanding.” Only three survey respondents disagreed with
the statement, “I am confident in my ability to adapt the curriculum as necessary to differentiate
the assignments.” Only one respondent disagreed with the statement, “I am confident in my
ability to adapt the curriculum as necessary to focus on mastery learning.” Figures 8, 9, 10, 11,
12, 13, and 14 give graphic representation to the self-efficacy statements posed on the faculty
survey.

Figure 8. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Developing Assignments.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I am capable of developing assignments that focus on
mastery, learning, and understanding.
LCS Faculty Responses
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 80

Figure 9. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Assignments.

Figure 10. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Curriculum Adaptations.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I am confident in my ability to adapt the curriculum as
necessary to differentiate the assignments.
LCS Faculty Responses
0
5
10
15
20
25
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I am confident in my ability to adapt the curriculum as
necessary to focus on mastery learning.
LCS Faculty Responses
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 81

Figure 11. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Creating Assessments.

Figure 12. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Assessments.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Stronly Disagree
I am capable of creating assessments that measure mastery
of content.
LCS Faculty Responses
0
5
10
15
20
25
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I am capable of creating differentiated assessments.
LCS Faculty Responses
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 82

Figure 13. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Instruction.

Figure 14. Faculty Self-Efficacy on Differentiating Homework.
0
5
10
15
20
25
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I am confident in my ability to differentiate instruction..
LCS Faculty Responses
0
5
10
15
20
25
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
I am confident in my ability to appropriately differentiate
homework
LCS Faculty Responses
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 83

The results of the survey overwhelmingly indicate that the LCS faculty has strong self-efficacy
for focusing on mastery learning and differentiating instruction, homework, and assessments.
However, as explained in the knowledge influences section of this chapter, based on the results
of the interviews, it appears that the faculty has a misunderstanding of what true differentiation
and mastery learning are. Based on the responses from the interviewees, LCS faculty members
are not engaging in the differentiation of instruction, homework, or assessments, nor engaging in
a strong focus on mastery learning. Self-efficacy does not have to be an accurate reflection of
one’s ability, but rather simply a measure of one’s belief in their own ability (Pajares, 2006;
Rueda, 2011). In this case, the LCS faculty’s lack of knowledge of differentiation and mastery
learning has created a false sense of confidence.
Summary of Research Question 2
The findings for the second research question indicate that the LCS faculty does not have
a conceptual understanding regarding the high level of school-related stress faced by LCS
students. While they agree that the students are stressed, they do not understand that schoolwork
and the faculty’s instructional practices significantly contribute to student stress. Additionally,
even though the results of the survey indicate a high degree of differentiation, the results of the
research indicate that the faculty does not have the procedural knowledge regarding how to
differentiate coursework, homework, or assessments in a way that would decrease student stress.
Regarding motivation, the LCS faculty has a high self-efficacy in the area of
differentiation, but the results of the interviews show that this is actually a false self-efficacy.
The LCS faculty as a whole does not have the knowledge, nor are they implementing the
practices, of true differentiation. Instead, the LCS faculty is providing all students with varied
assignments and assessments throughout the year.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 84

Finally, regarding attribution, the LCS faculty does not believe that their instructional
practices significantly contribute to student stress. The faculty believe that students’ lack of time-
management, being over-involved in activities, and parent pressure are the main causes of
school-related stress.
Research Question 3: Recommendations for Organizational Practice
This section will provide the results and findings to questions that were asked regarding
organizational influences that are present, according to LCS faculty. The complete answer to the
third research question will be expanded upon in Chapter Five.
Organizational Results
Similar to the results related to motivation, the responses regarding the organizational
influences varied greatly. Three questions were posed to the faculty asking whether their
department chair had discussed differentiating coursework, homework, and assessments. The
responses were split nearly down the middle, with 15 of the 27 respondents agreeing or strongly
agreeing that their department chair had discussed differentiating coursework, and with 12
disagreeing or strongly disagreeing. In response to differentiating homework, 13 respondents
agreed, while 14 disagreed. Differentiating assessments had a similar response, with 16 agreeing
that their department chair had discussed this with them and 11 indicating disagreement with the
statement.
When asked about professional development, 23 of the faculty members felt that they had
been well-supported by the school in terms of professional development, while four disagreed.
When asked whether they had pursued professional development in the area of differentiation, 15
faculty members responded that they had, while 12 indicated that they had not. When asked
about continuing education credits in the areas of mastery learning, differentiation, and adapting
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 85

assessments, the results were similarly split. Fifteen respondents had earned continuing
education credits in mastery learning, while 12 have not, and 11 had pursued continuing
education in differentiation, while nine had earned continuing education credits in developing
and adapting assessments.
Organizational Findings
Student celebration. While there were no questions on the quantitative survey about the
ways in which students were celebrated, each of the interviewees mentioned the perceived
pressure that students feel to be involved in many different activities at LCS. The interviewees
were asked about how students were celebrated at LCS, and their responses were very similar.
The interviewees each mentioned the large, all-school awards assemblies throughout the year, as
well as sports achievements. Most interviewees went on to comment on smaller, activity-specific
awards or honors that students could receive, along with individual classroom praise. When
asked about student celebration, Anna stated, “I think within every kids’ activity place, you
know, whether it’s sports, or fine arts, or academics, there’s an avenue for all of those. Some are
received, and maybe more public than others for sure.” Nathan also mentioned athletics and
academic award ceremonies, and further brought up the “Student of the Month” program hosted
by the local Chamber of Commerce. Debbie summed up the responses of her colleagues when
she said,
I would say one of the things I like a lot is that I actually think we celebrate
students for a wide array of accomplishments, and I use the term accomplishment
pretty loosely there, because I don’t mean like, only the best of the very best.
The sentiment that students are celebrated in many different ways at LCS was echoed by all of
the interviewees. But when probed for specific awards, platforms, and methods for celebrating
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 86

these diverse students, the interviewees could only call to mind the official, public, all-school
awards for academic or athletic achievements. They indicated that the other unique celebrations
are casual praise, perhaps in the morning announcements, or an occasional shout-out at chapel,
or in the form of private praise from a faculty member.
A document analysis was conducted of the student awards and recognitions that were
given in the academic years 2016-2017 and 2017-2018. The events that were evaluated were
graduation, the annual awards ceremony, honor roll assemblies, and the “Student of the Month”
program. Not included in the document analysis were each athletic team banquet, cast parties for
fine arts performances, or individual classroom awards. For the awards ceremonies listed above,
students were celebrated for academic achievements, athletic achievements, and community or
Christian service. Of the 20 students who were selected as “Student of the Month,” the average
GPA was 4.02, the average number of AP classes completed was five, the average number of
extra-curricular groups (sports/fine arts/student government) was seven, and the average number
of service hours completed was 213. The faculty may feel that the school is celebrating all types
of students, but based on the students who are receiving the top honors each year, it is
overwhelmingly the over-involved, high-achieving students who receive the most notice. When
she was asked whether LCS celebrates students in a way that aligns with its mission, Karen
explained, “Knowledge and skill is what is celebrated the most often or the most consistently. I
think that we also try to do the other areas [of the mission], but maybe not as consistently.” She
went on to explain the difficulty of celebrating students for attributes that are not as easy to
identify or praise, explaining that celebrating students for spiritual development is “not as easy to
do as maybe, like, pointing out somebody’s GPA or somebody’s big record in spikes or kills in
volleyball or whatever. I think that we are working on it, but it’s still a work in progress.”
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 87

The faculty interviews indicated that they believed that students felt celebrated in
multiple areas and for multiple mission-aligned reasons, but further questioning indicated that
celebrations other than in the areas of academics and athletics were casual, inconsistent, and one-
on-one. The document analysis supported this. The main reasons students are celebrated at LCS
are athletic success and academic excellence as demonstrated by grades and test scores.
Faculty professional development. The questions surrounding professional
development yielded very disparate responses. In the quantitative survey, when asked whether
they had been well-supported by the school in the area of professional development, the majority
of respondents agreed in the affirmative, with seven strongly agreeing, 16 agreeing, and four
disagreeing. In response to the statement, “I have pursued professional development in the area
of differentiation of instruction,” the responses were divided, with two strongly agreeing, 13
agreeing, eleven disagreeing, and one strongly disagreeing. The responses to the organizational
questions are represented in Figures 15 and 16.

Figure 15. Organizational Influence Questions 1.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Coursework Homework Assessment
My Department chair has discussed differentiating...
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 88

Figure 16. Organizational Influence Questions 2.

