Psychological Burnout Among Special Education Teachers in Qatar

Abstract

This study investigated psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar and analyzed its associations with professional and social factors. Employing a descriptive–correlational design, 204 special education teachers (M age = 42.73 years, SD = 10.23) completed two instruments: an 18-item burnout scale measuring emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment, and a 20-item scale assessing administrative and institutional stressors, parent- and community-related pressures, and work–life balance difficulties. Descriptive statistics revealed a moderate overall level of burnout, with emotional exhaustion as the most prominent dimension, followed by reduced personal accomplishment; depersonalization was comparatively low. Professional and social factors were also rated at a moderate level, with work–life balance difficulties exhibiting the highest mean. Multivariate analyses identified significant differences in burnout dimensions by gender, whereas age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting were not significantly associated with burnout. Multiple regression analysis indicated that the three factors collectively explained a substantial proportion of variance in burnout, with work–life balance difficulties demonstrating the strongest unique association, followed by administrative and institutional stressors and parent- and community-related pressures. These results highlight the need for organizational and relational supports, as well as policies that protect teacher time and wellbeing, to sustain special education services in Qatar.

1. Introduction

Psychological burnout remains a central topic in educational research, especially in special education, which involves intensive human service responsibilities (Brunsting et al., 2014). Burnout is defined as a psychological syndrome resulting from chronic occupational stress, marked by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a reduced sense of personal accomplishment (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). This framework is particularly pertinent to special education, where teachers must maintain emotional engagement, apply sustained cognitive and behavioral effort, and implement multiple strategies to meet diverse learner needs (Sariçam & Sakiz, 2014; Thakur, 2018). From an occupational health standpoint, burnout also presents as a set of stress-related symptoms, such as nervous strain, emotional depletion, and diminished satisfaction with professional achievement, commonly observed in roles that require intensive, direct interpersonal interaction (Aronsson et al., 2017).

Burnout is conceptualized as both an individual experience and an occupational outcome that emerges when persistent mismatches occur between educators and their work environments. According to Maslach and Leiter’s framework, ongoing exposure to demanding conditions and insufficient support gradually erodes teachers’ emotional resources, fosters depersonalization, and reduces professional accomplishment (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). In special education contexts, these mismatches typically manifest across three primary domains influencing daily service delivery: administrative and institutional stressors such as paperwork burden, ambiguous policies, limited resources, and restricted autonomy; relational pressures involving parents and the broader community, including sustained conflict, unrealistic expectations, and accountability demands; and work–life balance challenges arising from diminished recovery time due to after-hours planning, documentation, and coordination requirements (Bataineh & Alsagheer, 2012; Brunsting et al., 2014; Thakur, 2018).

Recent international research highlights the importance of investigating burnout-related functioning across diverse educational contexts and teacher roles. Angelini et al. (2024) compared general and special education teachers, finding that positive psychological functioning correlates with reduced occupational depression and that this relationship varies significantly across teaching roles. Similarly, Pellerone et al. (2020) demonstrated a relationship between burnout and perceived instructional competence, suggesting that occupational strain is closely associated with teachers’ assessments of their instructional effectiveness.

The teaching profession is widely acknowledged as highly stressful, with burnout linked to negative outcomes for teachers’ performance and their mental and physical health (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). Educators face cumulative occupational pressures, including sustained performance demands, time constraints, and frequent exposure to stressful situations requiring patience and self-regulation (Seibert et al., 2016). These challenges are exacerbated by heavy workloads, extended working hours, limited resources, expectations to manage diverse student behaviors, and the prevailing expectation that teachers act as role models. In some contexts, insufficient professional recognition further intensifies these challenges (M. Ahmad & Rochimah, 2021; Prova, 2025). Prolonged exposure to these demands can lead to job dissatisfaction and diminished psychological well-being, ultimately undermining educators’ professional effectiveness and the quality of instruction provided to students (Ghasemi, 2026; Jeon et al., 2018).

In the context of special education, burnout has been associated with maladjustment and a range of adverse social, psychological, and professional outcomes that may impede students’ educational and learning objectives (Gutowski, 2025; Park & Shin, 2020). Burnout is closely linked to occupational stressors that can undermine special education teachers’ professional competence and is typically conceptualized through three interrelated dimensions: emotional exhaustion, reduced accomplishment, and emotional blunting. These factors can decrease job satisfaction, intensify emotional fatigue, jeopardize professional retention, and ultimately compromise the quality of educational services delivered to students with special needs (Emery & Vandenberg, 2010).

Special education teachers frequently report higher levels of burnout and work-related strain compared to general education teachers, due to the intensive demands of individualized instruction, behavioral support, and coordination with multiple stakeholders (Alahmed, 2024; Brunsting et al., 2014; Park & Shin, 2020; Sariçam & Sakiz, 2014; Thakur, 2018). Beyond providing educational and rehabilitative services, these teachers often experience significant physical and psychological fatigue as well as increased emotional strain. The role requires implementing specialized intervention programs, using non-traditional instructional methods, and creating individualized plans and curricula for each student. These factors collectively intensify work pressure and increase the risk of burnout, highlighting the necessity for targeted support and assistance (Brunsting et al., 2014).

The psychological well-being of special education teachers is essential for sustaining effective instruction for students with disabilities (Maslach & Leiter, 2016; Park & Shin, 2020). Prolonged engagement with students who require intensive support and individualized programming can gradually diminish teachers’ motivation, enthusiasm, and sense of professional accomplishment, especially when high job demands are not met with adequate support (Brunsting et al., 2014; Thakur, 2018). Ongoing exposure to such demanding conditions may further reduce teachers’ responsiveness and perceived instructional effectiveness, increasing the risk of emotional exhaustion and diminishing personal accomplishment (Maslach & Leiter, 2016; Sariçam & Sakiz, 2014). Burnout is often manifested as withdrawal, persistent feelings of overload, and heightened psychological strain, all of which are well-documented consequences of sustained occupational stress in special education contexts (Ali, 2025; Park & Shin, 2020; Squillaci, 2021).

Empirical research has investigated burnout in relation to demographic and professional characteristics, including age, gender, educational attainment, and years of experience, as well as personal factors such as marital status. These variables are frequently analyzed to determine whether burnout risk varies systematically among teacher subgroups. Several studies have reported higher burnout rates among male teachers compared to female teachers, and marital status has been associated with burnout patterns. Married individuals often report greater job satisfaction and lower burnout, which may be attributed to increased psychological and social stability compared to unmarried or divorced individuals (D. N. Ahmad et al., 2024). Evidence regarding professional experience is inconsistent: some studies find no statistically significant relationship between years of teaching (including special education experience) and burnout (Zabel & Kay Zabel, 2001), while others demonstrate that burnout levels among special education teachers can vary significantly according to years of experience (Duli, 2016; Soini et al., 2019).

In addition to individual characteristics, administrative and institutional conditions within schools are widely acknowledged as primary contributors to burnout among special education teachers. These factors encompass limited material and human resources, insufficient administrative support, restricted teacher involvement in decision-making, unclear or inconsistently enforced policies, and inadequate recognition or motivational strategies (Maslach & Leiter, 2016; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017). Organizational stressors, including workplace conflict, role ambiguity, excessive workload, and a perceived lack of appreciation, have been associated with increased emotional exhaustion and reduced professional efficacy among teachers (Alyamy & Sau Cheong, 2020; Schaufeli, 2017).

Relational factors are similarly salient in special education, where home-school coordination is often essential to student progress. The relationship between schools and parents has been closely tied to burnout among special education teachers and is frequently discussed as a major influence on teachers’ mental health. Teachers who invest sustained effort in supporting students with disabilities may rely on encouragement, cooperation, and recognition from parents and school staff; however, when negative perceptions, limited support, or a weak understanding of teachers’ professional and psychological demands arise, burnout may intensify (Park & Shin, 2020). Moreover, because each student with a disability requires individualized approaches based on unique needs, unmet parental expectations regarding student progress can contribute to negative views of teachers and increase frustration, perceived underachievement, burnout, and emotional exhaustion (Brunsting et al., 2014).

