Exploring Stress Factors and Coping Strategies in Italian Teachers after COVID-19: Evidence from Qualitative Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I enjoyed reading your article.  In my opinion, the manuscript presents scientific and methodological quality, and its formal structure is well-written.

Congratulations to the authors!

 

Author Response

Thanks for the appreciation of our work. We have revised some parts according to the other reviewers’ comments to improve the manuscript’s quality. We hope the new version may be even more appreciated.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for this paper which outlines the stress factors and coping strategies employed by teachers in Italy after the Covid-19  pandemic.

Whilst the subject matter was topical I found the approach to the research and subsequent write up of the findings lacking in originality and objective worth.  I question whether the use of focus groups was necessarily the best method for collecting data in this context and I was not convinced that the variables were suitably isolated in order to make definite claims. It is always difficult to rely on memory ( i.e. what happened before or during Covid) and therefore it was hard to determine whether any copying strategies used were new or different given the change of circumstances.

More could have been done in this regard to research the literature about coping strategies normally employed by staff, how such strategies are defined and utilised by teachers and when.

As a result I felt the findings too loosely described, especially if the intention was to direct education policy going forward.

Author Response

We would like to thank the Reviewer for the appreciation of the relevance of our work. In the revised manuscript, we have addressed the detected issues. Please, find the list of comments below and the corresponding actions.

Comment: Thank you for this paper which outlines the stress factors and coping strategies employed by teachers in Italy after the Covid-19 pandemic. Whilst the subject matter was topical I found the approach to the research and subsequent write up of the findings lacking in originality and objective worth. I question whether the use of focus groups was necessarily the best method for collecting data in this context and I was not convinced that the variables were suitably isolated in order to make definite claims. It is always difficult to rely on memory (i.e. what happened before or during Covid) and therefore it was hard to determine whether any copying strategies used were new or different given the change of circumstances.

Action: We thank the Reviewer for these valuable comments, which made us deeply reflect on our work. The doubt about the use of group interviews is reasonable, as this research method has advantages and disadvantages. In our study, it allowed us to gain a considerable amount of information in a relatively short time, exploring those themes that were truly relevant for teachers, without researchers directing their attention to topics established ex-ante. On the other side, as expected from the use of this method, some teachers were more verbose, researchers had to prompt other teachers to express their opinions or had to redirect teachers’ attention to specific themes. A quantitative method (e.g., a questionnaire) could have guaranteed to isolate the variables more strongly, but we may have missed some unexpected themes that teachers expressed during the interviews. Thus, comparing the pros and cons, we believe the choice of group interviews was an adequate method for this study. Nevertheless, we included the shortcomings of the group interviews in the manuscript (see p. 9).

Regarding the coping strategies before and after the pandemic, we understand one could argue that it could be hard to determine whether they were new. However, first, Italy was the first European country to be hit by the pandemic and Italian teachers were among the first to be quickly confronted with such a challenge, so it is a particularly vivid memory. This turning point – both in their job and personal lives - made everyone, including teachers, absolutely capable of distinguishing between what happened before and after Covid-19. Second, we did not ask teachers to compare the coping strategies they adopted before and after the pandemic. Instead, the question was about the coping strategies they currently adopted.

Comment: More could have been done in this regard to research the literature about coping strategies normally employed by staff, how such strategies are defined and utilised by teachers and when.

Action: Thanks for this comment. We have enriched section 1.2 about coping strategies.

Comment: As a result I felt the findings too loosely described, especially if the intention was to direct education policy going forward.

Action: We have added more references in the manuscript, enriching the bibliography, and tied them with the content of the discussion section. Furthermore, we have revised the conclusions to more practically suggest how education policies may move forward.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper adopts qualitative methods to explore the stress and coping strategies of Italian teachers, which holds practical significance. The paper is well-structured and well-written. However, the paper also has the following issues.

1. The 86 teachers interviewed by the author were from 5 schools in northern Italy. It is important for the author to explain why these specific 5 schools were chosen and what makes them representative. I would suggest the author to provide additional information on this aspect.

2. There is a lack of theoretical content throughout the paper. It is suggested that the author incorporate relevant theoretical content into the paper.

3. Regardless of the author's statements or the actual situation, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our lives is diminishing. Therefore, is it necessary for the author to discuss the stress and coping strategies of teachers specifically in the context of the pandemic? It is recommended that the author consider the question. I believe it is not essential to exclusively frame the discussion within the context of the pandemic, but rather to mention it appropriately during analysis and discussion.