The responses from the interviewees regarding professional development were similarly
mixed. All of the respondents indicated that they felt supported by the school in terms of
professional development, but that the amount, type, focus, and intensity of the training varied
greatly.
In discussing professional development, each of the interviewees mentioned a year-long
training that the school had specifically brought in for the math department. This training had a
strong focus on differentiation and mastery learning, and though one session was for the entire
faculty, the main thrust of the work was for teachers in the math department. The fact that the
training was only for the math department may explain some of the disparity in the answers
regarding the various department chairs discussing differentiation. The interviews indicated that
the expectations varied greatly based on the department.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Mastery Learning Differentiation Creating Assessments
I have continuing education credits in ...
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 89

Overall, based on the interviews, it seems that professional development at LCS varies
and is driven by the individual faculty member’s desire and motivation. Anna indicated that
she’d been to “conferences and school visits.” Nathan, who is highly motivated to pursue
professional development, has sought out professional development opportunities, has completed
a credential program that the school paid a portion of, and has implemented what he learned in
Teach Like a Champion. Debbie explained that she had been told, “If you find something and
you want to go, and you think it’s helpful, just request it. We have funds for it. Tell us, and we’ll
find a way to make it happen.” Other than the mandatory AP training for new AP teachers, or a
program-specific training, it is up to each faculty member at LCS to pursue professional
development opportunities and to ask the school to pay for these programs. John pointed out that
at some of the conferences “you can go and learn what you think will help you the most in your
class.” Both Marilyn and Debbie indicated a reluctance to pursue professional development
because these opportunities often took place during the summer or on weekends, and would take
away from family and/or personal time.
There is great disparity in terms of the formal education, degrees, and teacher
certification among faculty members at LCS. The school has not consistently considered the
skills that they would like to develop in their faculty, nor has it created a differentiated plan for
faculty members to pursue professional development in those areas. From an organizational
standpoint, the academic leadership of LCS has not determined what its faculty development
priorities are, and has not consistently implemented a plan regarding how to train and equip the
faculty in those areas.
Parent education. While studying the parents as organizational stakeholders was beyond
the scope of this study, the influence of parents on student stress was something that was noted
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 90

by all of the interviewees and the survey participants. In the survey, the faculty members were
asked to respond to the statement, “Parents are the biggest contributor to student stress.” Three
respondents strongly agreed, 13 agreed, 10 disagreed, and one strongly disagreed. The
interviewees were also asked, “What parent education has the school provided for high school
parents?” The response from the faculty members indicated that not much had been provided in
terms of parent education. Each interviewee mentioned the parent info nights that are offered by
the college counseling office, and four mentioned a parent info night for new families and events
hosted by the behavior support specialist regarding substance abuse and social media, which took
place last in 2015. Anna, John, Karen, and Jeremy mentioned student information systems/online
gradebooks in which parents can access student grades and homework. Anna also mentioned
“individual emails and conversations with parents.”
During the interviews, the participants were asked whether or not the school was
pursuing any parent or student education opportunities regarding time management, or setting up
any programs in order to minimize choices and reduce the phenomenon of students being so
overbooked. Again, the answer was a clear “no.” Nathan summed it up best when he said, “I
don’t think the emphasis is on scaling down the programs. I think the emphasis is on making
[Linwood] more of an environment that’s more attractive and attractive to more people. They’re
trying to increase enrollment.” The challenge with a small independent school is the tension
between wanting to have broad programming in order to attract families who are willing to pay
tuition and enroll their children at the school, but then in turn having a small student population
that has to participate in those many programs in order to keep them running, which leads to
students being blatantly overscheduled in terms of their extracurricular activities (Pope et al.,
2013).
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 91

Synthesis
The results of the quantitative survey and the themes that emerged through the qualitative
data collection were both aligned. The findings indicate that the school is not meeting its goal of
reducing student stress or consistently implementing homework and assessment policies that
utilize differentiation and mastery learning that will reduce student stress. Regarding the second
research question, the faculty lacks knowledge and motivation regarding student stress and
implementing stress-reducing teaching practices. Similarly, regarding the third question, the
organization is not consistently communicating expectations or supporting the faculty in terms of
development in these areas. Chapter Five will present a recommended plan to help LCS achieve
its goal of reducing student stress.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 92

CHAPTER FIVE:
SOLUTIONS AND INTEGRATED IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION PLANS
Chapter Four addressed the first two research questions in this study. The Clark and Estes
(2008) KMO framework was used in order to present key findings and implications. This chapter
will address the final research question:
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
This chapter will use the Clark and Estes KMO framework in order to present context-specific
recommendations that address the validated knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences. Additionally, an integrated implementation and evaluation plan will be proposed that
incorporates the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Chapter Five
closes with the strengths and weaknesses of the study, limitations and delimitations, and
recommendations for future study.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
The framework used in this study for the assumed knowledge influences was the Revised
Bloom’s Taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002). Krathwohl (2002) defines the four types of knowledge
as factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. While a more robust study would have
covered additional knowledge influences and multiple stakeholders, the limitations of the study
allowed only two knowledge influences to be assessed. The two knowledge types assessed in the
study were conceptual and procedural. The conceptual knowledge assessed was regarding the
faculty’s understanding of students’ school-related stress. The procedural knowledge assessed
was regarding the strategies with which to successfully adapt the curriculum to differentiate
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 93

learning and homework, and also to focus on mastery learning. Both of these assumed
knowledge influences were validated within the study, and the proposed program offers solutions
to address these knowledge influences. Table 6 provides the principles upon which context-
specific recommendations are made, as well as one or more recommendations for each validated
knowledge influence.
Table 6
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and Citation
Context-Specific Recommendation
Teachers are not aware of
the level of stress that our
high school students
experience.
(Conceptual
[Declarative])
Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored more
quickly and remembered
more accurately because
it elaborated upon prior
learning (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide faculty with
information in the form of a
report on the levels of stress of
LCS students.

Teachers do not know the
strategies with which to
successfully adapt the
curriculum in order to
differentiate learning and
homework and focus on
mastery learning.
(Procedural)
Modeling to-be-learned
strategies or behaviors
improves self-efficacy,
learning, and
performance (Denler,
Wolters, & Benzon,
2009).

In order to develop
mastery, individuals must
acquire component skills,
practice integrating them,
and know when to apply
what they have learned
(Schraw & McCrudden,
2006).

Provide training to LCS
faculty that teaches strategies
with which to adapt curriculum
and homework.

Have a similar and credible
peer leader demonstrate or
model the steps to
differentiate.

Provide opportunities for
faculty to practice adapting
curriculum, homework, and
lesson plans.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 94

Declarative knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. The second type of
knowledge defined by Krathwohl (2002) is conceptual knowledge, which is a type of declarative
knowledge. Conceptual knowledge refers to the interrelationships between elements and how
they function together. In order to achieve the goal of reducing student stress, LCS faculty must
be aware of the high levels of school-related stress that LCS students experience. According to
Schraw and McCrudden (2006), information learned meaningfully and connected with prior
knowledge is stored more quickly and remembered more accurately because it elaborates upon
prior learning. Schraw and McCrudden would suggest that the school should provide faculty
with information in the form of a report on the levels of stress of LCS students and conduct a
training that connects this information to the faculty’s prior knowledge. The recommendation is
to provide faculty with information in the form of a report on the levels of stress of LCS
students.
While teachers may be aware of the workload in their particular class and have an
understanding of the general stress levels faced by their students, they do not understand the
overwhelming pressure that students face from multiple directions (Luthar & Becker, 2002; Pope
et al., 2015; Pope, 2010). Additionally, most teachers do understand that high school is a
stressful time for students, but research shows that faculty at high-achieving high schools do not
have a complete understanding of the significant level of stress that students face (Luthar &
Becker, 2002; Pope et al., 2015; Pope, 2010). According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006), if
the school would provide a report that helped faculty to understand the levels and influences of
student stress and then connected it to the faculty’s prior knowledge, it would increase the
faculty’s conceptual knowledge related to student stress.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 95

Procedural knowledge solutions, or description of needs or assets. According to
Krathwohl’s (2002) four types of knowledge, in procedural knowledge, there is a movement
from “what” into “how.” Teachers do not know the strategies with which to successfully adapt
the curriculum to differentiate learning and homework and focus on mastery learning, which
would reduce student stress (Tieso, 2004). The practice of differentiating instruction means
treating different groups of students differently in terms of instruction, delivery, and assessment.
Tieso (2004) explains that true differentiation adapts the curriculum and includes pre-assessment
in order to determine students’ strengths, interests, and learning styles; identifies flexible
grouping practices that necessitate the creation of small groups based on those pre-assessed
areas; and further differentiates existing curricula by increasing their breadth (interest, choices,
and learning style variation) and depth (“tiering” lessons for different ability levels). The main
reason to differentiate is to best meet students’ academic needs (Rice & Simile, 2014).
Differentiation can improve student learning and reduce stress (Tieso, 2004).
In order to increase the faculty’s ability to differentiate schoolwork, LCS should provide
training for LCS faculty that teaches them the strategies with which to adapt curriculum and
homework. The instructor of the training should be a similar and credible peer leader and should
demonstrate or model the steps to differentiate (Denler et al., 2009; Schraw & McCrudden,
2006). Finally, the training should provide opportunities for faculty to practice adapting
curriculum, homework, and lesson plans (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Motivation Recommendations
The motivation influences assessed in this study were attribution (faculty taking
responsibility for the fact that students’ stress is impacted by their instructional practices and to
assume responsibility for student learning) and self-efficacy (faculty’s confidence that they are
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 96

capable of effectively developing assignments that focus on mastery, learning, and
understanding). While a more robust study would have covered additional motivation influences
and multiple stakeholders, the limitations of the study allowed only these two influences to be
assessed. Table 7 summarizes the motivation influences, as well as validation and priority status.
Table 7 also provides the principles upon which context-specific recommendations are made,
and recommendations for the validated motivation influence.
Table 7
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence

Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Attribution Theory -
Teachers need to assume
responsibility for the fact
that students’ stress is
impacted by their
instructional practices
and to assume
responsibility for student
learning.
Learning and motivation
are enhanced when
individuals attribute
success or failures to effort
rather than ability
(Anderman & Anderman,
2009).
Attributional training should
be provided for LCS faculty
that informs them about their
ability to decrease student
stress by changing their
instructional practices.