1.1. Literature Review

Empirical research suggests that burnout among special education teachers reflects the combined influence of personal characteristics and working conditions, although the strength and direction of these relationships vary across educational systems. The literature highlights a set of factors that are particularly relevant for understanding burnout in this population, beginning with personal and professional characteristics (gender, age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting) and extending to contextual influences, including organizational conditions, relational pressures involving parents and the community, and work–life balance. Aligned with the burnout conceptualization adopted in this study, this review synthesizes evidence to elucidate how personal and professional characteristics, along with three contextual domains, constitute plausible pathways by which chronic occupational stressors lead to emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment.

1.1.1. Personal and Professional Factors

Gender. Evidence on gender differences in burnout among special education teachers remains mixed across contexts. In some studies, female special education teachers report higher burnout-related outcomes, including elevated emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment (Gong et al., 2013; Williams & Dikes, 2015). More recent evidence also suggests that gender effects may be conditional rather than uniform. For example, in a Saudi Arabian sample of special education teachers, gender differences varied by subspecialty, with female teachers in the deafness/hearing-loss specialization reporting higher emotional exhaustion than male teachers (Alahmed, 2024). At the same time, other studies report either no statistically significant gender differences or patterns in which male teachers show higher overall burnout in specific settings, underscoring that gender effects are context-dependent and may reflect differences in role expectations, task allocation, and working conditions rather than a stable, generalizable pattern (Awwad, 2010; Drobac & Micic, 2024, Jovanović et al., 2019).

Age. Results regarding age-related differences in burnout among special education teachers remain inconsistent across the literature. Evidence from special education samples indicates that both the direction and magnitude of associations between age and burnout vary by context and by specific burnout dimensions (Elsayed et al., 2025; Gong et al., 2013; Park & Shin, 2020). Several studies suggest that age is associated with particular components of burnout rather than with overall burnout levels. For instance, research involving female special education teachers working with children with disabilities has identified age-related variation in depersonalization, indicating that age may be more relevant to certain facets of burnout than to global burnout measures (Al-Dababneh et al., 2024). Conversely, other studies have found limited or non-significant sociodemographic associations after accounting for work-related factors, suggesting that age may not be a consistent correlate across settings (Al-Tarawneh et al., 2025; Drobac & Micic, 2024).

Years of experience. The literature presents conflicting results regarding the relationship between years of experience and burnout among special education teachers. Some studies suggest a protective effect of longer experience. For instance, Awwad (2010) found that burnout decreased with increasing years of experience, supporting the notion that professional adaptation and coping mechanisms may develop over time. Similarly, research among Greek special education teachers found that early-career teachers were more vulnerable to burnout, whereas those with greater experience exhibited lower burnout risk (Alexaki et al., 2025). Conversely, other studies report weak, inconsistent, or even positive associations between experience and specific burnout components. In a Serbian sample, years of experience were positively correlated with work-related burnout, while associations with personal burnout, student-related burnout, and total burnout were not statistically significant (Drobac & Micic, 2024). Furthermore, a meta-analysis of special education teacher burnout demonstrated that teaching experience was positively associated with personal accomplishment, suggesting that experience may influence burnout dimensions differently rather than uniformly reducing overall burnout (Park & Shin, 2020).

Educational qualification. Research on how educational qualifications affect burnout levels among special education teachers yields mixed results and appears to depend on the specific burnout aspect studied. Some studies found no significant link between teachers’ academic qualifications and burnout (Alahmed, 2024; Al-Tarawneh et al., 2025; Awwad, 2010; Williams & Dikes, 2015). However, other research suggests that education level may influence certain parts of burnout, such as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment, rather than overall burnout (Brunsting et al., 2014; Park & Shin, 2020).

Workplace setting. Workplace settings, including inclusive schools and specialized schools or centers, influence special educators’ daily responsibilities by affecting caseload composition, documentation requirements, coordination demands, and access to support resources. The literature indicates that burnout risk increases when teachers work in environments where resources and staffing are inadequate relative to the intensity of instructional and behavioral support required (Sariçam & Sakiz, 2014; Benigno et al., 2025). Research in special schools and centers further demonstrates that the demands of students with special needs and institutional constraints contribute to sustained work strain and heightened vulnerability to burnout (Drobac & Micic, 2024; Al-Tarawneh et al., 2025). Special education teachers serving higher-intensity populations are particularly at risk of burnout due to increased demands for behavioral management and coordination (Garwood, 2023). Moreover, heavy workloads and continuous interaction requirements are consistently associated with greater emotional exhaustion, especially when organizational structures fail to distribute responsibilities effectively (Thakur, 2018; Squillaci, 2021).

Overall, the literature indicates that burnout among special education teachers is influenced by multiple factors and is context-sensitive. Demographic and professional variables such as gender, age, experience, and qualification display inconsistent associations across studies and burnout dimensions. In contrast, factors such as workload intensity, coordination demands, and resource constraints are more consistently associated with burnout, especially in environments where staffing and support are inadequate to meet the complexity of students’ needs. These mixed and sometimes contradictory results suggest that burnout risk cannot be attributed to a single factor or assumed to generalize across educational systems. Instead, it should be analyzed within the specific structural and service-delivery contexts that shape special educators’ daily experiences.

1.1.2. Organizational Factors

Organizational conditions are widely recognized as primary contributors to teacher burnout, particularly in special education, where the demands of intensive documentation, individualized planning, and multidisciplinary coordination are significant. The literature demonstrates that the risk of burnout increases when persistent mismatches occur between teachers and their work environments, including workload, autonomy, recognition, collegial climate, fairness, and value alignment. These mismatches progressively erode teachers’ energy and reduce professional efficacy (Leiter & Maslach, 2017; Maslach & Leiter, 2016). In special education, such mismatches often appear as structural overload, including excessive caseloads, paperwork demands, limited control over scheduling and instructional pacing, and insufficient recognition of the invisible labor required to coordinate services and manage complex needs. In this context, administrative burdens such as reports, meetings, and compliance documentation, along with limited opportunities for job-embedded professional development and high caseload or class-size demands, are commonly identified as practical stressors that exacerbate overload and increase the risk of burnout (Brunsting et al., 2014).

Administrative and institutional stressors within organizations frequently include inadequate resources and staffing, limited access to specialist supports, unclear or inconsistently applied policies, restricted teacher involvement in school decision-making, role ambiguity and conflict, and insufficient leadership support. These conditions increase uncertainty about expectations and accountability, intensifying strain and contributing to emotional exhaustion and reduced professional accomplishment over time (Benigno et al., 2025; Pretorius & Padmanabhanunni, 2025). Research consistently highlights administrative support and role clarity as critical organizational factors, suggesting that burnout is shaped more by how schools structure responsibilities and support teachers in essential tasks than by individual characteristics alone (Brunsting et al., 2014).

Organizational influences are further highlighted in leadership literature. Recent studies in special education demonstrate that leadership practices, particularly supportive and transformational approaches, serve as protective factors against burnout by enhancing relational and cognitive resources that support teacher functioning (Liu et al., 2025). This body of research collectively recommends that burnout prevention efforts in special education should focus on organizational reforms, including reducing non-instructional overload, clarifying roles and policies, increasing meaningful teacher participation in decision-making, and improving access to resources and support systems. These reforms are consistently identified as essential for preventing chronic overload and maintaining teachers’ ability to provide high-quality services (Thakur, 2018).

1.1.3. Relational Factors

Relational demands involving parents and the broader community constitute a distinct and significant pathway to teacher burnout. These demands are especially evident in special education, where student progress often depends on continuous home-school coordination and shared responsibility. Challenging parental behaviors, limited cooperation, or ongoing conflict may function as chronic stressors that intensify frustration, negative affect, and psychological strain. These pressures encompass sustained communication efforts, repeated requests for justification of instructional decisions, and perceived unrealistic expectations regarding student progress. These pressures may intensify emotional labor and elevate perceived accountability for outcomes that depend on effective collaboration between home and school (Prakke et al., 2007).

