Swimming against the Tide: A Mixed-Methods Study of how the MARKERS Educator Wellbeing Program Changed Educators’ Relational Space

1Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Effective educator wellbeing interventions should consider the individual, relational, and contextual influences on educator wellbeing. Given the gap between the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions (PPIs) and their real-world success, it is essential to understand and adapt to the school context when integrating psychological interventions into educational settings. The MARKERS (Multiple Action Responsive Kit for Educator, Relational, and School wellbeing) educator wellbeing program is multi-level, designed to consider the individual, relational, and contextual influences on wellbeing. Its multi-foci design also allowed for adaptations to specific contexts. This study examines the impact of the MARKERS program in one school in Aotearoa New Zealand. We use a mixed methods case study approach that draws on measures of educator wellbeing, social network measures of energising interactions, and focus group data. The use of stochastic actor-oriented models (SAOMs) allowed us to examine changes to the social network over time. Findings show that MARKERS program participants experienced a significant positive change in their relational space and experienced more energising interactions, but they were ‘swimming against the tide’ as other staff in the school had fewer energising interactions with their colleagues. Our study illustrates the importance of considering the relational and contextual influences on wellbeing when evaluating educator wellbeing interventions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cann, R., Sinnema, C., Daly, A. J., & Rodway, J. (2024). Swimming against the Tide: A Mixed-Methods Study of how the MARKERS Educator Wellbeing Program Changed Educators’ Relational Space. International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, 9(2), 799–826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-024-00153-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free