Provide a simulated activity
that represents the “typical”
experience in their class and
how it may be adjusted with
differing strategies.
Self-Efficacy -
Instructors need to have
confidence that they are
capable of effectively
developing assignments
that focus on mastery,
learning, and
understanding.
High self-efficacy can
positively influence
motivation (Pajares, 2006).

Feedback and modeling
should increase self-
efficacy (Pajares, 2006).

Learning and motivation
are enhanced when learners
have positive expectancies
for success (Pajares, 2006).
The school should provide
training for faculty using
scaffolding, feedback, and
modeling, in order to train
faculty members in terms of
effectively developing
assignments that focus on
mastery, learning, and
understanding.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 97

Attributions. Attributions, or control beliefs (Rueda, 2011), examine individuals’ beliefs
about the causes of success or failure (Anderman & Anderman, 2009). LCS teachers need to
assume responsibility for the fact that students’ stress is impacted by their instructional practices
and to assume responsibility for student learning. Learning and motivation are enhanced when
individuals attribute success or failures to effort rather than ability (Anderman & Anderman,
2009). The recommendation is to provide attributional training for LCS faculty that informs them
about their ability to decrease student stress by changing their instructional practices (Anderman
& Anderman, 2009). Additionally, faculty should be provided with a simulated activity that
represents the “typical” experience in their class and how it may be adjusted with differing
strategies (Aguirre & Speer, 2000; Duffy & Roehler, 1986; Kagan, 1992; Stipek et al., 2001).
Cognitive load theory indicates that all information is processed through one’s schema, or
a mental framework for remembering and processing information (Kirschner et al., 2006). A
teacher’s schema may include unconscious assumptions and beliefs about both their own
teaching and their students’ ability (Kagan, 1992). Stipek et al. (2001) point out that teachers’
beliefs affect their classroom behavior, which aligns with attribution theory (Anderman &
Anderman, 2009; Rueda, 2011); if teachers believe that their instruction does not have an impact
on student stress, they will likely not be motivated to change (Aguirre & Speer, 2000; Duffy &
Roehler, 1986; Kagan, 1992; Stipek et al., 2001). In order for the LCS faculty to meet its goal of
reducing student stress, it will be essential that faculty members address teacher beliefs and
attributions regarding students’ stress (Anderman & Anderman, 2009; Stipek et al., 2001).
Self-Efficacy. Self-efficacy, or competence beliefs, are the beliefs that individuals hold
about their capabilities (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). Self-efficacy relates to how an individual
believes they will be able to perform on a task (Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011). High self-efficacy
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 98

can positively influence motivation (Pajares, 2006). Feedback and modeling increase self-
efficacy (Pajares, 2006). Learning and motivation are enhanced when learners have positive
expectancies for success (Pajares, 2006). The recommendation is to provide scaffolding,
feedback, and modeling, in order to train faculty members in terms of effectively developing
assignments that focus on mastery, learning, and understanding (Pajares, 2006), which will in
turn reduce student stress (Kirschner et al., 2006; Pope et al., 2015; Scott & Palinscar, 2006).
The subject of teen stress is as complex as teens themselves, but one relatively simple
solution to combat the high levels of stress and the “earn an A at all costs” mentality facing
affluent teens is to focus on mastery learning and to develop school programming that focuses on
collaboration, project-based learning, appropriate homework, and varies assessments (Galloway
& Pope, 2007). Research has indicated that learning is enhanced when students focus on mastery
learning (Mayer, 2011). Additionally, a focus on a mastery goal orientation rather than a
performance goal orientation, and implementing instructional design that encourages a mastery
orientation, would help shift the focus away from grades and instead focus on deep learning
(Anderman et al., 2010). Anderman et al. (2010) report that since the adoption of the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), the measuring of academic success has been focused on
achievement and progress. Even with the legislation to change NCLB, this intense focus on
success as determined by a set of tests has permeated school systems and the students who they
support. One way for LCS to counter this performance goal orientation is to focus on mastery
learning and to ensure that faculty members have positive self-efficacy in their ability to adapt
and deliver a differentiated curriculum that focuses on mastery learning (Anderman et al., 2010;
Galloway & Pope, 2009; Mayer, 2011; Pajares, 2006; Rueda, 2011).

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 99

Organization Recommendations
The organizational culture is critically important in terms of attracting and retaining
employees (Schneider et al., 1996). The culture is comprised of invisible elements known as
cultural models, as well as the visible policies and procedures, known as cultural settings
(Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schneider et al., 1996). Cultural models and cultural settings
must align with the organizational mission to create organizational health, and proposed
performance solutions must align with the organizational culture and mission (Clark & Estes,
2008). The assumed cultural model influences for this study regarded the school providing
professional development focused on differentiation and mastery learning, as well as providing
education events in order to help parents understand and support their students. The assumed
cultural setting influences for this study surrounded the ways in which students were celebrated.
While a more robust study would have covered additional organizational influences and multiple
stakeholders, the limitations of the study allowed only these three influences to be assessed.
Table 8 provides the principles upon which organization-specific recommendations are
Made, as well as recommendations for the validated organization influences.
Table 8
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence

Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
The organization needs to
celebrate students for process
and character, not simply
outcome-based results such as
Advanced Placement scores,
grade point averages,
admission to selective
colleges, and SAT/ACT
scores.
Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders identify, articulate, and
focus the organization’s effort on
reinforcing the organization’s vision
(Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003).

Clark and Estes (2008) state that
organizational performance increases
when policies and procedures are
Broaden the categories
for celebrating student
success and increase
the frequency of
celebrating students
for non-academic,
mission-aligned
reasons (Buchmann,
Condron, & Roscigno,
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 100

(Cultural Setting) aligned and communicated from the
top with all stakeholders.
2010; Levine, 2006;
McDonough, 1994).
The organization needs to
provide professional
development that enables
faculty to differentiate
assignments and assessments.
(Cultural Model)
Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders ensure that employees
have the resources needed to achieve
the organization’s goals (Waters et al.,
2003).
Differentiate
schoolwork,
assessments, and
homework in order to
reduce student stress.
The organization needs to
provide events to educate
parents on levels of student
stress.
(Policies and Procedures)
Effective leaders are knowledgeable
about the use of effective
communication skills to facilitate
change and enhance organizational
capacity (Conger, 1991; Denning,
2005; Lewis, 2011).
An important step in
terms of reducing
student stress is to
educate parents on the
seriousness and causes
of student stress.

Cultural settings. The organization needs to celebrate students for process and character,
not simply outcome-based results such as Advanced Placement scores, grade point averages,
admission to selective colleges, and SAT/ACT scores. Organizational effectiveness increases
when leaders identify, articulate, and focus the organization’s effort on reinforcing the
organization’s vision (Waters et al., 2003). The mission of LCS is much broader than simply
college acceptances and positive standardized test score outcomes, so the ways and reasons for
celebrating student success should align with the broader mission. When policies and procedures
are aligned and communicated from the top with all stakeholders, organizational performance
increases (Clark & Estes, 2008). The recommendation is to broaden the official, public, all-
school categories for celebrating student success, and to increase the frequency of celebrating
students for non-academic, mission-aligned reasons.
Related to the organizational influence of focusing on mastery orientation is the
suggestion that schools intentionally celebrate a broader definition of success than grades, test
scores, and college acceptances, and instead focus on character and the process of learning
(Levine, 2006; Pope et al., 2015). The research is clear that intrinsic motivation is beneficial to
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 101

student learning and achievement (Dweck, 2006; Levine, 2006; Mayer, 2011). Students who are
offered an external reward for achievement are more likely to cheat, and students who believed
that their school valued performance goals (e.g. grades, test scores, college acceptances) were
more likely to cheat and justify their cheating behaviors (Anderman, Griesinger, & Westerfield,
1998).
Ku et al. (2012) report that the attempt to motivate teens to be successful with the
promise of future financial success is counterproductive. They claim that those messages have
detrimental effects on mastery-oriented learning and actually discourage students from fully
engaging in learning, resulting in a deterioration of school grades over time. In an effort to
nurture intrinsic motivation, schools should celebrate students for achievements beyond
performance goal measures (Levine, 2006; Mayer, 2011). As previously stated, this broader
celebration is aligned with LCS’s faith-based mission.
Cultural models. The organization needs to provide professional development
opportunities that enable the faculty to differentiate assignments and assessments and focus on
mastery learning. Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders ensure that employees
have the resources needed to achieve the organization’s goals (Waters et al., 2003). The
recommendation is to train faculty and to establish evaluation expectations to differentiate
schoolwork, assessments, and homework in order to reduce student stress.
Clark and Estes (2008) state that when policies and procedures are aligned and
communicated from the top to all stakeholders, organizational performance increases. As
detailed in the knowledge section, the differentiation of schoolwork, homework, and
assessments, as well as a focus on mastery learning, will lead to a decrease in student stress. If
LCS wants to achieve its goal of reducing student stress, the leadership of the school must align
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 102