Empirical evidence indicates that the quality of teacher-parent relationships influences core dimensions of burnout. Teacher satisfaction with parent relationships has been identified as a significant correlation of professional functioning, including the personal accomplishment component of burnout, as well as broader job satisfaction and relational variables (Pedditzi et al., 2021). These results align with an ecological perspective on teacher wellbeing, wherein relational systems surrounding the teacher, particularly family-school partnerships, function as either protective or risk factors. The nature of these interactions, whether they provide support, facilitate shared problem solving, and promote realistic goal alignment, or instead generate blame, ambiguity, and sustained interpersonal tension, determines their impact. Relational strain is likely to be most significant when communication occurs frequently without productive outcomes, when expectations are misaligned, or when responsibility is disproportionately assigned to the teacher (Price & McCallum, 2015).

Recent studies in the region further underscore the importance of parental engagement for teacher wellbeing. For instance, Sideridis and Alghamdi (2023) utilized data from Saudi Arabia to model teacher burnout in relation to multiple factors, including parental engagement, demonstrating that parent-related variables are meaningfully associated with burnout risk in school settings. Taken together, the literature indicates that parent and community pressures should be regarded as measurable factors of burnout risk in special education contexts, rather than as peripheral or incidental stressors.

1.1.4. Work–Life Balance

Work–life balance is consistently identified in the burnout literature as a critical concern in the teaching profession, particularly in special education, where core responsibilities frequently extend beyond formal working hours. Special educators must engage in individualized planning, progress monitoring, and documentation, and coordinate with parents and multidisciplinary teams. These responsibilities often result in substantial after-hours work, which reduces opportunities for rest and recovery (Brunsting et al., 2014; Thakur, 2018). Insufficient recovery increases the risk that chronic strain will develop into burnout, particularly through emotional exhaustion and a diminished sense of professional accomplishment (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). Consequently, work–life balance difficulties function not only as an additional stressor but also as a practical indicator of sustained overload, illustrating that job demands are intruding upon personal time and limiting psychological detachment from work. In practice, this imbalance manifests as repeated time sacrifices, the spillover of work-related stress into health outside working hours, diminished participation in leisure activities, and persistent difficulty disengaging from work demands.

Research in special education contexts indicates that work–life imbalance is closely linked to the organization of responsibilities within schools. Thakur (2018) found that heavy workloads and continuous interaction demand intensify emotional exhaustion, particularly when responsibilities are concentrated on individual teachers rather than distributed among staff. Squillaci (2021) similarly observed that burnout is more likely when teachers face prolonged pressure within weak organizational structures that fail to support manageable task allocation and stable working conditions.

In summary, burnout among special education teachers is best conceptualized as a multidetermined and context-sensitive phenomenon shaped by the intersection of demographic characteristics and work organization. While results regarding gender, age, years of experience, and educational qualifications remain inconsistent across studies and burnout dimensions, the literature is more consistent in highlighting the significance of contextual pressures. These include workload intensity, documentation and coordination demands, resource limitations, leadership support, and the quality of school–family partnerships, all of which increase vulnerability to chronic strain and burnout (Awwad, 2010; Park & Shin, 2020). Therefore, burnout should not be attributed to a single factor or assumed to generalize across educational systems; instead, it should be examined within the structural and service-delivery context that shapes teachers’ responsibilities and opportunities for recovery (Thakur, 2018; Squillaci, 2021).

Drawing upon the existing evidence base and in alignment with Qatar’s ongoing efforts to enhance inclusive and special education services, this study offers a context-specific analysis of burnout among special education teachers. It investigates whether burnout levels differ according to key demographic and workplace characteristics and evaluates the associations between burnout and administrative or institutional stressors, parent- and community-related pressures, as well as work–life balance challenges.

1.2. Study Context

Qatar National Vision 2030 prioritizes human and social development, with a strong emphasis on equity and equal opportunity. These priorities are reflected in the education sector’s efforts to enhance access and quality for all learners, including those with disabilities. In accordance with this national agenda, the Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MoEHE) has established provisions for students with special education needs through multiple placement and support pathways. These pathways include integration into mainstream schools, supported by resource rooms and individualized programming, as well as specialized settings for students who require more intensive support (Ministry of Education and Higher Education [MoEHE], n.d.).

Policy and system-level initiatives have focused on developing clearer procedures and guidance for schools to support students with disabilities and learning difficulties, reflecting sustained institutional commitment to inclusive practices. At the same time, Qatar’s inclusive education landscape includes an expanding network of specialized centers and school-based support services, as well as teacher preparation and professional development programs. These initiatives are reinforced by partnerships and training efforts documented in national and sectoral reports (UNESCO, 2021).

Despite these advancements, international research consistently indicates that special education teachers face a uniquely high-demand workload. This workload involves intensive individualized planning, documentation, behavior support, coordination with multiple stakeholders, and sustained emotional labor, all of which increase vulnerability to chronic occupational stress and burnout. In Qatar, research on teacher burnout has identified it as a significant occupational issue in government schools, especially during periods of reform, highlighting the need to examine teacher well-being within the national education system (Alloh et al., 2019). Regional studies further suggest that stressors affecting teachers of students with disabilities are substantial and often linked to coping demands, reinforcing the likelihood of increased strain in special education roles (Kebbi, 2018).

Therefore, the Qatari context provides a compelling rationale for focused investigation of burnout among special education teachers. While the country advances its inclusive education commitments, the daily implementation demands may place sustained pressure on special educators. Assessing burnout levels and their associated factors in this context can inform the development of targeted organizational supports, such as workload design, role clarity, psychological support services, and professional development structures. These measures are essential to protect teacher well-being and to enhance the sustainability and quality of services for learners with disabilities (Singal et al., 2017).

1.3. Study Purpose and Questions

Although extensive international research has addressed teacher burnout, special education teachers remain a particularly high-priority group due to the combination of intensive instructional and behavioral demands with substantial documentation and coordination requirements (Park & Shin, 2020). The reported levels of burnout among special education teachers varies considerably across contexts and samples, with recent studies reporting patterns ranging from low overall burnout with moderate emotional exhaustion to moderate overall burnout with elevated emotional exhaustion (Al-Dababneh et al., 2024; Al-Tarawneh et al., 2025). This variability highlights a significant knowledge gap. The expansion of inclusive education in Qatar increases the need for context-specific estimates of burnout levels among special education teachers and for evidence identifying the most salient factors of burnout risk. Previous research indicates that burnout is shaped by a combination of personal and professional factors as well as work-context pressures. However, results regarding demographic correlations are often inconsistent, which necessitates direct testing within a unified model and context (Park & Shin, 2020; Al-Tarawneh et al., 2025).

Accordingly, this study examines psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar by estimating burnout levels within this population, assessing whether burnout differs across personal and professional factors (gender, age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting), and evaluating the explanatory contribution of contextual factors outlined in the theoretical framework. The research addresses the following questions: (1) What is the level of psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar? (2) What are the levels of professional and social factors of burnout among these teachers? (3) Are there statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) in burnout levels based on gender, age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting? (4) To what extent are administrative and institutional stressors, parent- and community-related pressures, and work–life balance difficulties associated with psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar?

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design

A descriptive–correlational analytical design was employed to address the study objectives. This design facilitated the assessment of psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar, examination of professional and social factors associated with burnout, analysis of differences in burnout levels across demographic variables (gender, age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting), and evaluation of the extent to which these factors explain variance in burnout levels.

2.2. Participants

A total of 204 special education teachers in Qatar participated in this study. Recruitment was conducted using a convenience sampling approach through accessible institutional channels. The survey invitation was distributed via school-based contacts and subsequently forwarded by email to eligible special education teachers across 38 inclusive schools and 19 specialized schools/centers. Among the inclusive schools, 32 were public, and 6 were private; among the specialized schools/centers, 17 were public, and 2 were private. In total, 415 teachers were contacted; 228 submitted the questionnaire, and 204 complete responses were retained for analysis, yielding a 55% response rate. While convenience sampling limits statistical generalizability, it is commonly employed in school-based survey research when access and administrative constraints prevent probability sampling. This approach can provide informative evidence when recruitment procedures and sample characteristics are reported transparently (Bornstein et al., 2013; Jager et al., 2017).