4.The author mentioned that only 30% of the interviewees discussed coping strategies and discussed the reasons for this result. However, has the author considered that this may be due to the interviewers themselves, that is to say, interviewers counld not sufficiently prompting the respondents to express relevant content, which results in a lack of related information. It is suggested that the author supplement the relevant interview content, or de-emphasize the section on coping strategies and focus solely on stress as the main theme of the study.

5. In the recommendations section, the author mentioned social-emotional competencies, self-efficacy, emotional intelligence, and so on. However, this information is too broad and does not explain how these factors actually alleviate teacher stress. Therefore, it is recommended that the author provide targeted and feasible effective suggestions.

Author Response

First of all, we would like to thank the Reviewer for having recognized the significance of our work. We have addressed the detected issues point by point. Please, find the list of comments below and the corresponding actions.

Comment: The paper adopts qualitative methods to explore the stress and coping strategies of Italian teachers, which holds practical significance. The paper is well-structured and well-written. However, the paper also has the following issues.

1. The 86 teachers interviewed by the author were from 5 schools in northern Italy. It is important for the author to explain why these specific 5 schools were chosen and what makes them representative. I would suggest the author to provide additional information on this aspect.

Action: The schools were selected by convenience because they were easily accessible by researchers. We understand the representativeness of the sample may be questioned, but these schools reflect typical realities in our Regions and Italy. In fact, we involved teachers from four cluster schools, which are the most common structures in the Italian education system - they are multi-site schools that share the same principal and organizational/administrative framework, driven by the guidelines of the Ministry of Education; they host kindergarten, primary, and middle secondary school. The remaining school was a high school and we involved teachers teaching in grades 9 and 10, which nationally share the curriculum with other high school institutes. The sample of teachers also had characteristics that are typical of Italian school staff (e.g., majority of females, mostly middle-aged, working full-time, been teaching for more than 15 years). However, we recognize that findings may be different in a sample of teachers from other Italian regions. Thus, we have added a sentence in the manuscript to clarify how schools were selected (p. 4) and a few lines in the discussion to suggest future directions of research with other samples (p. 9).

Comment: 2. There is a lack of theoretical content throughout the paper. It is suggested that the author incorporate relevant theoretical content into the paper.

Action: We have added more references throughout the manuscript to enrich the theoretical background.

Comment: 3. Regardless of the author's statements or the actual situation, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our lives is diminishing. Therefore, is it necessary for the author to discuss the stress and coping strategies of teachers specifically in the context of the pandemic? It is recommended that the author consider the question. I believe it is not essential to exclusively frame the discussion within the context of the pandemic, but rather to mention it appropriately during analysis and discussion.

Action: Thanks for this suggestion, we agree with the Reviewer the impact of the pandemic is currently diminishing. However, as mentioned in the manuscript, the research was conducted in 2022 when the pandemic was still a hot topic in Italy. Even if researchers’ questions during the group interviews did not explicitly refer to it, teachers recalled some episodes and experiences related to the pandemic. They did not talk about it extensively, but the theme emerged in every group. In our view, it is a clue that Covid-19 still was connected to teachers’ wellbeing. Thus, we have decided to keep the focus on stress and coping strategies in the context of the pandemic.      

Comment: 4. The author mentioned that only 30% of the interviewees discussed coping strategies and discussed the reasons for this result. However, has the author considered that this may be due to the interviewers themselves, that is to say, interviewers could not sufficiently prompting the respondents to express relevant content, which results in a lack of related information. It is suggested that the author supplement the relevant interview content, or de-emphasize the section on coping strategies and focus solely on stress as the main theme of the study.

Action: We believe the possibility that answers were not prompted enough is low because the question about coping strategies was presented through a survey and specifically stated: “In the last month, have you adopted specific coping strategies to enhance your wellbeing or reduce your stress (e.g., yoga, meditation)? If yes, please specify.”. Thus, even if all teachers were asked to answer it, the majority replied they did not adopt coping strategies. This is the reason why we hypothesized a lack of knowledge of coping strategies or a level of stress too low to activate coping strategies. That said, we would keep the focus both on stress and coping strategies.

Comment: 5. In the recommendations section, the author mentioned social-emotional competencies, self-efficacy, emotional intelligence, and so on. However, this information is too broad and does not explain how these factors actually alleviate teacher stress. Therefore, it is recommended that the author provide targeted and feasible effective suggestions.

Action: We thank the Reviewer for this precious comment and agree the statement was too general. We have revised the conclusive section to give more targeted suggestions, enriching it with more citations (see p. 10).

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am satisfied the authors have done their best to address the issues raised by the reviewers