its policies and procedures, consistently communicate the ways in which these procedures
support the mission of LCS, and provide resources and professional development for faculty in
order to increase their effectiveness in differentiation and focusing on mastery learning (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Waters et al., 2003).
Policies and Procedures. While the stakeholder group of this study is the faculty, an
important step for the organization to take is to provide events to educate parents on stress levels,
the causes of stress, and ways to reduce student stress. LCS will not be able to create significant
change in a vacuum of parental influence. The leadership of LCS must be knowledgeable about
the use of effective communication skills in order to facilitate change and enhance organizational
capacity (Conger, 1991; Denning, 2005; Lewis, 2011). The recommendation is to educate
parents on the seriousness and causes of student stress.
In the fast-paced lifestyle of many teens who are scheduled with multiple extra-curricular
activities in order to ensure the strength of their college applications, many affluent families have
decreased the practice of dedicated family time (Skeer & Ballard, 2013). Luthar and Latendresse
(2005) indicate that one reason for affluent teens engaging in risky behaviors is a perceived
disconnection from their parents, and that stressed students are more likely to engage in self-
destructive behaviors. Engaging in consistent family time has shown to decrease these negative
behaviors in teens (Skeer & Ballard, 2013). Research also shows that teens who consistently
have dinners with their families have lower levels of stress than their peers who rarely eat with
their families (National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, 2012;
Offer, 2013; Skeer & Ballard, 2013). In an effort to achieve its goal of reducing student stress,
LCS must engage parents in how they can help reduce student stress and ensure that families are
clear on the mission and goals of the school.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 103

Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation plan that was used to incorporate the suggestions of
this study is the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The original
Kirkpatrick Model (1958) defines four levels of evaluating training programs. These levels in
order are reaction, learning, transfer, and results. The updated model reverses the order to begin
with the results of the training, highlighting the importance of the results. In the New World
Kirkpatrick Model, results must include leading indicators which provide measurements with
which to evaluate the progression of the training results and ensure that trainers do not
overemphasize the first two levels. Level 3 focuses on the participant’s application of the
behavior learned in training. Level 2 measures the gain in the participant’s knowledge, skill, and
motivation as a result of the training. Level 1 measures the participant’s feelings of satisfaction
toward the training (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The New World Kirkpatrick Model
training is designed with the results in mind, and is tied to a change in performance and results.
Using this framework increases the probability of the success of the implementation program.
Organizational Purpose, Needs, and Expectations
Linwood Christian School is an independent college preparatory school that exists to
prepare students academically, personally, and spiritually for college and beyond (school
website). The stakeholder group of this study was the high school faculty, and the study
examined the high levels of stress faced by LCS students, the faculty’s knowledge and
motivation to reduce student stress, and the organizational influences that contribute to or inhibit
the faculty’s ability to reduce student stress.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 104

The goal of the LCS high school faculty is to reduce school-related student stress by
60%. It is important for Linwood to achieve its goal of reducing student stress in order to align
with its overall mission. Since the mission of LCS has a strong focus on developing students’
faith and growing students in terms of their leadership and character, a strong emphasis on
outcomes (college acceptances, standardized test scores, grades, etc.) does not align with the
mission of the school. It is important that LCS is able to address the high level of school-related
stress in order to allow students to develop the other competencies that align with the mission.
The desired outcomes for the recommendations for the stakeholders are to:
● Increase faculty knowledge and understanding of student stress.
● Understand and implement the strategies with which to successfully adapt the
curriculum in order to differentiate learning and homework and focus on mastery
learning.
● Have teachers assume responsibility for the fact that students’ stress is impacted
by their instructional practices and assume responsibility for student learning.
● Increase the faculty’s confidence in the fact that they are capable of effectively
developing assignments that focus on mastery, learning, and understanding.
● The organization would increase celebration of students for process and character,
not simply outcome-based results such as Advanced Placement scores, grade
point averages, admission to selective colleges, and SAT/ACT scores.
● The organization would provide professional development that enables faculty to
differentiate assignments and assessments and focus on mastery learning.
● The organization would provide events to educate parents on levels of student
stress.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 105

Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 9 shows Level 4 outcomes, metrics, and methods for external and internal
outcomes. If LCS can achieve success with internal outcomes due to organizational information,
training, and supports, the external outcomes would also be achieved.
Table 9
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increase faculty’s
awareness of student
stress.
100% of faculty actively
considering stress when
developing lesson plans.
Faculty Survey

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 106

Table 9 (continued)
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The stakeholders of focus are the LCS high school faculty. The first
critical behavior is that every faculty member attends information sessions with data from
student surveys on student stress and relevant research. The second critical behavior is that the
Increase celebration of
students for process
and character, not
simply outcome-based
results such as
Advanced Placement
scores, grade point
averages, admission to
selective colleges, and
SAT/ACT scores.
Number of Recognition awards,
shout-outs, honors, and
celebrations of students for
successes other than academic
outcome-based.
Count the number and type of
awards programs, chapel
“shout-outs,” honors given, and
the general number of student
celebrations during an academic
year.
The organization
would provide
professional
development that
enables faculty to
differentiate
assignments and
assessments and focus
on mastery learning.

Number of faculty enrolling in
and attending professional
development events that focus
on differentiation and mastery
learning.
Faculty Survey
The organization
would provide events
to educate parents on
levels of student stress.
Number of parent education
events executed.
Count the number of parent
education events hosted.
Internal Outcomes
Increase faculty’s self-
efficacy for
differentiation and
adapting curriculum to
focus on mastery
learning.
Faculty self-reporting an
increase in self-efficacy.
Faculty Survey
Increase faculty’s feelings
of responsibility for
student learning and
students’ stress levels.
Faculty self-reporting an
increased feeling of
responsibility for student
learning and students’ stress
levels.
Faculty Survey
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 107

faculty adapts curriculum in order to focus on mastery learning and employs differentiated
instruction strategies in coursework, assessment, and homework. The methods, metrics, and
timing for these critical behaviors appear in Table 10.

Table 10

Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation

Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1. Every faculty
member attends
information sessions
with data from student
surveys on student
stress and relevant
research.
100% of faculty
attend information
sessions.
Attendance sheets Sessions held two
times per year.
2. Faculty adapts
curriculum in order to
focus on mastery
learning and employs
differentiated
instruction strategies
in coursework,
assessment, and
homework.
100% of faculty
adapting curriculum
and implementing
differentiation
strategies.
Evaluation of lesson
plans.
Evaluation of lesson
plans quarterly.

Required drivers. Faculty will need the support of the school administration and the
organization in order to be successful in terms of implementing the recommended changes and to
maintain the change in behavior. The success of this program will require a combination of
organizational drivers in the form of support to reinforce, encourage, and reward critical
behaviors, and accountability to monitor and ensure that new behaviors are applied and
maintained. Table 11 shows the recommended drivers to support faculty’s critical behaviors for
reducing student stress.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 108

Table 11
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1 or 2
Reinforcing
Provide faculty with information in
the form of a report on the levels of
stress of LCS students.
Monthly at faculty meetings 1
Provide training to LCS faculty that
teaches them the strategies with
which to adapt curriculum and
homework.
Monthly at department
meetings
2
Have a similar and credible peer
leader demonstrate or model the
steps to differentiate.
Quarterly trainings offered 2
Provide opportunities for faculty to
practice adapting curriculum,
homework, and lesson plans.
Quarterly trainings offered 2
Encouraging

Attributional training should be
provided for LCS faculty that
informs them about their ability to
decrease student stress by changing
their instructional practices.

Provide a simulated activity that
represents the “typical” experience
in their class and how it may be
adjusted with differing strategies.
Two times per year 1
The school should provide training
for faculty using scaffolding,
feedback, and modeling, in order to
train faculty members in terms of
effectively developing assignments
that focus on mastery, learning, and
understanding.

Quarterly 2

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 109

Table 11 (continued).