Table 1. Distribution of the Study Sample by Demographic and Professional Variables.

Variable	Category	n	%
Gender	Female	158	77.5
	Male	46	22.5
Age	25–35 years	60	29.4
	36–45 years	69	33.8
	45+ years	75	36.8
Educational qualification	Bachelor’s degree	131	64.2
	Diploma	17	8.3
	Graduate studies	50	24.5
	PhD	6	2.9
Years of experience	1–5 years	44	21.6
	6–10 years	35	17.2
	11–15 years	34	16.7
	15+ years	91	44.6
Workplace setting	Inclusive school	172	84.3
	Specialized school/center	32	15.7
Total		204	100.0

displays the distribution of participants by gender, age, educational qualification, years of professional experience, and workplace setting.

Table 1 presents the characteristics of the study participants. The sample included 204 special education teachers, predominantly female (n = 158, 77.5%). The mean age was 42.73 years (SD = 10.23), with the largest group aged 45 years or older (n = 75, 36.8%), followed by those aged 36–45 years (n = 69, 33.8%) and 25–35 years (n = 60, 29.4%). Most teachers held a bachelor’s degree (n = 131, 64.2%), while 24.5% held graduate qualifications (n = 50). Smaller proportions held a diploma (n = 17, 8.3%) or a PhD (n = 6, 2.9%). Nearly half of the teachers had 15 or more years of professional experience (n = 91, 44.6%). The majority worked in inclusive schools (n = 172, 84.3%), with the remainder employed in specialized schools or centers (n = 32, 15.7%).

2.3. Measures

Two self-report questionnaires were administered: a burnout scale and a scale assessing professional and social factors of burnout among special education teachers in Qatar.

2.3.1. Burnout Scale

Burnout was measured using the Burnout Scale, a questionnaire specifically developed for this study. The instrument comprises 18 items distributed equally across three subscales: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment. The scale was conceptually based on Maslach’s three-component burnout model (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). Item development was informed by a review of existing burnout measures and research on special education teacher burnout (Benigno et al., 2025; Cook, 2012; Maslach & Leiter, 2016), followed by expert review and pilot testing. A panel of experts in counseling and educational psychology assessed the instrument for content clarity and relevance, retaining only those items that achieved at least 80% agreement.

Construct validity was initially evaluated in a pilot sample of 40 teachers who were not included in the main study. Each item was correlated with its respective subscale and with the total burnout score. Item–subscale correlations ranged from 0.483 to 0.920, and item–total correlations ranged from 0.428 to 0.811, both exceeding commonly accepted minimum thresholds for item retention (DeVellis, 2016). Internal consistency, as measured by Cronbach’s alpha, was acceptable for the total scale (α = 0.891) and for the subscales (α range = 0.751–0.917). Test–retest reliability was also satisfactory (total = 0.901; subscales range = 0.753–0.931) (P. Kline, 2015). Responses were collected using a 7-point frequency scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (every day).

2.3.2. Professional and Social Factors of Burnout Scale

Professional and social factors associated with burnout were assessed using the Professional and Social Factors of Burnout Scale, an instrument specifically developed for this study. This measure was newly constructed for this study that was designed to operationalize three contextual domains identified in the literature review: administrative and institutional stressors (6 items), parent- and community-related pressures (7 items), and work–life balance difficulties (7 items). In alignment with established burnout scales, items were drafted based on a review of relevant literature (Benigno et al., 2025; Cook, 2012; Maslach & Leiter, 2016) and subsequently refined through expert review and pilot testing. Only items that achieved at least 80% agreement among experts were retained.

Initial construct validity was evaluated in a pilot sample (n = 40) using item-subscale and item-total correlations. Item-subscale correlations ranged from 0.566 to 0.939, while item-total correlations ranged from 0.461 to 0.760, demonstrating adequate alignment of items with their respective dimensions (DeVellis, 2016). Reliability estimates were satisfactory for the total scale (α = 0.912; test–retest = 0.921) and for each subscale (α range = 0.789–0.950; test–retest range = 0.842–0.951) (P. Kline, 2015). For the final sample (n = 204), reliability remained high, with Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale at α = 0.918, and subscale alphas ranging from 0.792 to 0.954, indicating strong internal consistency across all dimensions. All items were rated using a 0–6 frequency metric (0 = never, 6 = every day), confirming that the scale is reliable for use with the study sample.

The questionnaire was administered in Arabic. All items were initially drafted in Arabic and subsequently reviewed for clarity by the expert panel described above. For reporting purposes, English translations of the items are included in the appendices. These translations were generated following data collection and were not utilized during administration.

However, these scales were developed specifically for the context of the present study, with items intentionally phrased to reflect the manifestation of burnout and work-related strain in special education settings. Certain items also address related experiences, such as work–home spillover and pressure-induced changes in functioning, which frequently co-occur with burnout in practice. Therefore, subscale scores are interpreted as coherent indicators of the targeted domains, while acknowledging that burnout-related experiences may not correspond to strictly defined categories in applied school contexts.

2.4. Procedure

Following approval from the Qatar University Institutional Review Board (QU-IRB 329/2025-EM; 22 October 2025), study procedures were implemented to address the research objectives. The development of measurement instruments was informed by a review of the relevant literature. The questionnaire was drafted and reviewed by experts in counseling psychology and educational psychology, then piloted with 40 special education teachers from the same population who were not included in the main sample. This pilot provided preliminary evidence of validity and reliability. Based on expert feedback and pilot results, the questionnaire was refined and finalized. The target population and study sample were defined, and participants were recruited using convenience sampling.

Data collection was conducted using an electronic questionnaire administered via Google Forms. School-based contacts, such as special education coordinators or administrators, facilitated the dissemination of the survey invitation by forwarding the link to eligible teachers through institutional email channels. Participation occurred at a time and location chosen by participants and was not restricted to school hours; teachers could complete the questionnaire outside instructional time if preferred. No incentives or compensation were provided. The electronic form included a brief study description and standardized response instructions. Participation was voluntary, and responses were collected anonymously and treated confidentially; no direct identifiers were requested. Survey data were transmitted via HTTPS and protected using Google Workspace security controls. Access to responses was restricted to the research team through a password-protected account. Completion of the questionnaire constituted informed consent.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 28). Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations, were calculated for each subscale of the Burnout Scale for Special Education Teachers as well as for the overall burnout score. Item-level descriptive statistics were also computed for each subscale. Identical descriptive procedures were applied to the Professional and Social Factors of Burnout scale, encompassing its subscales and total score. For interpretive clarity, mean scores on the 0–6 response metric were categorized using an equal-interval approach for both scales. The scale range (0–6) was divided by three to produce an interval width of 2.00. This interval was then added sequentially to the minimum score (0) to establish category boundaries: low (0.00–2.00), moderate (2.01–4.00), and high (4.01–6.00). Group differences in burnout dimensions by gender, age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting were examined using a five-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). A five-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was also conducted to assess differences in the overall burnout score across these variables. Multiple regression analysis was performed with overall burnout as the dependent variable, and administrative and institutional stressors, parent- and community-related pressures, and work–life balance difficulties were entered as independent variables.

3. Results

3.1. Level of Psychological Burnout

Overall psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar was moderate (M = 2.74, SD = 1.49), as shown in

Table 2. Descriptive statistics for burnout dimensions among special education teachers in Qatar.

Dimension	M	SD	Level
Emotional exhaustion	3.87	1.76	Moderate
Depersonalization	1.76	1.53	Low
Reduced personal accomplishment	2.58	1.81	Moderate
Total burnout	2.74	1.49	Moderate

Note. Scale range = 0–6; higher scores indicate higher levels. Interpretation bands are descriptive aids: low (0.00–2.00), moderate (2.01–4.00), high (4.01–6.00).