Faculty members should be
provided with time with
department chairs in order to
review curriculum and lesson
planning with a focus on
differentiation and mastery
learning.
Quarterly 2
Rewarding
Public acknowledgement of
success in adapting and
differentiating the curriculum,
such as a mention in faculty
meetings, all-school meetings,
and by recognition by the Head
of School.
Bi-annually 2
Video “shout-outs” by students
thanking individual faculty
members for understanding
student stress and adapting the
curriculum.
Monthly in chapel 1, 2
Monitoring
Broaden the categories for
celebrating student success and
increase the frequency of
celebrating students for non-
academic, mission-aligned
reasons.
Review monthly at faculty
meetings
1, 2
Differentiate schoolwork,
assessments, and homework in
order to reduce student stress.
Monthly 1, 2
Educate parents on the
seriousness and causes of student
stress.
Annual 2

Organizational support.
In order to support the implementation of the faculty’s critical behaviors, Linwood
Christian School will prioritize professional development activities that emphasize
differentiation, mastery learning, and awareness of student stress. Additionally, LCS will work to
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 110

decrease both the class sizes as well as the course loads for faculty members so that faculty can
focus on implementing the strategies into the classroom that they will learn through these
professional development activities. If LCS is going to continue to hire teachers who have not
been through teacher credentialing programs, then the school must provide additional
differentiated training for faculty members of varied experience levels. Finally, the academic
leadership of LCS must clearly communicate the expectations across all departments for
differentiation and mastery learning. Teacher’s aides should be employed in order to support the
faculty in this endeavor.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. At the end of the training activity, faculty will be able to do the
following:
1. Understand student stress data. (Declarative Knowledge)
2. Interpret student stress data. (Declarative Knowledge)
3. Summarize the definition and value of reflective practices and be able to carry these
out with regard to student stress. (Metacognitive Knowledge)
4. Use effective differentiation strategies in order to reduce student stress. (Procedural
Knowledge)
5. Evaluate the locus of control over student stress in order to attribute influence more
internally. (Motivation)
5. Integrate performance expectations with regards to reducing student stress, providing
rationalization for differentiation strategies, and monitoring progress towards goals.
(Accountability)
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 111

6. Feel encouraged by supervisors and the organization to try new differentiation and
curriculum adaptation strategies. (Affect)
7. Establish their own goals in support of the organizational goals. (Goal Setting)
8. Determine the efficacy of their stress reduction strategies and guide adjustments to
strategies. (Evaluate)
9. Recognize organizational incentives for focusing on reducing student stress.
(Incentives)
Program. The proposed training plan is focused on increasing faculty knowledge and
motivation regarding student stress. This training program will be implemented at the faculty
training in August, and then followed up on throughout the year at all-school meetings, high
school faculty meetings, and department meetings. The content will be delivered by LCS
employees, including the Chief Academic Officer, Dean of Faculty, Principal, and LCS faculty
members. Training topics will inform the faculty regarding the levels of student stress,
understanding and analyzing student stress data, the correct inappropriate attributions for student
stress, and training on effective strategies with which to differentiate coursework, assessments,
and homework.
The program will consist of five live sessions. The first session will focus on data from
the LCS student survey regarding stress and student testimonials, as well as national data and
trends in independent school stress (3 hours). The second session will present research on
strategies that faculty can employ in order to reduce student stress (2 hours). The third session
will focus on attribution training regarding the faculty’s responsibility for student learning and
student stress (1 hour). The fourth session will be a workshop on differentiation and mastery
learning (3 hours). This session will include a job aid as pre-reading and for faculty to use during
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 112

the training on which to follow along, reflect, and take notes. During this workshop, each faculty
member will bring a lesson plan and, with coaching, adapt the curriculum to focus on master
learning and create a plan to differentiate coursework, assessments, and homework. The final
session will be a goal-setting session where faculty members, with the help of a credible peer and
a job aid, will set their own goals for reducing student stress (1 hour). The total anticipated time
for completion, combining synchronous and asynchronous learning, is nine hours. Faculty
members will participate in post-training multiple choice assessments focusing on the application
of concepts from the training and surveys.
Evaluation of the Components of learning. Training plans must include evaluations
that confirm that the intended learning occurred. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) explain that
learning is the degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude,
confidence, and commitment based on their participation in a training session. Knowledge is
evaluated by measuring whether participants know and understand the training content. Skills are
evaluated by having the trainees demonstrate their new knowledge by putting it into practice,
even if just by simulation. Attitude is evaluated by determining whether participants see the
value of applying the training in their environment. Confidence and commitment are evaluated
by determining whether trainees have had enough practice, feedback, and time for questions.
Level 2 evaluation is formative, occurring both during training, allowing trainers to make
adjustments, as well as after training. Table 12 lists the methods of evaluating learning and
timing for each component.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 113

Table 12
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge: “I know it.”
Knowledge checks during live sessions Throughout session
Multiple choice assessment Post-training session
Procedural Skills: “I can do it right now.”
Application of strategies to lesson plans During workshop
Skill demonstration During workshop
Post-test assessment asking participants about their
levels of proficiency before and after training
After workshops
Attitude: “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Survey of faculty Post-training
Review of future lesson plans to see whether
strategies were implemented
Post-training and throughout the year
Peer discussion of value of implementing strategies During training
Confidence: “I think I can do it on the job.”
Survey using scaled items regarding
confidence in applying new skills
Post-training
Individual conversation with department chair Post-training
Peer conversation During training
Commitment: “I will do it on the job.”
Survey using scaled items regarding
commitment to applying new skills
Post-training
Individual conversation with department chair Post-training
Peer conversation During training

Level 1: Reaction
The final area of training measurement involves participant reactions. Level 1 is defined
as the customer satisfaction level, or the extent to which trainees find the learning experience
engaging, relevant to their real-world work, and favorable (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Level 1 evaluation is both formative and summative. Level 1 feedback occurs throughout
training in order to check participants on engagement, relevance, and satisfaction. Level 1
feedback also occurs immediately following the training experience. Table 13 details the
methods and timing of measuring Level 1 reactions.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 114

Table 13
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance records At the beginning of each session
Observations by instructor Throughout training sessions
Post-session evaluations At the end of every session
Completion of activities in training session Throughout sessions
Relevance
Post-session evaluation At the end of every session
Checks for relevance by instructor Throughout training sessions
Completion of activities in training session Throughout sessions

Customer Satisfaction
Post-session evaluation At the end of every session
Observations by instructor Throughout training sessions
Checks for satisfaction by instructor Throughout training sessions

Evaluation Tools
In order to adequately support faculty in terms of reducing student stress, LCS must
implement the recommended drivers completely. LCS administrators should utilize a goal
progress dashboard reviewed weekly both in principal team meetings and leadership team
meetings. This dashboard would include a log of individual drivers, timing, completion, and
results. This method is consistent with the leadership team’s current internal reporting approach,
and adopts the New World Kirkpatrick Model’s commitment to Levels 3 and 4.
Immediately following the program implementation. In addition to the formative
Level 1 checks throughout each of the training sessions, a survey will be distributed to each
participant immediately following each session. In order to get each faculty member’s immediate
reaction, the survey will be a paper survey that will be completed in the last moments of the
training and turned in on their way out the door. This evaluation instrument will be comprised of
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 115

questions asking about the engagement, relevance, customer satisfaction, and declarative
knowledge, procedural skills, attitude, confidence, commitment. The Level 1 and 2 survey is
found in appendix A.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. The administration at
Linwood Christian School will send a survey of Likert-style questions, as well as open-ended
questions, to all participants multiple times throughout the year. These surveys will be
distributed electronically once per quarter and one at the end of the year. The purpose of the
survey is to evaluate all Level 2, 3, and 4 of evaluations in the New World Kirkpatrick Model
(2016). Level 2 will seek to understand whether the training increased the faculty member’s
declarative and procedural knowledge, enhanced their attitude, confidence, and commitment to
reducing student stress. Level 3 questions will ask about faculty’s application of the training
principles within their own classrooms. Questions aimed at determining whether the
implemented practices actually reduced student stress will be posed in order to evaluate Level 4.
The survey instrument is found in Appendix B.

Data Analysis and Reporting
An important step in terms of determining the success of the training program and ensuring
that the academic leadership remains focused on the key performance indicators (KPIs) is data
analysis and reporting. A blended approach of analyzing and reporting data will be used, drawing
on the critical behaviors and required drivers listed in Tables 10 and 11. Table 14 lists the KPIs
that will be measured, as well as the associated metrics and frequency, and how this information
might be demonstrated in a dashboard. As previously stated, the dashboard will be a tool used by
the administrative team in order to continually evaluate and assess the success of the initiative.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 116

During their bi-weekly administrative team meeting, the LCS administrative team will review the
dashboard and the progress toward the goal.
Table 14

KPIs that will be measured.
Key Performance Indicators Metric(s) Frequency
Dashboard
Representation
Faculty attends and engages in training
sessions.
100% of faculty
attending training
sessions
At the end of
each session
Graphic of
percentage of
attendance
Faculty adapts lesson plans using new
techniques learned in training.
Trained
techniques
appearing on
lesson plans
turned into
department
chairs
Monthly
report given
by
department
chairs.
Grid of trained
techniques and
frequency of use
by faculty.
Awards ceremony and honor assemblies
will include categories for honors beyond
grades and test scores.

Awards/honors
given
Review each
quarter
Grid of types and
frequency of
awards/honors
Parents education events will be hosted in
order to inform parents about student
stress
Parent events
hosted
Review each
quarter

Faculty’s self-efficacy for differentiation
and adapting curriculum to focus on
mastery learning will increase.
Survey Post-training Graph showing
responses to
survey
Faculty’s feelings of responsibility for
student learning and students’ stress levels
will increase.
Survey Post-training Graph showing
responses to
survey

Summary
In an effort to maximize the likelihood that LCS meets its goal of reducing school-related
student stress within a certain period of time, the New World Kirkpatrick Model (2016) was used
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 117

as a framework for developing the solution, implementation strategies, and evaluation plan.
Using the New World model, which reverses the order of Kirkpatrick’s original 1958 levels,
ensures a focus on all levels of the implementation plan, with a strong focus on the outcomes and
the required drivers of the stakeholders. Creating a plan with the outcomes in mind, and
developing a training program in order to meet those goals, significantly increases the potential
of success of the initiative. A clearly defined data and analysis mechanism will also contribute to
the likelihood of success. The research-based model presented in this chapter will increase the
ability of LCS to reduce school-related student stress and achieve their goal within the
designated timeframe.
Recommendations for Future Research
The relationship between affluent teens and school stress is a research subject that is
growing in relevance. Led by the research of Sunyia Luther, Madeline Levine, and Denise Pope,
the existing research on the issues facing this population of teens has increased over the past 15
years. However, there is still much research to do in order to increase our understanding of these
complex issues. Since faculty instructional practices and organizational influences can play a key
role in reducing school-related stress, some of the national organizations serving private and
independent schools should conduct research on student stress at private schools. This research
could inform teacher training and instructional practices at all schools.
Linwood Christian School would benefit by continuing research on the causes of student
stress and faculty practices. A more robust study that included student responses would be
helpful in order to better inform organizational practices. Additionally, including parents as a
stakeholder would also benefit the understanding of the data.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 118

Conclusion
This study sought to understand student stress at Linwood Christian School in relation to
its faculty goal of reducing student stress, and to assess the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences of faculty related to student stress. Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis
served as the general conceptual and methodological framework for the study.
Survey and interview data revealed that the LCS faculty lacks the conceptual knowledge
of student stress and the procedural knowledge of how to differentiate coursework, homework,
and assessments in a way that would reduce student stress. Additionally, the data revealed that
the LCS faculty has high self-efficacy regarding differentiation, but it is a false confidence, as
they are not actually engaging in true differentiation. The LCS faculty also do not attribute
student-stress to their instructional practices. Instead they believe that the reasons for student
stress are poor time-management, students being overscheduled, and parent pressure.
The data indicates that the organization is inconsistent in its approach to training and
professional development, and that there are no clear policies or expectations for differentiation.
By implementing the recommended solutions, LCS may begin to effectively address its
homework and assessment policies in ways that reduce student stress and improve outcomes for
all stakeholders. Addressing the issue of school-related stress is critical to LCS’s mission. The
school-related stress that LCS students are facing is having a detrimental effect on the academic
and social-emotional outcomes for LCS students. Independent schools that serve affluent teens
and their families must become aware of the high-levels of long-term, chronic, developmentally
damaging stress their students are facing and take steps to implement instructional practices that
will reduce the stress and pressure these students feel. This study presented actionable, research-
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 119

based steps that LCS can implement to make a lasting impact on the emotional well-being of its
students.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 120

References

Aguirre, J., & Speer, N. (1999). Examining the Relationship Between Beliefs and Goals in
Teacher Practice. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(3), 327-356.
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2014). School start time for adolescents. Policy Statement.
Retrieved from: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/08/19/ped
s.2014-697.
American Psychological Association (APA). (2009). Stress in America. Retrieved from:
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2009/stress-exec-summary.pdf
Anderman, E., & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/
reference/article/attribution-theory/
Anderman, E. M., Anderman, L. H., Yough, M. S., & Gimbert, B. G. (2010). Value-added
models of assessment: Implications for motivation and accountability. Educational
Psychologist, 45(2), 123-137.
Anderman, E. M., Griesinger, T., & Westerfield, G. (1998). Motivation and cheating during
early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 84-93.
Aurini, J., & Davies, S. (2004). The Transformation of Private Tutoring: Education in a
Franchise Form. The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 29(3), 419-438.
Benenson Strategy Group. (2009). Hi-tech cheating: Cell phones and cheating in schools.
Retrieved from: http://www.commonsensemedia.org/hi-tech-cheating.
Bogard, K. (2005). Adolescents, depression and drug use: The role of adults in their lives.
Adolescence, 40(158), 281-306.
Bound, J., Hershbein, B., & Long, B. T. (2009). Playing the admissions game: Student reactions
to increasing college competition. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(4), 119-46.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 121

Bradley-Geist, J.C. & Olson-Buchanan, J.B. (2014). “Helicopter parents: an examination of the
correlates of over-parenting of college students,” Education + Training, 56(4), 314 -328.
Bryant, N. B., & Gómez, R. L. (2015). The teen sleep loss epidemic: What can be
done? Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 1(1), 116-125.
Buchmann, C., Condron, D., & Roscigno, V. (2010). Shadow Education, American Style: Test
Preparation, the SAT and College Enrollment. Social Forces, 89(2), 435-461.
Canaday, V. (2016). CDC convening investigation into ‘suicide cluster’ in Palo Alto. Mental
Heath Weekly, 26(8). doi:10.1002/mhw.30515.
Carskadon, Mary A. (1999). When Worlds Collide: Adolescent Need for Sleep Versus Societal
Demands. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(5), 348-53.
Challenge Success (2012). Changing the Conversation about Homework from Quantity and
Achievement to Quality and Engagement [White Paper]. Retrieved from
http://www.challengesuccess.org/resources/research/white-papers/.
Challenge Success. (2012). Cheat or be cheated? What we know about academic integrity in
middle & high schools & what we can do about it. [White Paper]. Retrieved from:
http://www.challengesuccess.org/resources/research/white-papers/
Chang-Kook, Y., Kim, J., & Lee, J. (2005). Age-Related Changes in Sleep/Wake Patterns
Among Korean Teenagers. Pediatrics, 115(1), 250-6.
Child Mind Institute. Children’s Mental Health Report. (2015). Retrieved from:
http://www.speakupforkids.org/ChildrensMentalHealthReport_052015.pdf
Clark, D., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 122

College Board. (2014). The 10th annual AP report to the nation. Retrieved from
http://media.collegeboard.com/ digitalServices/public/pdf/ap/rtn/AP-Report-to-the-
Nation.pdf.
Conger, J. A. (1991). Inspiring others: The language of leadership. Academy of Management
Perspectives, 5(1), 31-45.
Conner, J., Pope, D. & Galloway, M. (2009). Success with less stress. Educational Leadership,
67(4), 54- 58.
Cooper, H., Jackson, K., Nye, B. & Lindsay, J. (2001). A Model of Homework’s Influence on
the Performance Evaluations of Elementary School Students. The journal of
Experimental Education, 69(2), 181-199.
Cooper, H. (2007). The battle over homework: Common ground for administrators, teachers,
and parents. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Cooper. H. & Valentine, J.C. (2001). Using research to answer practical questions about
homework. Educational Psychologist, 36(3), 143-153.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2006). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/.
Denning, S. (2005). The leader’s guide to storytelling: Mastering the art and discipline of
business narrative (Vol. 269). John Wiley & Sons.
Duffy, Gerald, & Roehler, Laura. (1986). Constraints on Teacher Change. Journal of Teacher
Education, 37(1), 55-58.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Incorporated.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 123

Eaton, D.K., Kann, L., Kinchen, S., Shanklin, S., Flint, K.H., Hawkins, J., ... & Lim, C. (2012).
Youth risk behavior surveillance-United States Centers for Disease Control, 2011.
MMWR Surveill Summ, 61(4), 1-162.
Eaton D. K., McKnight-Eily, L. R., Lowry, R., Perry, G.S., Presley-Cantrell, L. & Croft, J. B.
(2010). Prevalence of insufficient, borderline, and optimal hours of sleep among high
school students – United States, 2007. Journal of Adolescent Health, 46(4), 399-401.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Eckert, P. (1989). Jocks and burnouts: Social categories and identity in high school. New York,
NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Edmonds, Dan. (2015) How Many College Applications Are Too Many?. Forbes, November,
2015. Retrieved from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/noodleeducation/2015/11/20/how-
many-colleges-should-you-apply-to/#2b2a728049ef
Eisner, E. W. (2002). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school
programs (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Galloway, M., Conner, J., & Pope, D. (2013). Nonacademic effects of homework in privileged,
high-performing high schools. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81(4), 490.
Galloway, M. K., Conner, J. O., and Pope, D. (2009). Stanford Survey of Adolescent School
Experiences. Presentation at Challenge Success May Conference, Stanford, CA.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 124