. At the dimension level, emotional exhaustion had the highest mean (M = 3.87, SD = 1.76), followed by reduced personal accomplishment (M = 2.58, SD = 1.81), while depersonalization remained low (M = 1.76, SD = 1.53).

Table 2 shows that mean scores for burnout dimensions ranged from 1.76 to 3.87. Emotional exhaustion emerged as the most prominent component, reflecting elevated levels of fatigue and depletion. Reduced personal accomplishment was moderate, indicating certain limitations in perceived effectiveness and achievement. Depersonalization was low, suggesting that cynical or emotionally detached responses were reported infrequently.

Burnout Dimensions

Analysis of item-level responses (See Appendix A,

Table A1. Descriptive statistics of the item level for the Burnout Scale.

Rank	Item	Statement	M	SD	Level
Emotional Exhaustion
1	EE2	I feel physically and psychologically exhausted at the end of the school day	4.40	1.72	High
2	EE1	I feel that my work greatly drains my emotional energy	4.08	1.84	High
3	EE6	My job drains my energy to the extent that it affects my personal life	4.03	2.08	High
4	EE5	I experience physical symptoms (e.g., headaches, muscle tension) due to work stress	3.94	2.00	Moderate
5	EE4	Daily teaching pressures sometimes make me feel helpless	3.56	2.07	Moderate
6	EE3	I have difficulty regaining my energy at the start of a new workday	3.23	2.11	Moderate
		Total	3.87	1.76	Moderate
Depersonalization
1	DP5	I feel that I transfer work stress to my family or personal surroundings	3.26	2.17	Moderate
2	DP2	Work pressures have made me more distant or harsh in dealing with others	2.01	2.00	Moderate
3	DP1	I sometimes deal with some students as if they were merely tasks to be completed	1.62	1.91	Low
4	DP3	I find myself less empathetic toward students’ feelings than at the beginning of my work	1.49	1.86	Low
5	DP6	I deal with some student problems with coldness or indifference	1.18	1.65	Low
6	DP4	I have become more sarcastic or negative in my view of students’ problems	0.99	1.68	Low
		Total	1.76	1.53	Low
Reduced Personal Accomplishment
1	LPA6	Occupational pressures affect my ability to be creative and innovative.	3.37	2.23	Moderate
2	LPA3	Work pressures reduce the quality of my performance.	3.10	2.21	Moderate
3	LPA1	My teaching achievements are limited compared with what I aspire to.	2.62	2.09	Moderate
4	LPA5	I am not achieving my professional goals as I had hoped.	2.59	2.08	Moderate
5	LPA2	I find it difficult to feel proud of my work as a teacher.	2.04	2.16	Moderate
6	LPA4	Sometimes I feel that my profession does not have much value for me.	1.76	2.10	Low
		Total	2.58	1.81	Moderate

Note. Scale range = 0–6; higher scores indicate higher levels. Interpretation bands are descriptive aids: low (0.00–2.00), moderate (2.01–4.00), high (4.01–6.00).

) indicated that emotional exhaustion was primarily attributable to end-of-day fatigue and perceived depletion extending beyond the workplace. The highest mean scores were associated with feeling physically and psychologically exhausted at the end of the school day (M = 4.40, SD = 1.72), experiencing significant emotional energy drain (M = 4.08, SD = 1.84), and perceiving that work demands negatively impacted personal life (M = 4.03, SD = 2.08). The remaining items fell within the moderate range (item means = 3.23–3.94). Overall, emotional exhaustion was moderate (M = 3.87, SD = 1.76), indicating persistent fatigue and notable spillover effects.

Depersonalization levels were generally low (M = 1.76, SD = 1.53). Item-level analysis indicated that detached or cynical reactions toward students were infrequently endorsed (item means = 0.99–1.62 for four items). Higher endorsements within this domain primarily reflected the spillover of work-related stress into personal life (M = 3.26, SD = 2.17), and to a lesser extent, perceptions of increased distance or harshness in interactions (M = 2.01, SD = 2.00). The highest-rated item within the depersonalization domain reflects stress spillover to family or personal life, which may conceptually overlap with work–life strain. Therefore, depersonalization results are interpreted conservatively and in conjunction with the remaining depersonalization items. Collectively, these results indicate that depersonalization manifested more as the transfer of stress beyond the workplace rather than as persistent negative or cynical attitudes toward students.

Reduced personal accomplishment was rated at a moderate level (M = 2.58, SD = 1.81), primarily reflecting perceived constraints on effectiveness under pressure. The most frequently endorsed items related to reduced creativity and innovation (M = 3.37, SD = 2.23) and perceived declines in performance quality (M = 3.10, SD = 2.21). In contrast, the lowest endorsement pertained to devaluing the profession (M = 1.76, SD = 2.10). Collectively, item-level evidence suggests that reduced accomplishment was experienced mainly as restricted professional functioning rather than diminished professional commitment.

3.2. Professional and Social Factors of Burnout

Professional and social factors associated with burnout were rated at a moderate level (M = 3.19, SD = 1.53), as indicated in

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for the professional and social factors of burnout among special education teachers in Qatar.

Dimension	M	SD	Level
Administrative and institutional stressors	2.94	1.63	Moderate
Parent/community-related pressures	2.66	1.72	Moderate
Work–life balance	3.96	1.99	Moderate
Total score	3.19	1.53	Moderate

Note. Scale range = 0–6; higher scores indicate higher levels. Interpretation bands are descriptive aids: low (0.00–2.00), moderate (2.01–4.00), high (4.01–6.00).

. Among the three factors, work–life balance received the highest average score (M = 3.96, SD = 1.99; moderate), followed by administrative and institutional stressors (M = 2.94, SD = 1.63; moderate) and pressures from parents or the community (M = 2.66, SD = 1.72; moderate).

Table 3 shows that mean scores for the factors ranged from 2.66 to 3.96, with work–life balance identified as the most significant contributor. While all three domains were within the moderate range, the higher mean for work–life balance indicates that time demands and challenges in separating work from personal life were reported more frequently than institutional and relational pressures.

Professional and Social Factors Dimensions

Analysis of item-level responses (see Appendix A,

Table A2. Descriptive statistics of the item level for the Professional and Social Factors Scale.

Rank	Item	Statement	M	SD	Level
Administrative and Institutional Stressors
1	OAS1	Administrative tasks (reports, meetings, follow-up) drain my time and energy more than teaching itself.	4.39	1.87	High
2	OAS2	I lack the resources and facilities needed to teach students with disabilities effectively.	3.31	2.12	Moderate
3	OAS3	School administration does not provide sufficient support to address work challenges.	2.64	2.14	Moderate
4	OAS4	School policies and regulations are unclear or do not help me perform my role effectively.	2.59	2.08	Moderate
5	OAS5	The number of students in my class exceeds my ability to provide individual support.	2.40	2.17	Moderate
6	OAS6	A lack of continuous professional development leaves me less prepared to meet work challenges.	2.29	2.14	Moderate
		Total	2.94	1.63	Moderate
Parent/Community-Related Pressures
1	PSS3	Limited family cooperation makes my educational task more difficult and exhausting.	3.32	2.04	Moderate
2	PSS2	Sometimes I feel the community does not appreciate the effort I make in teaching students with disabilities.	3.25	2.12	Moderate
3	PSS5	I feel that parents place full responsibility on me for educating their children.	3.00	2.06	Moderate
4	PSS1	I repeatedly face difficulties with parents due to high or unrealistic expectations.	2.48	1.95	Moderate
5	PSS7	Unrealistic community expectations make me feel frustrated about my efforts.	2.29	2.15	Moderate
6	PSS6	I sometimes face negative reactions or disapproval from the community when discussing my work with students with disabilities.	2.15	2.14	Moderate
7	PSS4	I face repeated criticism or demands from parents that increase my sense of pressure.	2.15	1.98	Moderate
		Total	2.66	1.72	Moderate
Work–life Balance
1	WLB5	I sometimes have to sacrifice my personal time to complete my professional tasks.	4.30	1.99	High
2	WLB7	Work pressures affect my mental and physical health outside work hours.	4.02	2.12	High
3	WLB6	My work limits my ability to engage in leisure activities or hobbies.	4.02	2.14	High
4	WLB2	I sometimes take work worries home and cannot detach from them.	3.97	2.09	Moderate
5	WLB1	My work consumes my time, so I do not have enough time for my personal or family life.	3.91	2.10	Moderate
6	WLB3	Work pressures make me less able to enjoy my private life.	3.86	2.18	Moderate
7	WLB4	I find it difficult to balance my professional obligations and my personal needs.	3.62	2.18	Moderate
		Total	3.96	1.99	Moderate

Note. Scale range = 0–6; higher scores indicate higher levels. Interpretation bands are descriptive aids: low (0.00–2.00), moderate (2.01–4.00), high (4.01–6.00).

) revealed that all factor domains received moderate ratings. Work–life balance difficulties had the highest mean (M = 3.96, SD = 1.99), followed by administrative and institutional stressors (M = 2.94, SD = 1.63) and parent or community-related pressures (M = 2.66, SD = 1.72).

Within administrative and institutional stressors, administrative workload was identified as the most significant factor. The highest-rated item indicated that administrative tasks such as reports, meetings, and follow-up consumed more time and energy than teaching itself (M = 4.39, SD = 1.87; high). The remaining items, including resource availability, leadership support, policy clarity, class-size or caseload demands, and professional development opportunities, were rated at moderate levels (item means = 2.29–3.31). These results indicate that institutional strain was primarily attributed to administrative burden, with lesser contributions from resource and support limitations.

Endorsement of parent- and community-related pressures was consistently moderate across all items (item means = 2.15–3.32). The highest-rated items reflected limited family cooperation (M = 3.32, SD = 2.04), perceived lack of community appreciation (M = 3.25, SD = 2.12), and perceived responsibility attributed to teachers (M = 3.00, SD = 2.06). These results suggest that relational pressures were primarily associated with challenges in collaboration and perceived accountability, rather than isolated incidents of criticism.

Work–life balance difficulties exhibited the highest overall mean and included several items rated in the high range. The most frequently endorsed indicators were sacrificing personal time to complete professional tasks (M = 4.30, SD = 1.99; high), spillover of work pressures into mental and physical health outside working hours (M = 4.02, SD = 2.12; high), and reduced engagement in leisure activities and hobbies (M = 4.02, SD = 2.14; high). The remaining items indicated moderate difficulty in detaching from work and balancing professional and personal obligations (item means = 3.62–3.97). This pattern demonstrates that, within this sample, challenges related to work–life balance, especially reduced recovery time and unclear after-hours boundaries, represented the most prominent factor domain associated with burnout-related strain.

3.3. Effects of Demographic and Professional Variables on Burnout

Before conducting the five-way MANOVA, key statistical assumptions were evaluated to ensure the validity and robustness of the results. Univariate normality for each dependent variable (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment) was assessed using skewness and kurtosis values. Emotional exhaustion had a skewness of −0.55 and kurtosis of −0.73, depersonalization had a skewness of 1.07 and kurtosis of 0.60, and reduced personal accomplishment had a skewness of 0.29 and kurtosis of −1.08. For the overall burnout score, assessed using a five-way ANOVA, univariate normality was also evaluated. Total burnout had a mean of 0.158, a standard deviation of 0.17, a skewness of −0.652, and a kurtosis of 0.339. According to R. B. Kline (2023), acceptable thresholds for normality are ±3 for skewness and ±10 for kurtosis; therefore, these values support the assumption of normality (see Appendix B,

Table A3. Skewness and Kurtosis Values for Dependent Variables.

Dependent Variable	Skewness	Std. Error	Kurtosis	Std. Error
Emotional Exhaustion	−0.551	0.170	−0.730	0.339
Depersonalization	1.071	0.170	0.603	0.339
Reduced Personal Accomplishment	0.289	0.170	−1.082	0.339
Total burnout	0.158	0.17	−0.652	0.339

).

The assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices across groups was tested using Box’s M test, which was non-significant (Box’s M = 145.764, F = 1.247, df1 = 90, df2 = 3217.947, p = 0.060), indicating the assumption was satisfied (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013; Appendix B,

Table A4. Box’s Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices.

Test	Value	F	df1	df2	Sig.
Box’s M	145.764	1.247	90	3217.947	0.060

). The assumption of homogeneity of error variances was assessed using Levene’s tests. For the MANOVA dependent variables, the results were non-significant (emotional exhaustion: F = 1.087, p = 0.341; depersonalization: F = 0.986, p = 0.511; reduced personal accomplishment: F = 1.087, p = 0.341), confirming equal variances across groups. For total burnout in the ANOVA, Levene’s test was also non-significant (F = 1.083, df1 = 56, df2 = 147, p = 0.348), indicating that the assumption of homogeneity of error variances was satisfied (See Appendix B,

Table A5. Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variances.

Dependent Variable	F	df1	df2	Sig.
Emotional Exhaustion	1.087	56	147	0.341
Depersonalization	0.986	56	147	0.511
Reduced Personal Accomplishment	1.087	56	147	0.341
Total burnout	1.083	56	147	0.348

).

Multicollinearity among the dependent variables was assessed using Pearson correlations. Correlations ranged from 0.567 to 0.734, with the largest correlation observed between depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment (r = 0.734, p < 0.001). Since all correlations were below 0.80, multicollinearity was considered acceptable, supporting the use of MANOVA (Black & Babin, 2019; Appendix B,

Table A6. Pearson Correlations Among Dependent Variables.

Dependent Variable	Emotional Exhaustion	Depersonalization	Reduced Personal Accomplishment
Emotional Exhaustion	1	0.567 **	0.642 **
Depersonalization		1	0.734 **
Reduced Personal Accomplishment			1

Note. ** p < 0.001 (two-tailed).

).

Given that all assumptions were met, the five-way MANOVA was considered the most appropriate and comprehensive method for analyzing the effects of demographic and professional factors—gender, age, educational qualification, years of experience, and workplace setting—on burnout dimensions. This approach aligns with best practices in educational and organizational research, particularly when multiple interrelated outcome variables are analyzed simultaneously (Mertler et al., 2021).

Multivariate analyses revealed that gender was the sole factor associated with statistically significant differences across the combined burnout dimensions. The five-way MANOVA demonstrated a significant multivariate effect for gender, Hotelling’s Trace = 0.187, F(3, 190) = 11.87, p < 0.001. In contrast, age, educational qualifications, years of experience, and workplace setting did not exhibit statistically significant multivariate effects (all ps ≥ 0.127), suggesting that these variables were not associated with overall differences in emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, or reduced personal accomplishment.

Subsequent univariate follow-up tests were conducted to determine which specific burnout dimensions contributed to the significant multivariate effect (

Table 4. Univariate tests for burnout dimensions (follow-up to five-way MANOVA).

Variable	Emotional Exhaustion	Depersonalization	Reduced Personal Accomplishment
Gender	F(1, 192) = 29.30, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.132	F(1, 192) = 1.50, p = 0.222, η2 = 0.008	F(1, 192) = 8.31, p = 0.004, η2 = 0.041
Age	F(2, 192) = 0.17, p = 0.842, η2 = 0.002	F(2, 192) = 0.21, p = 0.813, η2 = 0.002	F(2, 192) = 0.19, p = 0.828, η2 = 0.002
Educational qualification	F(3, 192) = 0.95, p = 0.416, η2 = 0.015	F(3, 192) = 1.34, p = 0.262, η2 = 0.021	F(3, 192) = 1.45, p = 0.228, η2 = 0.022
Years of experience	F(4, 192) = 0.79, p = 0.531, η2 = 0.016	F(4, 192) = 0.16, p = 0.960, η2 = 0.003	F(4, 192) = 0.20, p = 0.939, η2 = 0.004
Workplace setting	F(1, 192) = 0.02, p = 0.885, η2 = 0.000	F(1, 192) = 0.23, p = 0.630, η2 = 0.001	F(1, 192) = 2.89, p = 0.091, η2 = 0.015

Note. p values are reported to three decimals; values < 0.001 are reported as p < 0.001.

).

Table 4 shows a significant main effect of gender for emotional exhaustion, F(1, 192) = 29.30, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.132, and reduced personal accomplishment, F(1, 192) = 8.31, p = 0.004, ηp² = 0.041. Females reported higher mean scores than males on emotional exhaustion (females: M = 4.26, SD = 1.60; males: M = 2.55, SD = 1.66) and reduced personal accomplishment (females: M = 2.82, SD = 1.79; males: M = 1.78, SD = 1.64) (Cohen, 1988). Using conventional benchmarks for partial eta squared, the effect for emotional exhaustion was large, whereas the effect for reduced personal accomplishment was small to moderate. Gender was not significantly associated with depersonalization, F(1, 192) = 1.50, p = 0.222, ηp² = 0.008, with only a modest mean difference between females (M = 1.84, SD = 1.56) and males (M = 1.47, SD = 1.41). No other demographic or professional variables showed statistically significant effects on any burnout dimension (all ps > 0.05, ηp² ≤ 0.022), indicating that observed group differences were specific to gender and limited to selected burnout components.

Finally, a five-way ANOVA was conducted on the overall burnout score to determine whether total burnout varied by gender, age, educational qualification, years of experience, and workplace setting (

Table 5. Five-way ANOVA results for total burnout by demographic and professional variables.

Variable	F	df	p	Effect Size (η2)
Gender	13.39	(1, 192)	<0.001	0.065
Age	0.11	(2, 192)	0.898	0.001
Educational qualification	1.44	(3, 192)	0.233	0.022
Years of experience	0.24	(4, 192)	0.916	0.005
Workplace setting	0.66	(1, 192)	0.418	0.003

Note. p values are reported to three decimals; values < 0.001 are reported as p < 0.001.

). This analytic approach was selected because burnout was conceptualized as a multidimensional construct assessed through three correlated dimensions. The multivariate test evaluated group differences across the combined set of outcomes while controlling for Type I error. Univariate follow-up analyses identified which dimensions contributed to significant multivariate effects. The composite-score model provided a summary assessment of group differences in overall burnout.

As shown in Table 5, total burnout differed significantly by gender, F(1, 192) = 13.39, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.065, indicating a moderate effect. Females reported higher total burnout scores (M = 2.97, SD = 1.44) than males (M = 1.93, SD = 1.38). In contrast, age, educational qualification, years of experience, and workplace setting were not significantly associated with total burnout (all ps ≥ 0.05, ηp² ≤ 0.022). Taken together, these results indicate that gender accounted for the primary observed variation in burnout in this cross-sectional sample, with differences evident in emotional exhaustion and reduced personal accomplishment and reflected in the overall burnout score.

3.4. Associations Between Professional and Social Factors and Burnout

Prior to conducting the regression analysis, key statistical assumptions were examined to ensure the validity of the results, and the corresponding tables are provided in the appendices. First, the assumption of normality was assessed using skewness and kurtosis values. The results indicated that all predictor variables—administrative and institutional stressors (skewness = 0.095, kurtosis = −0.802), parent/community-related pressures (skewness = 0.193, kurtosis = −0.868), and work–life balance difficulties (skewness = −0.572, kurtosis = −1.055)—fell within acceptable ranges, supporting approximate normal distribution. According to R. B. Kline (2023), acceptable thresholds for normality are ±3 for skewness and ±10 for kurtosis; therefore, these values support the assumption of normality (See Appendix B,

Table A7. Skewness and Kurtosis Values for Normality Assessment.

Variable	Skewness	Std. Error	Kurtosis	Std. Error
Administrative and Institutional Stressors	0.095	0.170	−0.802	0.339
Parent/Community-Related Pressures	0.193	0.170	−0.868	0.339
Work–Life Balance Difficulties	−0.572	0.170	−1.055	0.339

). Second, the assumptions of independence of observations and absence of multicollinearity were evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficients. Correlations among the independent variables ranged from 0.523 to 0.714, all below the commonly accepted threshold of 0.80. Therefore, multicollinearity was not considered a concern (Hair et al., 2019; Appendix B,

Table A8. Pearson Correlations Among Dependent Variables.

Variable	1	2	3
1. Administrative and Institutional Stressors	1	0.714 **	0.600 **
2. Parent/Community-Related Pressures		1	0.523 **
3. Work–Life Balance Difficulties			1

Note. ** p < 0.001 (two-tailed).

). Third, the assumption of linearity and absence of multicollinearity was further examined using regression diagnostics. The tolerance values ranged from 0.420 to 0.621, exceeding the minimum acceptable threshold of 0.10, while the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values ranged from 1.610 to 2.380, remaining well below the commonly accepted upper limit of 5. These values fall within recommended ranges, indicating acceptable levels of collinearity. Therefore, the results confirm the absence of multicollinearity issues among the predictor variables. (Winship & Western, 2016). Overall, these results confirm that the assumptions underlying regression analysis were adequately met, supporting the reliability and validity of the regression results reported in this study.

A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to determine whether administrative and institutional stressors, parent- and community-related pressures, and work–life balance difficulties were associated with overall burnout among special education teachers in Qatar. The model accounted for a substantial proportion of variance in burnout in this cross-sectional sample (R = 0.85, R² = 0.72, adjusted R² = 0.72, SE = 0.79) and was statistically significant, F(3, 200) = 173.26, p < 0.001, indicating a strong relationship between the predictor variables and burnout levels. However, due to the cross-sectional, single-source self-report design, the magnitude of explained variance should be interpreted with caution. Additionally, potential content overlap between the burnout and work–life balance measures, such as spillover into personal life, may have increased shared variance. Therefore, these results are best interpreted as robust associations rather than evidence of causal relationships.

Each variable demonstrated a statistically significant unique association with burnout (

Table 6. Regression coefficients for associations between professional and social factors and overall burnout.

Variable	Unstandardized (B)	SE (B)	Standardized (β)	t	p	Tolerance	VIF
Constant	0.048	0.131	—	0.37	0.715	—	—
Administrative and institutional stressors	0.232	0.052	0.26	4.43	<0.001	0.420	2.380
Parent/community-related pressures	0.181	0.047	0.21	3.89	<0.001	0.477	2.100
Work–life balance difficulties	0.385	0.035	0.52	10.91	<0.001	0.621	1.610

Note. p values are reported to three decimals; values < 0.001 are reported as p < 0.001.

). Work–life balance difficulties exhibited the largest standardized coefficient (β = 0.52, t = 10.91, p < 0.001), followed by administrative and institutional stressors (β = 0.26, t = 4.43, p < 0.001) and parent- and community-related pressures (β = 0.21, t = 3.89, p < 0.001). In unstandardized terms, higher scores on work–life balance difficulties were associated with the greatest increase in burnout (B = 0.385), while administrative and institutional stressors (B = 0.232) and parent- and community-related pressures (B = 0.181) also showed positive associations.

Overall, the results demonstrated the strongest association with work–life balance difficulties. Administrative and institutional stressors, as well as parent- and community-related pressures, also exhibited significant unique associations. Due to the cross-sectional design and potential content overlap, these results are interpreted as co-occurring relationships rather than indicative of causal priority.

4. Discussion

The results of this study add to the literature on special education teacher well-being by clarifying how burnout manifests across its main aspects and how it connects to specific stressors in Qatar. The pattern matches the burnout model developed by Maslach and Leiter (2016), which describes burnout as a combination of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal achievement. This condition appears after prolonged work-related stress and has major effects on performance and health. In special education, this model is particularly relevant, as the job demands ongoing emotional involvement and continuous mental and behavioral effort, often in environments of high accountability and complex student needs (Aronsson et al., 2017).

The burnout profile identified in this study indicates that teachers are primarily impacted by the depletion of emotional and physical resources, with comparatively lower levels of detachment. Previous research describes this pattern as characteristic of the helping professions, in which commitment to service endures despite diminished energy (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). However, ongoing efforts in individualized instruction, behavioral support, and coordination can heighten exhaustion without necessarily resulting in depersonalization, especially when teachers maintain strong professional values and perceive their work as meaningful. In practice, this suggests that risk may initially present as fatigue and reduced efficacy rather than overt disengagement, highlighting the need for early detection, as teachers may continue to perform externally while experiencing substantial internal strain.

The factors analyzed in this study align with established categories of stress exposure in teaching, including institutional and administrative demands, relational pressures from parents and the community, and work–life balance challenges. The observed link between administrative and institutional stressors and burnout is consistent with broader evidence that workload intensification, unclear policies, and insufficient organizational support undermine well-being and contribute to burnout in educational contexts (Seibert et al., 2016; Maslach & Leiter, 2016). This interpretation is further supported by evidence in the manuscript, which emphasizes that workload demands and the pressure to maintain performance are central contributors to burnout (Seibert et al., 2016).

Relational pressures from parents and the community constitute a distinct source of emotional labor in special education. Prior studies have shown that limited cooperation, criticism, or unrealistic expectations from stakeholders increase the emotional demands of collaboration and accountability, thereby elevating strain and reducing satisfaction with professional accomplishment (Robinson et al., 2019). These pressures are often amplified in special education, where student progress is generally incremental and dependent on coordinated support between school and home, increasing the likelihood that teachers are held accountable for outcomes determined collectively.

Work–life balance challenges are especially significant because they allow occupational demands to encroach upon periods intended for recovery. Extensive occupational health research identifies insufficient recovery and prolonged after-hours cognitive or emotional engagement as key conditions under which chronic stress evolves into burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 2016). From this perspective, work–life imbalance operates not only as an additional stressor but also as a mechanism that impedes the restoration of resources needed to manage the considerable emotional and cognitive demands of special education teaching.

Gender differences in burnout have been reported inconsistently across studies and appear to depend on contextual conditions and role configurations. Williams and Dikes (2015) suggested that observed gender patterns may reflect cumulative demands arising from both professional and non-professional responsibilities, which can constrain recovery opportunities and intensify exhaustion. In this study, gender differences are interpreted as descriptive differences in reported burnout levels within the sample. Explanatory mechanisms such as domestic responsibilities, task allocation, and role expectations were not measured and therefore cannot be evaluated empirically in the current dataset. In this context, where the special education workforce is predominantly female, gender differences may plausibly coincide with the distribution of documentation, coordination, and related duties within schools; however, the present results do not allow for isolation of these pathways.

More broadly, the results indicate that burnout is associated with a range of work-related pressures. Difficulties in achieving work–life balance demonstrated the strongest unique association with burnout in the regression model, with additional significant associations for administrative or institutional stressors and parent or community-related pressures. This pattern aligns with previous research showing that burnout increases when teachers encounter sustained demands that exceed their coping capacity and when organizational supports and shared decision-making are limited (Robinson et al., 2019). Furthermore, evidence suggests that special education roles involve intensive instructional, behavioral, and coordination demands, and that supportive working conditions and clearer task allocation are essential for reducing burnout risk (Sariçam & Sakiz, 2014; Squillaci, 2021; Thakur, 2018).

In light of Qatar’s ongoing expansion of inclusive education initiatives and enhancements in services for learners with disabilities, maintaining a stable special education workforce is a critical system priority (Alloh et al., 2019; Kebbi, 2018). The results underscore actionable implications at the system, school, and community interface levels.

At the system level, the results support initiatives to reduce non-instructional overload by streamlining documentation and reporting requirements, clarifying procedures, and ensuring that staffing models are aligned with the demands of individualized programming in special education. Targeted investments in professional development that address specific classroom needs, rather than generic training, may also enhance teachers’ perceived efficacy and alleviate strain, consistent with evidence that training and support reduce burnout (Awwad, 2010).

At the school leadership level, effective strategies include promoting role clarity, protecting planning time, and implementing workload distribution practices that minimize chronic after-hours work. Leadership approaches that provide constructive feedback, recognize effort, and involve teachers in decision-making align with recommendations to reduce burnout and increase satisfaction (Robinson et al., 2019). Additionally, schools can establish structured collaboration routines to distribute responsibility for students with disabilities more equitably among teams, consistent with research highlighting the importance of collaboration and balanced responsibility in preventing burnout (De Stasio et al., 2017).

At the school-family-community interface, proactive partnership mechanisms may reduce relational pressure by fostering shared goal-setting meetings, parent education on individualized learning trajectories, and communication protocols that clarify roles and responsibilities. Such approaches can shift interactions from “accountability conflict” to “shared problem solving,” thereby reducing emotional labor and perceived blame. Over time, these strategies may protect teachers’ well-being and stabilize service quality.

In a broader context, this study adds evidence from Qatar to the international literature, showing that special education teachers experience a distinctive burden profile, with burnout closely linked to workload intensity, organizational support, and relational demands (Sariçam & Sakiz, 2014; Thakur, 2018; Squillaci, 2021). Future research should expand on these results by incorporating direct measures of workload architecture, such as caseload size, documentation hours, and co-teaching supports, and by assessing protective resources, such as self-efficacy and self-esteem (Fu et al., 2021). Employing longitudinal designs to clarify the directionality between factors and burnout would further strengthen the evidence base for targeted, context-responsive interventions in Qatar’s inclusive education system (Alloh et al., 2019; Kebbi, 2018).

5. Limitations and Future Directions

Some limitations should be considered when interpreting these results. First, the study relied on self-report questionnaires, which may increase the risk of common method variance and social desirability bias, particularly for sensitive dimensions such as depersonalization. Future research could strengthen measurement validity by incorporating multi-source indicators and objective markers of work demands, such as caseload size, documentation hours, or administrative records. Second, the use of convenience sampling may limit representativeness and reduce the generalizability of the results to all special education teachers in Qatar. Although convenience sampling is common in school-based research, where access is constrained, future studies should employ more systematic sampling across regions, school types, and service settings to improve external validity. Third, as the measures are newly developed and certain item content may overlap with related constructs, future research should employ exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, as well as measurement invariance testing where appropriate, to rigorously establish the factorial structure and optimize item placement. Fourth, burnout was modeled primarily as an overall score; although dimension-level results were also examined, future work should test whether different work-related factors show distinct associations with emotional exhaustion versus reduced personal accomplishment, given that correlations may vary across burnout components. Finally, because all variables were measured concurrently using self-report instruments and some items overlap across scales, the observed associations may be inflated due to shared method variance and content overlap. Therefore, these results should be interpreted as correlational evidence rather than as indicative of causal effects.

6. Conclusions

The results demonstrate that psychological burnout among special education teachers in Qatar represents a significant occupational issue requiring systematic intervention. Overall, burnout levels were moderate, with emotional exhaustion identified as the most pronounced dimension. Reduced personal accomplishment was also moderate, while depersonalization remained relatively low. Burnout varied significantly by gender; however, age, years of experience, educational qualification, and workplace setting did not exhibit statistically significant differences. In the regression analysis, the professional and social factor domains were strongly associated with burnout levels in this cross-sectional sample. Work–life balance difficulties exhibited the strongest unique association, followed by administrative and institutional stressors and parent- and community-related pressures.

These conclusions should be regarded as evidence of associations rather than causal relationships. Strengthening the empirical foundation for policy and practice will require longitudinal research to clarify temporal relationships and determine whether changes in work conditions lead to changes in burnout over time. Future research should incorporate multi-informant and multi-source indicators, such as workload and caseload records, administrative documentation demands, and supervisor or peer ratings, to reduce reliance on single-source self-report and enhance measurement validity. From an applied standpoint, the present results underscore the need for system- and school-level interventions that protect teacher recovery time, minimize unnecessary administrative burden, strengthen organizational support and role clarity, and foster constructive partnerships with families and the broader community to sustain effective special education services in Qatar.