Galloway, M. K., & Pope, D. (2007). Hazardous Homework?. Reading Against Democracy: The
Broken Promises of Reading Instruction, 20(4), 55.
Gangwisch, J. E., Babiss, L. A., Malaspina, D., Turner, B. J., Zammit, G. K., & Posner, K.
(2010). Earlier parental set bedtimes as a protective factor against depression and suicidal
ideation. Sleep, 33(1), 97-106.
Gilman, R., & Ashby, J. S. (2003). A first study of perfectionism and multidimensional life
satisfaction among adolescents. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 23(2), 218-235.
Hallinan, M., & Kubitschek, T. (1999). Curriculum Differentiation and High School
Achievement. Social Psychology of Education, 3(1), 41-62.
Hawkins, D. A., & Lautz, J. (2005). State of College Admission. National Association for
College Admission Counseling.
Hines, A. R., & Paulson, S. E. (2007). Parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of adolescent storm and
stress: Relations with parenting and teaching styles. Family Therapy, 34(2), 63-80.
Hirshkowitz, M., Whiton, K., Albert, S. M., Alessi, C., Bruni, O., DonCarlos, L., ... & Neubauer,
D. N. (2015). National Sleep Foundation’s sleep time duration recommendations:
methodology and results summary. Sleep Health: Journal of the National Sleep
Foundation, 1(1), 40-43.
Johnston, L.D., O’Malley, P.M., Bachman, J.G., & Schulenberg, J.E. (2011). Monitoring the
Future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2010: Volume I, Secondary school
students. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan.
Josephson Institute (2010). Josephson Institute’s 2010 Report Card on the Ethics of American
Youth. Los Angeles: Josephson Institute. Retrieved from:
http://charactercounts.org/pdf/reportcard/2010/ReportCard2010_data-tables.pdf
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 125

Kagan, D. (1992). Implications of Research on Teacher Belief. Educational Psychologist, 27(1),
65-90.
Kett, J. (2003). Reflections on the history of adolescence in America. The History of the
Family, 8(3), 355-373.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/.
Klassen, Robert M., & Chiu, Ming Ming. (2010). Effects on Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Job
Satisfaction: Teacher Gender, Years of Experience, and Job Stress. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741-756.
Knoblauch, D., & Chase, M. (2015). Rural, suburban, and urban schools: The impact of school
setting on the efficacy beliefs and attributions of student teachers. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 45, 104-114.
Knopf, D., Park, M. J., & Paul Mulye, T. (2009). The mental health of adolescents: A national
profile, 2008. San Francisco, CA: National Adolescent Health Information Center,
University of California, San Francisco.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Ku, L., Dittmar, H., & Banerjee, R. (2012). Are materialistic teenagers less motivated to learn?
Cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence from the United Kingdom and Hong Kong.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 74-86.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 126

Leonard, N., Gwadz, M., Ritchie, A., Linick, J., Cleland, C., Elliott, L., & Grethel, M. (2015). A
multi-method exploratory study of stress, coping, and substance use among high school
youth in private schools. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1028.
Levine, M. (2006). The price of privilege: How parental pressure and material advantage are
creating a generation of disconnected and unhappy kids. HarperCollins Publishers, New
York, NY.
Levine, M. (2012). Teach your children well. HarperCollins US.
Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic
communication. UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Liu, A. Y. H., Ehrenberg, R. G., & Mrdjenovic, J. (2007). Diffusion of Common Application
membership and admissions outcomes at American colleges and universities. National
Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w13175.
Lubell, K.M., Kegler, S.R., Crosby, A.E., & Karch, D. (2008). Suicide trends among youths and
young adults aged 10-24 years—United States, 1990-2004. JAMA 299(3):283-284.
Luthar, S.S. (2017). Our kids are not all right: High-achieving schools and risks for
addiction. Psychology Today, June 13. Retrieved from:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/privileged-pressured/201706/our-kids-are-not-
all-right.
Luthar, S. S., & Barkin, S. H. (2012). Are affluent youth truly “at risk”? vulnerability and
resilience across three diverse samples. Development and Psychopathology, 24(2), 429-
49.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 127

Luthar, S. S., Barkin, S. H., & Crossman, E. J. (2013). “I can, therefore I must”: Fragility in the
upper-middle classes. Development and Psychopathology, 25(4), 1529-1549.
Luthar, S. S., & Barkin, S. H. (2012). Are affluent youth truly “at risk”? vulnerability and
resilience across three diverse samples. Development and Psychopathology, 24(2), 429-
49.
Luthar, S., & Becker, B. (2002). Privileged but Pressured? A Study of Affluent Youth. Child
Development, 73(5), 1593-1610.
Luthar, S. & D’Avanzo, K. (1999). Contextual factors in substance use: A study of suburban and
inner-city adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 11, 845-867.
Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Children of the affluent: Challenges to well-
being. Current directions in psychological science, 14(1), 49-53.
Luthar, S. S., & Schwartz, B. (2016). Sometimes ‘poor little rich kids’ really are poor little rich
kids. The Great Debate, Reuters.com, January 5. Retrieved from:
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2016/01/05/sometimes-poor-little-rich-kids-really-
are-poor-little-rich-kids/
Ma J., Lee K-V. & Stafford R. S. (2005). Depression treatment during outpatient visits by U.S.
children and adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37(6), 434 – 42
Mayer, R. E. (2011). How learning works. Applying the science of learning (pp. 13–37, 44–49).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Marzano, R. & Pickering, D. (2007). The Case For and Against Homework. Educational
Leadership, March, 74-79.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 128

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
McDonough, P. M. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure
opportunity. SUNY Press, New York, NY.
McDonough, Patricia M. (1994). Buying and Selling Higher Education: The Social Construction
of the College Applicant. Journal of Higher Education, 65(4), 427-46.
Moore, M., & Meltzer, L. J. (2008). The sleepy adolescent: Causes and consequences of
sleepiness in teens. Paediatric Respiratory Reviews, 9(2), 114-20
National Association of College Counseling (NACAC). (2017). The State of College
Admissions. Retrieved from:
https://www.nacacnet.org/globalassets/documents/publications/research/soca17final.pdf.
National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS). (2018). About NAIS. Retrieved from:
https://www.nais.org/about/about-nais/.
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. (2012). The
importance of family dinners VIII: A CASAColumbia White Paper. Retrieved from
http://www.casacolumbia.org/addiction-research/reports/importance-of-family-dinners-
2012
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2007). WISQARS Leading Causes of Death
Reports, 1999-2006. [Online Database]. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html.
O’Donnell, H. (1985). Homework in the Elementary School. The Reading Teacher, 39(2), 220-
222.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 129

Offer, S. (2013). Assessing the relationship between family mealtime communication and
adolescent emotional well-being using the experience sampling method. Journal of
Adolescence, 36(3), 577-585.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Palardy, J. (1988). The Effect of Homework Policies on Student Achievement. NASSP Bulletin,
April, 14-17.
Partnership for a Drug-Free America, (2008). Partnership attitude tracking study, 2007.
Retrieved from: http://www.drugfree.org/newsroom/fullreport-pats-teens-2007
Perez-Pena, R. (2014). Best, brightest, and rejected: elite colleges turn away up to 95%. New
York Times, April 9, 2014, p. A1.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Pope, D. (2001). Doing school: How we are creating a generation of stressed out, materialistic,
and miseducated students. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Pope, D., Brown, M., Miles, S. (2015). Overloaded and underprepared: Strategies for stronger
schools and healthy, successful kids (1st ed.). San Francisco, Ca: Jossey-Bass.
Rahdar, A & Galvan, A. (2014). The cognitive and neurobiological effects of daily stress in
adolescents. NeuroImage (92), 267-273.
Rice, Suzanne, & Smilie, Kipton D. (2014). In Plato’s Shadow: Curriculum Differentiation and
the Comprehensive American High School. Educational Studies: Journal of the
American Educational Studies Association, 50(3), 231-245.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 130

Rolle, I.V., Kennedy, S.M., Agaku, I., Jones, S.E., Bunnell, R., Caraballo, R.,…McAfee, T.
(2015). Cigarette, cigar, and marijuana use among high school students – United States,
1997 – 2013. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). Retrieved from:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6440a2.htm?s_cid=mm6440a2_w
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics: Using Microsoft Excel
2016 (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19.
School Student Survey (2017).
2

School’s website. (n.d.) School History.
3

School’s website. (n.d.) Admissions.
4

Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Skeer, M. & Ballard, E. (2013). Are family meals as good for youth as we think they are? A
review of the literature on family meals as they pertain to adolescent risk prevention.
Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 42(7), 943-963.
Snyder, T. D., de Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2016). Digest of Education Statistics 2014, NCES
2016-006. National Center for Education Statistics.

2
Name of organization not included to protect anonymity
3
Name of organization not included to protect anonymity
4
Name of organization not included to protect anonymity
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 131

Stipek, D., Givvin, K., Salmon, J., & Macgyvers, V. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and practices
related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 213-226.
Tieso, Carol. (2004). Through the Looking Glass: One School's Reflection on
Differentiation. Gifted Child Today, 27(4), 58-62.
University of California, Undergraduate Admissions Summary. (2018). Retrieved from:
https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/infocenter/admissions-residency-and-ethnicity
Vigdor, Jacob L., and Charles T. Clotfelter. 2003. “Retaking the SAT.” The Journal of Human
Resources 38(1):1-33.
Walberg, H. (1991). Does Homework Help? The School Community Journal, 1(1), 13-15.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced Leadership: What 30 Years of
Research Tells Us about the Effect of Leadership on Student Achievement. A Working
Paper.
Wilens, T.E., Adler, L.A., Adams, J., Sgambati, S., Rotrosen, J., Sawtelle, R,…Fusillo, S.
(2008). Misuse and diversion of stimulants prescribed for ADHD: A systematic review of
the literature. Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(1), 21-31.
Yates, T. M., Tracy, A. J., & Luthar, S. S. (2008). Nonsuicidal self-injury among “privileged”
youths: Longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to developmental process. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(1), 52.
Yuretich, Richard F., & Kanner, Lisa C. (2015). Examining the Effectiveness of Team-Based
Learning (TBL) in Different Classroom Settings. Journal of Geoscience
Education, 63(2), 147-156.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 132

Appendix A
Survey Questions
Knowledge Survey Items: (Conceptual and Procedural)
o All responses: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
1. LCS students are experiencing a very high level of stress.
2. LCS students are significantly stressed about schoolwork.
3. Homework is a significant cause of stress for LCS students.
4. I understand the process to differentiate instruction.
5. I know how to adapt the curriculum to focus on mastery learning.
6. The main reason students are stressed is social issues.
7. Schoolwork is not a significant contributor to student stress.
8. I know how to develop differentiated assessments.
9. LCS students are more stressed now than they were in my generation.
10. I know how to create assessments that determine if a student has mastered a concept.
Motivation Survey Items: (Attribution and Self-efficacy)
o All responses: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.
11. Student stress is strongly influenced by the amount of effort I put into adapting the
lesson.
12. I am capable of developing assignments that focus on mastery, learning, and
understanding.
13. I believe that my students are capable of managing the academic load in my class.
14. I am confident in my ability to adapt the curriculum as necessary to differentiate the
assignments.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 133

15. I am confident in my ability to adapt the curriculum as necessary to focus on mastery
learning.
16. I am capable of creating assessments that measure mastery of content.
17. Student’s stress level is impacted by the coursework I give them.
18. Student’s stress level is impacted by my instructional design.
19. The homework that I give contributes to student stress.
20. The homework that I give is a significant contributor to student stress.
21. Students are stressed not because of the homework I give, but because they don’t manage
their time well.
22. Students would not be stressed if they managed their time better.
23. The reason students are stressed about schoolwork is because they have not developed
good study habits.
24. I am capable of creating differentiated assessments.
25. I am confident in my ability to differentiate instruction.
26. I am confident in my ability to appropriately differentiate homework assignments.
27. My instructional decisions have a big impact on students’ level of stress.
Organization Survey Items:
o All responses: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree
28. I have been well-supported by the school in the area of professional development.
29. I have pursued professional development in the area of differentiation of instruction.
30. My department chair has discussed differentiating coursework with me.
31. My department chair has discussed differentiating homework with me.
32. My department chair has discussed differentiating assessments with me.
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 134

33. The most important thing to the administration is the scores my students receive on
standardized tests.
34. The AP scores are the most important metric the administration uses when evaluating my
success.
35. The most important thing is that I prepare my students for the AP test.
36. I know my principal assess my success as a teacher based on my students’ standardized
test scores.
37. I have continued education credits in mastery learning.
38. I have continued education credits in differentiation.
39. I have continued education credits in adapting assessments.

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 135

Appendix B
Interview Questions
3. In what ways do you see students demonstrating that they are stressed?
4. What are some strategies you use in your classroom to differentiate Classwork? What
about homework?
5. In looking at your curriculum, what are some ways you have adjusted the curriculum to
focus on mastery learning?
6. What do you think are the greatest contributors to stress for our students?
7. When you do your lesson planning, is student stress a consideration when designing and
planning coursework? If yes, what are some specific considerations you make?
9. How confident do you feel about creating assignments that focus on mastery? Follow-up
Probe.
10. What are the main reasons students are celebrated at LCS?
11. Tell me about your experience with standardized tests; do you believe the school
considers these scores as a reflection of you, the teacher?
12. Tell me about the professional development you’ve done in the past 3 years.
13. Tell me about any professional development experiences you have relating to
differentiation.
14. What sort of parent education events has the school provided?
1. Do you think LCS students are stressed?
2. From your perspective, how stressed are LCS students?
8. What are some ways that you attempt to develop assignments that focus on mastery?
Learning? Understanding?
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 136

15. What experiences have you had educating parents on how to help their children navigate
stress in your classroom?

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 137

Appendix C

Sample Post-Training Survey Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1 and 2

1. The training held my interest. (Level 1 Engagement)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
2. This training was relevant to the work I do. (Level 1 Relevance)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
3. I am satisfied with my training experience today. (Level 1 Customer Satisfaction)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
4. From the definitions below, choose the one that most closely describes your understanding of
differentiation: (Level 2 Declarative Knowledge)
a. Grading on a curve.
b. Proving SSD accommodations.
c. Using pre-assessment to individualize instruction and homework
d. Giving ‘A’ students more work.
5. The first step in differentiating instruction is: (Level 2 Procedural Knowledge)
a. Asking students what they want to do
b. Pre-assessment
c. Asking other teachers about a student’s ability
d. Allowing students to self-select groups.
6. Understanding how to differentiate and adapt coursework is valuable to my work.
(Level 2 Attitude)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
7. I feel confident I can implement the concepts presented today. (Level 2
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 138

Confidence)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
8. I am committed to applying my knowledge of how to differentiate and adapt curriculum to
reduce student stress. (Level 2 Commitment)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree

TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 139

Appendix D
Sample Blended Evaluation Items Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels 1, 2, 3, and 4
1. The training sessions have been applicable to my work. (Level 1 Relevance)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
2. What information was most relevant? (Level 1 Relevance)
3. What information was least relevant? (Level 1 Relevance)
4. What information should be added to this training in the future to increase its relevance to
LCS faculty? (Level 1 Relevance)
5. What information, if any, do you feel was missing from training? (Level 2 Knowledge,
Skills)
6. How has your confidence using what you learned changed since training? (Level 2
Confidence)
7. I have successfully applied what I learned in training to my work. (Level 3 Transfer)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
8. If you selected Strongly Disagree or Disagree for #7 above, please indicate the reasons
(check all the apply): (Level 3 Transfer)
a. What I learned is not relevant to my work.
b. I do not have the necessary knowledge and skills.
c. I do not feel confident applying what I learned to my work.
d. I do not have the resources I need to apply what I learned to my work.
e. I do not believe applying what I learned will make a difference.
f. No one is tracking what I am or am not doing anyway.
g. Other (please explain):
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 140

9. What else, if anything, do you need in order to successfully apply what you learned?
(Level 3 Transfer)
10. I feel encouraged to apply what I learned by my supervisor. (Required Drivers -
Encouraging)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
11. I have time with my supervisor and peers to share success stories and troubleshoot
challenges related to what I learned. (Required Drivers - Encouraging)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
12. I am incentivized to apply what I learned. (Required Drivers - Rewarding)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
13. I have been or will be rewarded for successfully applying what I learned. (Required Drivers
- Rewarding)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
14. I have my own performance goals related to what I learned. (Required Drivers -
Reinforcing, Monitoring)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
15. I am held accountable for applying what I learned and making progress. (Required Drivers -
Monitoring)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
16. I am already seeing positive results from applying what I learned. (Level 4 Results)
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree
17. I see a positive impact in the following areas as a result of applying what I learned (check all
that apply): (Results and Leading Indicators)
TEENS AND SCHOOL STRESS 141

a. Increased student engagement
b. Decreased student stress
c. Decreased performance goal orientation among students
d. Decrease in my own stress
e. Increased understanding of academic goals for LCS
f. Increased parent and school partner satisfaction
18. Please provide one or more examples of positive outcomes from applying this
training: (Level 4 Results)
19. Please share any suggestions you have for improving this training:

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

First-generation college students and persistence to a degree: an evaluation study

PDF

Preparing university faculty for distance education: an evaluation study

PDF

Civic learning program policy compliance by a state department of higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Satisfactory academic progress for doctoral students: an improvement study

PDF

The academic implications of providing social emotional learning in K-12: an evaluation study

PDF

Mandatory reporting of sexual violence by faculty and staff at Hometown University: an evaluation study

PDF

The moderating role of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on employee turnover: A gap analysis

PDF

Efficacy of non-formal education programs in educational outcomes of marginalized Filipino children: an evaluation study

PDF

Line staff and their influence on youth in expanded learning programs: an evaluation model

PDF

Teacher retention influences: an evaluation study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Bridging the empathy gap: a mixed-method approach to evaluating teacher support in bullying prevention and intervention at an urban middle school in India

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

Measuring the impact of short-term campus exchange programs: an evaluation study

PDF

Sustained mentoring of early childhood education teachers: an innovation study

PDF

Online graduate-level student learning and engagement: developing critical competencies for future leadership roles: an evaluation study

PDF

Strengths-based pedagogy for culturally marginalized groups

PDF

Organizational agility and agile development methods: an evaluation study

PDF

School-based interventions for chronically absent students in poverty

Asset Metadata

Creator Bell, Casey M. (author)

Core Title Affluent teens and school stress: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/30/2019

Defense Date 04/30/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag affluent teens,High school students,OAI-PMH Harvest,Stress

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Muraszewski, Alison (committee member), Stowe, Kathy (committee member)

Creator Email CaseyBel@usc.edu,CaseyMarieBell@yahoo.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-162176

Unique identifier UC11660618

Identifier etd-BellCaseyM-7365.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-162176 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BellCaseyM-7365.pdf

Dmrecord 162176

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Bell, Casey M.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA