联系我们
我们只做按需定制化代写服务,绝对原创!
QQ:41806229 点击这里在线咨询代写
Email:admin@assignment.cc
网  址:http://www.assignment.cc/
支持Paypal、VISA、MasterCard、Discover等银行卡支付
Paypal支付
代写paper,Teacher Stress
发表日期:2013-10-09 08:49:08 | 来源:assignment.cc | 当前的位置:首页 > 代写paper > 正文
The problem of teacher stress was a great concern in Hong Kong. As in many media also mention that nowadays teachers are suffers from great pressure.

Professional teacher’s union (2005) has conducted a survey and the results showed that 28% of teachers always have more than five burnout symptoms. The situation is serious as such a high percentage of teachers complained about burnout. It would affect the quality of teaching and the quality of life among teachers. The situations have been for a long time. The professional teachers’ union of Hong Kong (1995) also conducted a survey on teacher stress. 1000 questionnaires were distributed to its members by random sampling method in January 1995, with a return rate of 45 per cent. The results showed that 61 per cent of the respondent found teaching stressful. The main sources of stress are: students’ unruly behavior, large class size, too much marking, too much clerical work and so on.

Recent research finding has suggested that when worker suffer from prolonged stress of the organizational factor, they are potentially to have burnout. There are few study conducted in Hong Kong to investigate the correlation between work stress and burnout. In this study, I would like to find which stress factor contribute to teacher three dimension of burnout in Hong Kong.

Definition of Burnout

Burnout is a term used to describe people who are physically and psychologically burnout. Burnout is defined originally by Freudenberger to describe health-care workers who were physically and psychologically burnt out (Byrne, 1994). It means people would deplete themselves and when they experience burnout, they would feel their physical and mental resources have been exhaust. The reason to get burnout because people wear out themselves by excessively to strive or reach some unrealistic expectation, so burnout is developed gradually over time as a result of excessive demands derived from task structure.

The concept distinguishes between work stress and burnout is when people have stress. Stress can have negative or positive effects. Positive side is mean that people have average and suitable stress can motivate people work hard and to attain the goal. But burnout is a long term negative result of work stress. Burnout has been viewed as one type of chronic response because of cumulative, long-term work stress experience.(Ling, 1995).If an employee is under stress for a prolonged period of time, he or she may finally come to a situation that he or she no longer cope with it. When individual feel that they are unable to maintain the caring, this finally leads to the feelings of burnout.

“Machach (1996) defines burnout syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment.” (Tony&Lillian,2007, p.469). So emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and reduced personal accomplishment is not exist separately, three of them are correlate each other.

Emotional exhaustion refers to the characteristic that individual experience that they seem lack of energy and feeling that their emotional energy is used up. This feeling can be come from that they feel frustration and tension in their workplace, so they appear compassion fatigue that they feel that their emotional and psychologically cannot continue to continue their work. Depersonalization is characterized that display a detached and an emotional callousness and cynical attitude toward their co-worker, clients or people surrounding in their workplace. When people under the state of depersonalization, they may use some derogatory word when communication with other people. They may withdrawal to communicate with other co-worker. When people appear reduce personal accomplishment, the characteristic is they would have a tendency to evaluate oneself negatively, they would not appreciate themselves even though they have contribution at work and even have a decline on feeling job competence and successful achievement in their work and interaction with people at work. (Coedes& Dougherty, 1993)

Burnout is a syndrome that affects employees in all occupations, but is especially prevalent among human services workers. Hasida and Keren (2007) indicated that burnout associate with people which the job is giving care to others . Burnout is occurs most in helping professional such as teachers, lawyers, physicians, nurses, social workers and psychotherapist.

According to Maslach and Jackson (1981), professional staff in human service, they have many opportunities in intense involvement with other people, and this interaction would have chance for staff is charge with feeling of anger, embarrassment, fear or despair. When people who work continuously with people under such circumstances, the chronic stress would leas emotional draining and have risk for burnout. There are more emotional strain is greatest for the individual who work in helping professions because they are constantly dealing with other people and their problems, their work need they have involve their emotion to client’s problem and face-to-face interaction with other people is emotional charged situations.

Cordes and Dougherty (1993) indicated that burnout is a process, the process of burnout is the sequencing of the three components of burnout, Maslach suggested that emotional exhaustion is first developed by the excessive chronic work demands, and this demand would drain individual’s emotional resources, thus individual would feel they lack of emotional energy and feeling of being worn out. Emotional exhaustion would lead ones distant oneself from self from work, so depersonalization may be viewed as a type of avoidance coping mechanism used to cope with emotional exhaustion. Depersonalization seem provide an emotional buffer between individual and the stress induced by emotional demand of the job. Depersonalization is a unique response to burnout.Then when people recognized that their current attitude and their original expectation of performance in the work is discrepancy. Diminish the feeling of personal accomplishment were developed. Individual would feel that their ability is not enough to care other people and perform their job.

Janssen, Schauffi and Houkes (1999) have mentioned that emotional exhaustion is significantly positively related with depersonlization. (r=0.33) And there are significant negatively related between depersonalization and personal accomplishment (r=0.38)

Based on the previous findings, the research question in this study is how three dimensions of burnout are related to each other. The two related hypotheses are formulated. The first hypothesis is there are positive association between emotional exhaustion and depersonalization. The second hypothesis is there are negative association between depersonalization and personal accomplishment.

Consequence of burnout

Burnout has negative consequence on organization, as burnout would affect employee performances.

In organization, burnout would affect people’s psychological factor. It would result in low morale, absenteeism, more frequency of tardiness, work alienation, physical and emotional ill-health, teachers leaving the professional, early job retirement. This factor would make organization loss many experienced and experienced people. (Baker, O’Brien & Salahuddin, 2007; Pines & Aronson, 1988). The burnout have been linked with a variety of mental and physical health problems. The effect of mental health is decrease in self-esteem, depression, irritability, helplessness and anxiety. Physical health problems include fatigue, insomnia, headache. (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993)In the field of influence the quality of education, burnout would decrease the quality of teaching because teacher’s performance’s decline. Ioannou and Kyriakides (2007) indicated that when people experience burnout, they would accompany several symptoms, such as physical depletion, feeling disillusionment, they would develop negative attitude toward the work. Teachers experiencing burnout tend to be dogmatic about their practices and to rely rigidly on structure and routine.

If people suffer form burnout, it would affect their attitude toward others and it would affect the quality of social relationship. Ioannou and Kyriakides(2007) indicated that if teacher suffer form burnout, they would have poor interpersonal relationships with colleague and students. Tatar and Yahav (1999) also indicated that generally burned-out teacher provide significantly less information, less praise, and less acceptable of their student’s ideas, and they interact them less frequently. The burnout syndrome would affect the teacher perception of their student as when people have suffer from burnout, as teacher would lower student’s ability and usually they would provide little positive feedback for students’ answer. Abel and Sewell (1999) also indicated that the consequence of burnout would reduced teacher-pupil rapport and pupil motivation.

Teachers are the key persons in the frontline to ensure the quality of teaching to provide to the next generation. So it is important to investigate the situation of burnout phenomenon of teachers in Hong Kong nowadays.

Work stress

Tam and Mong (2005) indicated job stress means people experience psychological state which is incongruence and misfit between worker’s perceptions of the demands on them and their ability to cope with those demand

Abel and Sewell (1999) used transactional model to defined stress, this model emphasized that stress depends on individual’s cognitive appraisal of events and circumstance at work and the perception of owns ability to cope with. The experience of stress is due to perception of demand and inability to meet this demand, and finally threat teacher’s mental or physical well-being.

Teacher stress

Many studies have been done to identify the causes of stress in teaching. Previous factor analytic studies have identified identify guidance work, school management, student behavior management, workload and time pressure and work relationship is source of stress in Hong Kong. Workload and time pressure are the commonly reported stress in Hong Kong. As in several reports also reported that teachers have to work overload and it is one of the major sources of stress. (Professional teachers’ union of Hong Kong ,2005)

Work stress and burnout

There are many research have done before had indicated that work stress is related to burnout.

Capel.(1991) indicated that individual differences and personality alone can not predict burnout. Because burnout is affected by the long-term impact of stressor come from environmental stressor.

In Kokkinos(2007) measured the relationship between job stressor and burnout in primary school teachers. It used 63 job stressor which have 11 subscales of work stress, it is student’s behavior, managing student’s misbehavior, decision making, relationships with colleagues, role ambiguity, poor working conditions, appraisal of teachers by students, work overload, appraisal of teachers, time constraints, specific teaching demands. This study run correlation analyses, it showed that emotional exhaustion and depersonalization were significantly positively correlated with all job stressor. And work stress was negative correlated with personal accomplishment.

I would use teacher stress scale designed by Hui and Chan (1996) to measure teacher stress in Hong Kong, as this scale is 20 relevant items were selected form the 55 items in factor analysis. This scale have been conducted in Hong Kong secondary school, it is more representative in present study as my target participant is secondary school teachers in Hong Kong.

Based on these finding, I formulate the these hypothesis. The third hypothesis is there are positive association between work stress and emotional exhaustion. The forth is there are positive association between work stress and depersonalization. The fifth hypothesis is there are negative association between work stress and personal accomplishment.

Guidance work

Apart from teaching student academic knowledge in school. Teacher in Hong Kong also have responsibility to guide students in their individual development. Kyriacou (2001) indicated that many teachers in Hong Kong have been given additional duties in school guidance work in order to improve the quality of guidance. As a result, guidance work has become a part of every teacher’s workload in Hong Kong teachers. It is one of the responsibilities that Hong Kong teachers need to do in their routine of job. “In 1990, the Hong Kong Education commissions, a body which defines educational objectives and formulates education policy, formally endorsed guidance work as a responsibility of all teachers, thereby advocate a whole school approach to guidance” (Hui. & Chan,1996,p.201). Guidance work is a process of helping students in their self-understanding and self-development, and facilitate students in their educational, vocational, personal-social development.

Hui and Chan (1996) indicated that guidance aspect of works as a potential dimension of stress, until now it has not yet received much research attention. But it may lead teacher increase their workload as they have additional responsibilities in planning and monitoring whole school guidance programmes. Therefore it would become a part of every teacher’s workload. In Hui and Chan (1996) study, it indicated that guidance-related aspect of work is one of major dimension of stress in Hong Kong secondary teachers, they have most stress on individual guidance work, it includes guiding students with behavior, emotional and learning difficulties, the lack of improvement in students. Moreover, Lam, Yuon and Mak (1998) stated that teachers feel difficulty in guidance work is one of the factor which teacher feel difficulty they encounter in their work.

There is no research conducted on the relationship between stress on guidance work and burnout. But there are two factors are potential emerged from guidance work. The first one is guidance work increase workload to teacher and the other is guidance work may induce role conflict and role ambiguity for teacher. In the workload of guidance work, it may increase their workload as they are given additional responsibilities to plan, formulate and carry out the guidance work may be related to burnout. The workload and time pressure may be out of expectation. Teacher will devote more time and energy to perform their guidance work, it may make them work over time in this aspect.

Futhermore, Hui and Chan (1996) stated that teachers would have role conflict between guiding and teaching because there are different responsibility in guidance role and teacher role, and role ambiguity were other aspects of guidance work which constitute sources of stress for teachers.

Role theory stated that every role would have a set of expected behavior, such as teacher would have expected behavior such as teaching .Role conflicts would induce in the situations which two incompatible behavior are expected to one individual .Work role ambiguity occurs when the persons lack of clear, consistent information which have rights, duties, responsibility of the job (Manlove, 1994). Lack of clarify to perform job tasks or criteria for performance evaluations would lead role ambiguity. Manlove (1994) study proved that there are positively association between work ambiguity and emotional exhaustion there are positive association between work ambiguity and depersonalization and there are negative association between work ambiguity and personal accomplishment.

Based on these findings, I formulate three hypotheses on guidance work and three dimension of burnout. The sixth hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on guidance work and emotional exhaustion. The seventh hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on guidance work and depersonalization. The eighth hypothesis is there are negative association between stress on guidance work and personal accomplishment.

School management and burnout

Cheng and Ng (1994) indicated that the policy of school-based management is started in 1991. It is a new policy “school management initiative” issued by the education and Manpower Branch and Education Department; it is a reform of management in school in Hong Kong. This policy and reform focus on changing schools management style from external control management to school-based management. The purpose of reform is increase the quality of education and increase the effectiveness of management at school. In this new policy, every school’s administrative and management is decided by each school oneself. Every school would responsible for planning and structuring the school’s teaching system. School-based management can be viewed stressful if teacher cannot participate in school-base management.

Byrne (1994) indicated that one of the sources of stressor is lack of decision making in school. Lack of decision making means they lack of involvements in their quality of work life. If teacher perceived that they have not enough in participate in decision making, it would increase their opportunities to suffer from role conflict and role ambiguity.

Teacher autonomy is important for teachers as teacher working in work condition. When teacher contains higher autonomy, teacher would have higher satisfaction of their job. Autonomy in teaching professional means teacher can control themselves and their work in working environment. It include teacher have freedom to make prescriptive professional choice to decide appropriate service and activity to their students. Teacher would experience autonomy when they have freedom and opportunities to interfere or supervision on their teaching process, such as have autonomy to decide own teaching style. Moreover, autonomy also include it can give teacher freedom to participate in some collaborate decision-making which are relevant to the service of student and school policy. And autonomy can give teacher have right to formulate their own rule according to their own choosing. (Pearson & Moomaw, 2005). Maslach, Schaufeli and Leiter (2001) indicated that a lack of autonomy is correlated with burnout. Schwab, Jackson and Schuler (1986) indicated that there are correlation between autonomy and personal accomplishment. It using multiple regression, it find that autonomy of teacher have 12% variance to predict personal accomplishment. In contrast , lack of autonomy would lead to lower the personal accomplishment.

Lack of participations gives employees a feeling of lack of control over critical aspects or demands of their work. Jackson, Schuler and Schuler (1986) found that lack of participation in decision making was linked to depersonalization. the reason behind is when individual perceived that they lack of participate in decision making, they would feel that they are in condition which is uncontrollable, so they feel helplessness and feel uncertainly of the operation in workplace. In order to cope with the situation, individuals will depersonalize their relationships with co-worker, clients or the organization.

Miller, Ellis, Zook and Lyles (1990) mentioned that participation in decision can decrease the role stress. As there are negative association between participation in decision making and role stress. And there are positive association between role stress and emotional exhaustion. It can explained that people participate in decision making can reduce role stress, and when role stress reduce, it can reduce emotional exhaustion. So it can explained that participation in decision making may reduce emotional exhaustion. I would make hypothesis that there are negative correlation between participation in decision making and emotional exhaustion.

Pearson and Moomaw (2005) indicated that several researcher have noted that lack of control or autonomy in one’s job contribute to burnout. Feeling of control and autonomy include employee can perceive they have opportunity on decision making on work schedule and develop the policies that directly affect their environment at work. Moreover, participation in decision making is significant correlate to burnout.

There are mentioned that there are there are negatively association between participant decision making and emotional exhaustion with r=-0.33. this means that when people have high participation in decision making, they would have lower emotional exhaustion.

Based in previous research, hence, we formulate three hypotheses which stress on school management and three dimension of burnout. The ninth hypothesis is there is positive association between stress on school management and emotional exhaustion. The tenth hypothesis is there is positive correlation between stress on school management and depersonalization. The eleventh hypothesis is there is negative correlation between stress on school management and personal accomplishment.

Student’s behavior management and burnout

Managing students’ behavior in classroom is one of the important responsibilities in teacher’s role, because teacher would perceive that they need to manage student’s behavior in classroom as they must be ensure that every students in classroom have equal opportunities to gain knowledge in classroom. But in some situation, there are some student do some misbehavior to distract the pace of teaching and affect the quality of teaching, such as many student talking at the same time, it would induce much noise which would affect other student acquire knowledge in classroom, so teacher have duty to prevent the situation which have influence normal teaching.

Hastings and Bham (2003) indicated that several researchers found that teachers identify student misbehavior as a source of stress. It would make teachers feel stress as there are no clear patterns or consistent action to handle different type of student misbehavior. Many studies paid attention on the association between teacher burnout and student misbehavior. Bilbou-Nakou, Stogiannidou and Kiosseoglou (1999) also indicated that difficulty in managing disruptive children have been presented as one of the major cause of burnout.

Friredman (2001) indicated that teachers perceive their students as the main source of burnout in their work because of different problems among different problems such as discipline problems in classroom, unsatisfactory achievement, and absenteeism. Teacher feel irksome to handle the student behavior which interfere with the teaching process. Student misbehavior includes disrespect behavior of student. It include students in class interrupt, derisive, quarrel each other, student’s in class all speak at the same time, which makes a lot of noises.

In Kokkinos (2007) study, there are positive relationship between managing student behavior and emotional exhaustion, with r is 0.53. There are positive relationship between managing student behavior and depersonalization, the r is 0.33. There are negative correlation between manage student behavior and personal accomplishment, the r is –0.20.

According to the results of previous studies, we formulate the three hypothesis between stress on student behavior management and three dimension of burnout. The twelve hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on student behavior management and emotional exhaustion. The thirteenth hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on student behavior management and depersonalization. The fourteenth hypothesis is there are negative association between stress on student behavior management and personal accomplishment.

Workload and burnout

Teacher experience high workload is a serious problem in Hong Kong. Professional teacher’s union of Hong Kong (2005) survey show that 35.6% teachers report that they have to work overtime for more than 21 hours per week and 14% of them have to work overtime even over 31 hours each week. It also mentioned that education reform is one of the sources to increase teachers’ workload as teachers have to do many things to keep pace on education reform. Education reform need teacher to do much extra time and effort to match with the pace of education reform.

Chan and Hui (1995) have explored teacher burnout in a study of 415 secondary school in Hong Kong have indicated that one of the major sources of stress was having too heavy workload. There are many duties for teachers in Hong Kong, it includes teaching, administration and clerical work, extracurricular activities and discipline and guidance work. Lam., Yuon and Mak (1998) found that the two major difficulties of secondary school teachers feel the most difficulties in work were heavy workload and insufficient time.

Santavirta ,Solovieva. And Theorell (2007) indicated that workload means people suffer from excessive demands under time pressure, and also mismatch between the demands of teacher and the teacher’s ability to cope with this demands.

Greenglass, Burke and Fiksenbaum (2001) demonstrated that workload was positively associated with emotional exhaustion in hospital nurses. It indicate that when nurse workload has increased and too heavy, they were more likely to experience emotional exhaustion.

Dr. Moises Salinas(2004) indicated that work overload in teacher include teachers experience excessive paper work, oversized classes filled with student of different academic abilities and the need for teachers to complete tasks beyond their knowledge base.

In Janssen, Schaufel and Houkes (1999) use conservation of resources theory, emotional exhaustion was primary associated with job demand such as work overload. It indicated that emotional exhaustion is positively related to work overload, whereas depersonalization and reduce personal accomplishment are not. Hence, i hypothesized that the fifteenth hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on workload/time pressure and emotional exhaustion

Work relationship and burnout

Social support has been seen as useful resources to let individual cope with stress efficiency. In moderating hypothesis, when individual who have supportive social relationship; they are able to rely on others to help them to deal with some problems in stressful situations, so they would perceive less stress and less affected by stress. In contrast, people who lack of supportive social relationships are vulnerable to the effect of stress. (Russell., Altmaier & Velzen, 1987)

The quality of work relationship with others could be one of stress at work. The nature of the relationship with one’s boss, subordinates, and colleagues can be a major source of stress at work. A trusting and caring environment in the organizations and an effective support system is essential in combating burnout. Burnout can be reduced if individual have good work relationship with others and better support systems at work. When individual have good work relation and support from others, people advice and support can act as tension reduction, help people achieving distance from the situation and a sense of shared responsibility. The stress can release in this situation and hence those people have social support and work relationship would have less prone to burnout. (Pines & Aronson, 1988)

Codes and Dougherty (1993) indicated that the effect of social support on stress and burnout have received extensive attention in literature. Social support has been identified have a role to buffer job-related stress. Social support can make individual has perception that they can cope with the situations by increasing their perception that others will provide the necessary resources. Greater perceived social support from co-workers or supervisor is associated with lower reported levels of burnout

Baker and O’Brien (2007) indicated that supervisor and coworker support are important sources of social support, relating to lower level of burnout in the workplace. Rebecca and Wendy (2007) indicated that supervisors and work colleagues are able to provide support in the form of relevant information and feedback, practical assistance and emotional support relevant to the stressful work situation, it can help individual can have more confidence in solving stress. Teachers with receive social support from supervisors reported less emotional exhaustion, more positive attitudes and greater personal accomplishment.

Cordes and Dougherty (1993) indicated that social support may cause the individual to redefine the bad situation at work and enhance the individual’s perceived ability to cope with the demand induced by the stressful workplace.

Maslach, Schaufeli and Leite (2001) indicated that social support is one source of job resources; they indicate that job resources can acts as buffer effect from the process of job demand and burnout. In this result, it indicated that lack of social support is linked to burnout.

Hasida and Keren(2007) mentioned that social support at work were negatively related to exhaustion, depersonalization and positively related to personal accomplishment.

Base on these findings, I formulated three hypotheses on stress on work relationship and burnout. The sixteenth hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on work relationship and emotional exhaustion. The seventeenth hypothesis is there are positive association between stress on work relationship and depersonalization. The eighteenth hypothesis is there are negative association between stress on work relationship and personal accomplishment.

Method

Participants

The sample consists of 44 participants. In the aspect of gender, 20 were male and 24 were female. They were all full-time teaches in secondary school in Hong Kong. In the aspect of teaching experience, 14 participants have 5 years or less teaching experience, 5 participants have 6-10 years teaching experience, 25 participants have 11 years or more teaching experience. 21 participants are single and 20 are married. In the religion aspect, 14 participants have religion and 28particpants have no religion.

Measures

Teacher stress were assessed using the Teacher stress scale designed by Hui and Chan (1996) for Hong Kong teachers. There are 20 items which have five dimension of stress. It is stress on guidance work, school-based management, student behavior management, workload and work relationship. Teacher were requested to rate each item on 5-point scale ranging from 1to 5. 1 means “no stress”, 2 means “ mild stress”, 3 means “moderate stress”, 4 means “much stress”, 5 means “extreme stress”

Teacher burnout were assessed using Maslach burnout inventory. The three subscales of the MBI are emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and personal accomplishment. Emotional exhaustion includes 9 items. Depersonalization contains 5 items, and personal accomplishment include 8 items. The 22 items are rated on a 7 –point-likert-type scale on which the respondent indicates how often a feeling has been experienced ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (everyday). 0 means “never”, 1 means “a few times a day, 2 means “monthly”, 3 means “a few times a month”,4 means “every week” , 5 means “a few times a week” and 6 means”everyday”

(Abel & Sewell, 1999; Maslach & Jackson, 1981)

The scoring of MBI using .Lau, Yuen and Chan (2005) indicated that scores of the MBI subscales is using the normative distribution, high if they fall into the upper third portion of the normative distribution average if they fall into the middle third and low if they fall into the lower third. As this study sample size is quite small, it would not representative to analysize using normative distribution. So I would use scoring based on the study in Lau, Yuen and Chan (2005) study. As their study was conducted in Hong Kong in 2005, there are 1797 secondary teachers participants in this study. In emotional exhaustion, the grade below 17 as low level, 18-26 as a middle level and 27 or upper as high level. In depersonalization, below 3 as low level, 4-7 as high level, 8 and upper as high level. In personal accomplishment, below 30 as low level, 31-37 as middle level and 38 and upper as high level.

Procedures

The questionnaire was delivered to secondary school in Hong Kong.The period of data collection lasted for 1 month. Before deliver the questionnaire, I would have briefing to teachers. In briefing, I would tell them the aim of this research and participation is voluntary.

there are positive correlation between total stress and emotional exhaustion. Hypothesis 3 is confirmed. There are positive correlation between total stress and depersonalization. Hypothesis 4 is confirmed. There are negative correlation between total stress and personal accomplishment. Hypothesis 5 is confirmed.

there are positive correlation between stress on guidance work and emotional exhaustion, hypothesis 6 is supported. There are positive correlation between stress on guidance work and depersonalization. Hypothesis 7 is confirmed. There are no significant between stress on guidance work and personal accomplishment. Hypothesis 8 is rejected.

there are positive correlation between stress on school management and emotional exhaustion, hypothesis 9 is supported. There are positive correlation between stress on school management and depersonalization. Hypothesis is 10 is confirmed. There are no significant between stress on school management and personal accomplishment, hypotheis 11 is rejected.

There are positive correlation between stress on student behavior management and emotional exhaustion. Hypothesis 12 is confirmed. There are positive correlation between stress on student behavior management and depersonalization. Hypothesis 13 is supported. There are negative correlation between stress on student behavior management and depersonalization. Hypothesis 14 is confirmed.

, there are positive correlation between stress on workload and emotional exhaustion. Hypothesis 15 is confirmed.

, there are positive relationship between stress on work relationship and emotional exhaustion. Hypothesis 16 is supported. There are positive relationship between stress on work relationship and depersonalization, hypothesis 17 is confirmed. There are no significant between stress on work relationship and personal accomplishment.

, the mean of stress on guidance work is 13.0682. it is moderate stress. The mean of stress on school management is 11.25, it is moderate stress. The mean of stress on student behavior management 13.1818, it is moderate stress. The mean of stress on stress on workload is 14.6818 is moderate stress and nearly much stress. The mean of stress on work relationship is 10.5, it is mild stress and nearly moderate stress. The mean of emotional exhaustion is 26.8403. it is high level of emotional exhaustion. The mean of depersonalization is 11, it is high level of depersonalization. The mean of personal accomplishment is high level of accomplishement. The mean of total stress is 62.6818, it is moderate stress.

As shown in table 9, it showed that teacher which have lower than 10 years teacher experiences which have higher emotional exhaustion than teacher which have 10 year or above teacher experience.

Discussion

The central aim of the present study is to examine the correlation between work stress and the three dimension of burnout among teachers. The analysis has a number of research implications.

Although we have the result the correlation between guidance work and emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, as it has not a very clear reason behind the cause of stress on guidance work. There are two potential cause of this stress, one is workload and time pressure to conduct the work of guidance, the another one may be role conflict. Further study can investigate the mainly reason stress reason causing of guidance work.

References

  • Abel, M.H. & Sewell, J. (1999). Stress and burnout in rural and urban secondary school teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(5), 287-293
  • Byrne, B.M. (1994). Burnout: Testing for the validity, replication, and invariance of causal structure across elementary, intermediate and secondary teachers. American Educational Research, 31(3), 645-673
  • Pines, A. & Aronson, E. (1988). Career burnout. New York : Free Press.
  • Professional Teachers’ Union of Hong Kong (2005, November 25). Quality Education impossible with teacher’s higher burnout rate. PTU News, 498: 127
  • Professional Teacher’ Union of Hong Kong (1995, March 18). PTU News, 299, 1
  • Tong S.K. & Lillian P.K. Mong. (2007). Job stress, perceived inequity and burnout among school social workers in Hong Kong. International Social Work, 48(4), 467-483
  • Maslach, C. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual. Palo Alto. CA: Consulting Psychology Press.
  • Hasida, B.Z.& Keren,M .(2007). Burnout, social support and coping at work among social workers, psychologist and nurses: The role of challenge/control appraisals. Social Work in Health Care, 45(4),63-82
  • Ioannouu, I & Kyriakides, L. (2007). Structuring a model for the determinants of vocational teacher burnout. Department of Education, University of Cyrus. http://www.topkinisis.com/conference/CCEAM/wib/index/outline/PDF/IOANNOU%20Ioannis.pdf
  • Tatar, T. & Yahav, V. (1999). Secondary school pupils’ perceptions of burnout among teachers. British Journal of Education Psychology, 69, 457-468
  • Cordes, C.L. & Dougherty, T.W. (1993). A review and an integration of research on job burnout. Academy of Management, 19(4), 621-656
  • Kyriacou, C. (2001). Teacher stress: Direction for future research. Education Review, 53(1), 27-35
  • Hui, E. K. P. & Chan, D.W. (1996), Teacher stress and guidance work in Hong Kong secondary school teachers. British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 24(2), 199-211
  • Lam, S.F., Yuon, F.L. & Mak,Y. S. (1998). Support services to secondary school teachers in Hong Kong. Educational Journal, 26(1), 77-99
  • Manlove, E.E. (1994). Conflict and ambiguity over work roles: The impact on child care worker burnout. Early Education and Development, 5(1), 41-55
  • Hastings, R.P. & Bham, M.S. (2003). The relationship between student patterns and teacher burnout. School Psychology International, 24(1), 115-126
  • Bilbou-Nakou, I., Stogiannidou, A., & Kiosseoglou, G. (1999). The relation between teacher burnout and teachers’ attributions and practices regading school behavior problems. School Psychology International, 20(2), 209-217
  • Friredman, I. A. (2001). Student behavior patterns contributing to teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 281-289
  • Kokkinos, C.M. (2007). Job stressors, personality and burnout in primary school teachers. The British Psychological Society, 77, 229-243
  • Santavirta, N., Solovieva, S. & Theorell, T (2007). The association between job strain and emotional exhaustion in a cohort of 1028 Finnish teachers. The British Psychology Society, 77,213-228
  • Moises, Sailinas. (2004). Teacher stress and burnout and the role of physical activity and parent involvement . Central Connecticut State University.
  • Janssen, P.P.M., Schaufeli, W. B. & Houkes, I. (1999). Work-related and indivisual determinants of the three burnout dimensions. Work and Stress, 13(1), 74-86
  • Janssen, P.P.M., Schaufeli, W. B. & Houkes, I. (1999). Worload and burnout in nurses. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 211-215
  • Maslach, C & Jackson, S.E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of occupational behaviour, 2, 299-113
  • Tam, S.K. & Mong, P.K. (2005). Job stress, perceived inequity and burnout among school social workers in Hong Kong. International Social Work, 48(4),467-483
  • Miller, K.I., Ellis, B.H., Zook, E.G., & Lyles, J.S. (1990). An integrated model of communication,stress and burnout in the workplace. Communication Research, 17(3), 300-326
  • Schwab, R.L. & Schuler, R.S. (1986). Educator burnout: Sources and consequences. Educational Research Quarterly, 10(3), 14-30
  • Lau, S.Y., Yuen, M.T. & Chan, M.C. (2005). Do demographic characteristics make a difference to burnout among Hong Kong secondary school teachers? Social Indicators Research, 71, 491-516
  • Ling, S.O. (1995). Occupational stress among schoolteachers: A review of research findings relevant policy formation. Education Journal, 23(2), 105-124
  • Pearson, L.C. & Moomaw, W. (2005). The relationship between teacher autonomy and stress, work satisfaction, empowerment and professionalism. Educational Research Quarterly, 29, 37-53
  • Russell, D.W., Altmaier , E., & Velzen, D.V. (1987). Job-related stress, social support and burnout among classroom teachers. Journal of Applies Psychology, 72(2), 269-274
  • Jackson, S.E., Schwab, R.L.,& Schuler, R.S. (1986). Toward an understanding of the burnout phenomenon. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71,630-640 (quote in review)
  • Rebecca, S.L. & Wendy, P. (2007). Determinants of burnout among public hospital nurses, Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(1), 8-16
  • Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B. & Leiter, M.P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422
  • Greenglass, E.R., Burke, R.J., & Filsenbaum, L. (2001). Workload and burnout in nurses. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 211-215
  • Baker, L.M. & O’Brien, K.M. (2007). Are shelter workers burned out?: An examination of stress, social support and coping, Journal of family violence, 22(6), 465-475
  • Capel, S.A. (1991). A longitudinal study of burnout in teachers, The British of burnout in teachers, 61, 36-45
  • Finn, J.D., Pannozzo, G.M., & Achilles, C.M. (2003). The “why’s” of class size : Student behavior in small classes. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 321-356
  • Kim, W.O. (1991). Teacher burnout: Relations with stress, personality and social support. CUHK Education Journal, 19(1), 3-11
  • Farber, B.A. (1991). Crisis in education: Stress and burnout in the American teacher. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass
  • 教师工作压力的问题,是一个在香港的极大关注。正如很多媒体还提到,现在教师受到很大的压力。
    专业教师工会(2005)进行了一项调查,结果表明, 28 %的教师总是有五个以上的工作倦怠症状。如此高比例的教师抱怨倦怠形势是严峻的。它会影响教学质量和教师之间的生活质量。情况已经很长一段时间。香港专业教师工会(1995)也进行了调查,对教师压力。其成员发放1000份问卷,以随机抽样的方法,于1995年1月, 45 %的回报率。结果表明, 61%的受访者发现教学压力。压力的主要来源是:学生的违规行为,班级规模大,太多标志,太多的文书工作等。
    最近的研究发现表明,当工人组织因子遭受长时间的压力,他们可能有倦怠。很少有在香港进行的研究调查工作压力和职业倦怠之间的相关性。在这项研究中,我想找到的应激因素有助于教师倦怠三个维度在香港。
    倦怠的定义
    倦怠是一个术语,用来形容人谁是身体上和心理上的倦怠。最初由弗洛登伯格倦怠定义来描述谁是身体上和心理上烧毁(拜恩,1994年)的卫生保健工作者。这意味着人们会耗尽自己,当他们遇到倦怠,他们会觉得他们的身体和精神资源已经排气。倦怠的原因,因为人们穿出来自己过于努力或达到一些不切实际的期望,因此烧坏随着时间的推移逐渐发展由于过度需求来自任务结构。
    工作压力和体力透支是当人们有压力的概念区分。压力可以有正面或负面的影响。积极的一面是指人们有平均和适当的压力可以激励人们努力工作,以达到目标。但倦怠是一个长期的工作压力的负面结果。倦怠,已被视为一种慢性反应,因为累积的,长期的工作压力的经验。 (凌,1995年) 。如果一个员工处于压力之下,他或她可能会在很长的一段时间,终于来到了的情况,他或她不再配合。当个人的感觉,他们无法保持对他人的关心,这最终导致职业倦怠的感受。
    “ Machach (1996)定义工作倦怠症的情感耗竭,人格解体和个人成就感降低。 ” (托尼莉莲, 2007 , p.469 ) 。因此,情绪耗竭,人格解体和个人成就感降低,不存在分开,他们三个是相互关联的。
    情绪衰竭是指个人的经验,他们似乎缺乏能源和感觉,他们的情感能量是用来特征。他们在自己的工作岗位感到沮丧和紧张,所以他们出现同情心,他们觉得自己的情绪和心理上不能继续继续他们的工作,这种感觉可以来。人格解体的特点是显示一种超然的,情感的冷漠和玩世不恭的态度对待自己的同事,客户或周围的人在自己的工作岗位。当人格解体的状态下的人,他们可能会使用一些贬义的词与其他人沟通时。他们可能会撤出与其他同事沟通。当人们出现降低个人成就感的特点是,他们有一种倾向,评估自己的负面的,他们不会欣赏自己,即使他们在工作中的贡献,甚至有下降的感觉在他们的工作和互动的工作能力和成功的成就人们在工作。 ( Coedes多尔蒂, 1993年)
    倦怠是一种综合征,影响员工在所有职业,但尤其是普遍存在的人性化服务工作者。 Hasida和Keren (2007)表示,倦怠联营公司与该作业关怀他人的人。倦怠的发生如教师,律师,医生,护士,社会工作者和心理治疗师的专业帮助。
    据明了和杰克逊(1981年) ,人性化服务的专业工作人员,他们有很多机会与其他人在激烈的参与,这种互动将有机会为员工负责与愤怒,尴尬,恐惧或绝望的感觉。当谁的人在这样的情况下连续工作的人,慢性应激会执法机关情感排水和倦怠风险。有更多的情感张力是最伟大的个人谁在帮助专业工作,因为他们正在不断地处理与其他人他们的问题,他们的工作需要他们都涉及到他们的情绪,以客户的问题和觌互动与其他人的情绪带电的情况。
    科德斯和多尔蒂(1993)指出,职业倦怠是一个过程,过程中的倦怠是职业倦怠的3组件的测序,马斯拉奇建议,情绪耗竭是第一个开发的过度慢性工作需求,以及这种需求会漏个人的情绪资源,因此人会觉得他们缺乏情感能量和感觉被磨损。会导致情绪耗竭的遥远自己从工作自可能被视为一种类型的回避应对机制,以应对与情绪耗竭,人格解体。人格解体似乎提供了一个情感的个人和由情绪压力引起的作业需求之间的缓冲区。人格解体是一个独特的响应burnout.Then ,当人们认识到他们目前的态度和他们原本期望在工作中的表现差异。减少个人成就感的感觉。个人会觉得自己的能力是不够的,关心其他人,并执行他们的工作。
    扬森, Schauffi Houkes的(1999 )提到情绪衰竭是明显正相关depersonlization的。相关(r = 0.33),有显着负相关人格解体和个人成就感相关(r = 0.38之间)
    根据以前的研究结果,在这项研究中所研究的问题是如何倦怠的三个维度是相互关联的。两个相关的假设制定。第一个假设是情绪衰竭和人格解体有正相关关系。第二个假设是人格解体和个人成就感有负相关关系。
    职业倦怠的后果
    倦怠对组织有负面后果,如倦怠会影响员工的表演。
    组织,倦怠会影响人们的心理因素。它会导致士气低落,旷工,更多频率迟到,工作疏离感,生理和情感健康欠佳,离开专业,早期的工作退休教师。这个因素会使组织丧失许多有经验的和有经验的人。 (贝克,奥布莱恩和萨拉赫丁, 2007年松树阿伦森1988年) 。工作倦怠已与各种各样的心理和身体健康问题。心理健康的影响是减少自尊,抑郁,烦躁,无助和焦虑。身体健康问题,包括疲劳,失眠,头痛。 (科德斯多尔蒂,1993)在教育质量领域的影响力,倦怠会降低教学质量,因为教师的工作表现的下滑。约安努和Kyriakides (2007)指出,当人们遇到职业倦怠,他们会陪几个症状,如体力耗尽,幻灭的感觉,他们将开发工作的消极态度。经历倦怠的教师往往是教条他们的做法,并依靠刚性结构和常规。
    如果人患上形式倦怠,它会影响到他们的态度对待他人,并会影响社会关系的质量。约安努和Kyriakides (2007)指出,如果老师受到形式倦怠,他们将不得不与同事和学生人际关系差。鞑靼Yahav (1999)也指出,一般烧坏教师提供显着的信息较少,较少的好评,并难以接受他们的学生的想法,和他们互动较少。倦怠症会影响他们的学生的老师的看法,当人们遭受倦怠,教师会降低学生的能力,他们通常会提供一点积极的反馈学生的回答。亚伯和Sewell (1999)也表示,将减少职业倦怠的后果师生融洽和瞳孔动机。
    教师是关键的人在前线,以确保教学质量提供给下一代。所以重要的是,香港现时的教师职业倦怠现象的情况进行调查。
    工作压力
    谭旺( 2005 )指出,工作压力意味着人们体验到的心理状态,这是工人的看法,对他们的需求和自己的能力,以应付这些需求之间的不协调与不称职
    亚伯和Sewell (1999)使用的事务模型定义应力,这种模式强调,压力取决于事件和在工作中的情况下,拥有感知能力,以应付个人的认知评价。是由于应力的经验感知的需求,并不能满足这种需求,并最终威胁教师的心理或身体安康。
    教师压力
    许多研究已经完成,以确定在教学中的压力的原因。上一页因素分析的研究已经确定,确定指导工作,学校管理,学生行为管理,工作量和时间压力和工作关系是在香港的压力源。工作量和时间压力,在香港是常见的应力。在几份报告中还报告说,教师必须超负荷地工作,这是压力的主要来源之一。 (专业教师工会香港,2005 )
    工作压力和体力透支
    有许多研究都已做了之前曾表示,工作压力与职业倦怠。
    卡佩尔(1991 )表示,单独的个体差异和个性无法预测倦怠。因为倦怠受到来自环境刺激的应激源造成的长期影响。
    Kokkinos的(2007)测量工作压力源和小学教师的职业倦怠之间的关系。它用63其中有11个分量表的工作压力,工作压力源,它是学生的行为,管理学生的不端行为,决策,与同事的关系,角色模糊,工作条件差,教师考核学生,超负荷工作,教师的考核,时间约束,具体的教学需求。这项研究运行的相关性分析,结果表明情绪衰竭和人格解体显着正相关,与所有的工作压力源。与工作压力呈负相关,与个人成就感。
    我会用在香港教师压力量表设计由回族和陈(1996)来衡量教师工作压力,这种规模是20个有关项目,选择55项因素分析。这个规模已在香港中学进行,这是本研究中比较有代表性的,作为我的目标参与者是在香港的中学教师。
    基于这些发现,我制订了这些假说。第三个假设是工作压力和情绪耗竭有正相关关系。第四是工作压力和人格解体之间有正相关。第五个假设是工作压力和个人成就之间有负相关。
    指导工作
    在学校除了教授学生学术知识。在香港的教师也有责任引导学生在他们的个人发展。 Kyriacou这样(2001)指出,在香港,许多教师被赋予更多的职责学校指导工作,以提高质量的指导。因此,已成为指导工作的一部分,每个老师的工作量在香港教师。这是香港教师在他们的日常工作需要做的职责之一。 “ 1990年,香港教育佣金,身体定义教育的目标和制定教育政策,正式认可所有教师的责任,指导工作,从而提倡整个学校指导方针” ( Hui.陈, 1996年,第.201 ) 。指导工作,帮助学生在他们的自我认识和自我发展是一个过程,在他们的教育,职业,个人和社会的发展,并促进学生。
    辉和陈(1996)指出,指导方面的作品作为一个潜在的维度的压力,到现在为止还尚未收到大量的研究关注。但是,它可能会导致教师增加他们的工作量,因为他们有额外的责任,规划和监测整个学校指导方案。因此,它会成为每一位教师的工作量的一部分。慧和陈(1996)的研究,它表明,相关指导方面的工作是在香港中学教师的压力主要尺寸,他们最看重个别指导工作,包括指导学生的行为,情绪和学习困难学生缺乏改善。此外,林, YUON和麦(1998)指出,教师辅导工作感到困难的因素,老师感到他们在工作中遇到的困难之一。
    有没有指导工作压力和职业倦怠之间的关系进行研究。但有两个因素是潜在摆脱指导工作。第一个是指导老师的工作增加工作量,另一个是教师指导工作可能会引起角色冲突和角色模糊。在指导工作的工作量,它可能会增加他们的工作量,因为他们被赋予更多的职责,规划,制订和实施工作的指导意见可能与倦怠。的工作量和时间压力可能超出预期。教师将投入更多的时间和精力履行其指导工作,它可能使他们在这方面的工作,随着时间的推移。
    此外,辉和陈(1996)指出,教师的指导作用和教师的角色,因为有不同的职责,指导和教学之间的角色冲突和角色模糊是构成教师的压力来源等方面的指导工作。
    角色理论指出,每一个角色都将有一组预期的行为,如教师预期的行为,如教学角色会引起冲突的情况下,这两个不兼容的行为,预计一个人的工作角色模糊时发生的人缺乏清晰,一致的信息,有权利,义务,责任的工作( Manlove ,1994) 。澄清执行工作任务或绩效评估标准的缺乏,会导致角色模糊。 Manlove (1994)的研究证明,有积极工作的模糊性和情绪耗竭之间的关联有工作的模糊性和人格解体的正相关关系,并有工作的模糊性和个人修养的负相关关系。
    基于这些发现,我制订指导工作的三个假设和三维倦怠。第六假说是有积极的指导工作压力与情绪耗竭之间的关联。第七假设是有指导工作的压力和人格解体的正相关关系。第八假说是有负相关关系指导工作和个人修养的压力。
    学校管理和倦怠
    郑和Ng (1994)表示,校本管理的政策,于1991年开始。这是一项新政策, “学校管理倡议” ,由教育统筹科及教育部门发行的,它是一个在香港的学校管理改革。这种政策和改革的重点从外部控制管理,校本管理上改变学校的管理风格。改革的目的是提高教育质量,提高学校管理的有效性。在这个新的政策,每所学校的行政和管理是由每个学校自己决定。每所学校将负责规划和组织学校的教学系统。校本管理可以被看作压力,如果老师不能参加学校的基础管理。
    拜恩(1994)指出,应激的来源之一是缺乏在学校决策。缺乏决策意味着他们缺乏涉及他们的工作生活品质。如果老师认为,他们没有足够的参与决策,这将增加他们的机会患上角色冲突和角色模糊。
    教师作为教师在工作条件下工作的教师自主性是非常重要的。当老师含有较高的自主权,教师将有他们的工作满意度较高。专业教学手段教师的自主权,可以控制自己和自己的工作,在工作环境。它包括教师有自由作出指令性的专业选择,以决定​​适当的服务和学生活动的。老师会经历自主权时,他们有自由和机会来干扰或自己的教学过程中的监督,比如有自主权来决定自己的教学风格。此外,还包括它的自主权可以给教师自由参加一些协作决策相关的服务学生和学校政策。和自主权,可以给,老师有权制定自己的规则,根据自己选择的。 (皮尔逊Moomaw的,2005年) 。马斯拉奇, Schaufeli和雷特的(2001)指出,缺乏自主性与倦怠。施瓦布,杰克逊和舒勒(1986)表示,有自主权和个人成就之间的相关性。它采用多元回归分析,发现教师的自主权,有12 %的变异来预测个人修养。相反,缺乏自主性,会导致个人成就感降低。
    缺乏参与,让员工感觉缺乏控制权的关键方面或要求他们的工作。杰克逊,舒勒和舒勒(1986)发现,缺乏参与决策与人格解体。背后的原因是当个别看出他们缺乏参与决策,他们会觉得他们的条件是不可控的,所以他们感到无助和感觉不确定性在工作场所操作。为了应付这一局面,个人会往自己身上揽了他们与同事,客户或组织的关系。
    米勒,埃利斯,祖克和莱尔斯(1990)提到,参与决策的作用可以降低压力。有参与决策和角色压力的负相关关系。角色压力与情绪耗竭之间有正相关。它可以解释,人们参与决策可以减少角色压力,角色压力时,降低,它可以减少情绪耗竭。因此,它可以解释,参与决策,可以减少情绪耗竭。我会假设,即有负相关关系,参与决策和情绪耗竭。
    Pearson和Moomaw的(2005年)表示,几个研究员指出,一个人的工作缺乏控制或自治有助于职业倦怠。控制权和自主权的感觉,包括,雇员可以感知他们有机会对决策工作日程,并制定政策,直接影响其在工作环境。此外,参与决策是显著关联倦怠。
    有提到,有负面的也有参与决策之间的关联和情感耗竭与r = -0.33 。这意味着,当人们有很高的参与决策,他们将不得不降低情绪耗竭。
    基于以往的研究中,因此,我们制定了三个假设应力对学校的管理和三维倦怠。第九假设是学校压力管理与情绪耗竭之间有正相关。第十届假说是对学校的管理和人格解体的压力之间有正相关。第十一假说是有负相关关系,对学校管理和个人成就感的压力。
    学生的行为管理和倦怠
    在课堂管理学生的行为是在教师的角色的重要职责之一,因为老师会觉察到,他们需要在课堂管理学生的行为,因为他们必须确保每一个学生在课堂上有平等的机会获得知识课堂。但在某些情况下,也有一些学生做一些,行为不检分散教学的步伐,影响教学质量,如许多学生在同一时间谈论,它会引起太多的噪音会影响其他学生在课堂获取知识,所以老师有责任防止局势影响正常的教学。
    ( Hastings和BHAM的, 2003)指出,一些研究人员发现,教师识别学生的不当行为,作为一种应激源。这使教师感到压力,因为没有明确的模式或一致的行动,以处理不同类型的学生的不当行为。许多研究关注教师职业倦怠和学生的不当行为之间的关联。拿口, Stogiannidou Bilbou Kiosseoglou (1999)也指出,管理破坏性儿童的困难已倦怠的主要原因之一。
    Friredman ( 2001)指出,教师倦怠的主要来源,在他们的工作,因为不同的问题,在不同的问题,如在课堂纪律问题,成绩不理想,和旷工看待自己的学生。教师感到令人厌烦的干扰教学过程来处理学生的行为。学生的不当行为,包括对学生的不尊重行为。它包括学生在课堂上中断,嘲笑,争吵对方,学生在课堂上说话的同时,这使得很多噪音。
    在Kokkinos的( 2007)的研究,也有管理学生的行为和情绪耗竭的正相关关系,与r为0.53 。有管理学生的行为和人格解体的正相关关系, r为0.33 。有管理学生的行为和个人修养的负相关关系, r为-0.20 。
    根据前人的研究成果,我们制定的三个假说之间的压力,对学生的行为管理和三维倦怠。 12个假说是有学生行为管理的压力与情绪耗竭的正相关关系。第十三假说是有正相关关系压力对学生的行为管理和人格解体。第十四假设是,有学生行为管理的压力和个人修养的负相关关系。
    工作量和倦怠
    教师经验的高工作量在香港是一个严重的问题。香港(2005年)的调查显示, 35.6 %的教师报告说,他们不得不加班超过21小时,每星期和14 %的人有加班,甚至超过31小时,每星期的专业教师工会。它还提到,教育的改革是增加教师的工作量,作为教师必须做很多事情,以跟上教育改革的来源之一。教育改革需要老师做很多额外的时间和精力,以配合教育改革的步伐。
    陈辉(1995)探讨教师职业倦怠的415中学在香港的一项研究表明,压力的主要来源之一是过于沉重的工作量。有很多香港教师的职责,它包括教学,行政及文书工作,课外活动和纪律和指导工作。林, YUON和麦(1998)发现,两大困难的中学教师感到最困难的工作是繁重的工作量和时间不足。
    Santavirta , Solovieva 。 (2007)指出, Theorell工作量意味着人们遭受过分的要求在时间压力下,老师和老师的能力,以应付这个需求之间的需求不匹配。
    格林格拉斯,伯克和Fiksenbaum , (2001年)表明,情绪衰竭在医院护士的工作量呈正相关。它表明,当护士的工作量增加了,太沉重了,他们更有可能体验到的情绪耗竭。
    莫伊塞斯萨利纳斯(2004)博士表示,在老师的超负荷工作,包括教师经验纸张过度工作,超大班充满了不同的学术能力的学生和教师的需要,完成任务超出了他们的知识基础。
    扬森, Schaufel Houkes (1999)使用节约资源的理论,情绪耗竭主要超负荷工作,如与岗位需求相关。它表明,情绪耗竭呈正相关,不超负荷工作,而人格解体和个人成就感降低。因此,我推测,第十五假设是有正相关关系工作量/时间上的压力和情绪耗竭的压力
    工作关系和倦怠
    社会支持一直被视为有用的资源,让个人配合讲究效率。调节假说,当个别有支持性的社会关系的人,他们能够依赖别人来帮助他们处理一些问题,在紧张的情况下,这会使他们感觉到压力少,受到压力的影响较小。相比之下,缺乏支持的社会关系的人谁是易受压力的效果。 ( Russell. Altmaier Velzen , 1987 )
    工作与他人的关系的质量可能是一个在工作中的压力。的老板,下属和同事的关系的性质,可以在工作压力的主要来源之一。一个信任和关怀的环境中的组织和有效的支持系统是在打击倦怠至关重要。如果个人有良好的工作关系,与他人在工作中更好的支持系统,可以减少倦怠。当个人有良好的工作关系和他人的支持,人民的建议和支持张力降低,可以作为帮助人们实现距离的情况,并共同承担的责任感。压力可以释放,因此在这种情况下,这些人有社会支持和工作关系不容易倦怠。 (松树阿伦森,1988 )
    代码和多尔蒂(1993)指出,社会支持对压力和体力透支的效果已经得到了广泛的关注文学。已确定的社会支持,缓冲工作相关的压力有一定的作用。社会支持可以使个人认为他们可以配合的情况下,通过提高他们的看法,其他人将提供必要的资源。更大的社会支持较低水平倦怠相关同事或上司
    贝克和奥布莱恩(2007)指出,上司和同事的支持,社会支持的重要来源,降低在工作场所职业倦怠水平。丽贝卡和温迪(2007)表示,监事和同事都能够提供支持的形式有关的信息和反馈,实际援助和相关的情感上的支持,工作压力大的情况,它可以帮助个人可以有更多的解决压力的信心。教师获得社会的支持,监事报道较少情绪耗竭,更积极的态度和更大的个人成就感。
    科德斯和Dougherty (1993)指出,社会支持可能会导致重新定义个人在工作和恶劣的情况下,提高个人的感知能力,以应付紧张的工作环境引起的需求。
    马斯拉奇, Schaufeli和雷特的(2001)表明,社会支持是工作资源的来源之一,它们表明工作资源可以作为缓冲效果的过程中,工作需求和倦怠。在这样的结果,它表明,缺乏社会支持与职业倦怠。
    Hasida和Keren (2007)提到,在工作的社会支持呈负相关的耗竭,人格解体和积极的个人修养有关。
    这些研究结果的基础上,我提出了三个假设压力的工作关系和职业倦怠。第十六条假设是有积极的工作关系与情绪耗竭的压力之间的关联。第十七假设是有压力的工作关系和人格解体的正相关关系。 18假说是有压力的工作关系和个人修养的负相关关系。
    方法
    参与者
    样品由44人参加。在性别方面,男性20人,女性24人。他们为所有全职在香港中学任教。在教学经验方面, 14名学员有5年或更少的教学经验, 5名有6-10年的教学经验, 25名参加者有11岁或以上的教学经验。 21名参加者是单身, 20都结婚了。在宗教方面, 14名学员有宗教和28particpants没有宗教信仰。
    措施
    教师压力辉和陈(1996)香港教师设计的教师压力量表评估。有20个项目,其中有五维的压力。它是指导工作,校本管理,学生行为管理,工作量和工作关系上的压力。教师被要求评价每个项目规模5点,从1至5 。 1表示“没有压力” , 2表示“应激” ,3表示“适度的压力” ,4表示“太多的压力” , 5表示“极度紧张”
    教师职业倦怠,工作倦怠量表评估。 MBI的三个分量是情感耗竭,人格解体和个人成就感。情绪耗竭包括9个项目。人格解体包含5个项目,包括8个项目和个人修养。 22个项目被评为7点李克特式量表的受访者表示经常感觉已经经历了从0 (从不)到6 (每天) 。 0表示“从来没有” , 1表示“一天几次,意思是”每月“ ,意思是”每月几次“ ,意思是”每周“ , 5表示”一周几次“等6个手段“日常”
    (阿贝尔与休厄尔,1999;马斯拉奇杰克逊,1981)
    MBI的得分。刘源和陈(2005)指出, MBI量表的分数使用的规范性分布,高如果他们陷入上第三部分的规范性分布平均,如果他们陷入中间三分之一和低的如果他们陷入低三分之一。由于这个研究的样本量是相当小的,也不会代表化分析使用规范分配。所以,我会用得分,在刘源和Chan ( 2005)的研究基础上的研究。由于他们的研究在2005年在香港进行,有1797名中学教师参加在这项研究中。在情绪耗竭,档次低的水平,低于17 18-26作为中间级和27或高水平上。人格解体,低于3低的水平, 4-7高的水平, 8和高水平上。在个人修养, 30以下为较低水平, 31-37为中等水平, 38和高水平上。
    程序
    问卷被送到中学在香港Kong.The的数据采集历时1个月内。在交付问卷之前,我想有老师的简报。在发布会上,我会告诉他们这项研究的目的和参与是自愿的。
    总压力与情绪耗竭之间有正相关关系。假设3被确认。总应力和人格解体有正相关关系。假设4被确认。总应力和个人修养有负相关关系。假设5被确认。
    指导工作压力与情绪耗竭之间存在正相关,假设6支持。有指导工作的压力和人格解体的正相关关系。假设7被确认。有没有重大的指导工作和个人修养之间的压力。假设8被拒绝。
    对学校的管理压力和情绪耗竭之间有正相关,假设9是支持的。对学校的管理和人格解体的压力之间有正相关。假设是10确认。有没有显着的学校管理和个人修养上的压力之间, hypotheis 11被拒绝。
    学生行为管理的压力与情绪耗竭之间有正相关。假设12被确认。强调对学生的行为管理和人格解体之间有正相关。假设13的支持。有负相关关系,强调对学生的行为管理和人格解体。假设14被确认。
    ,有工作量的压力与情绪耗竭之间呈正相关。假设15被确认。
    ,有工作关系与情绪耗竭的压力正相关关系。假设16的支持。应力之间的关系有积极的工作关系和人格解体,假设17被确认。有工作关系和个人成就之间没有显着的压力。
    指导工作的压力,平均为13.0682 。它是适度的压力。学校管理上应力的平均值是11.25,它是适度的压力。学生行为管理13.1818的平均应力,它是适度的压力。在工作量的压力应力的平均值14.6818适度的压力和近的压力。工作关系,应力的平均值为10.5,它是温和的压力和近适度的压力。情绪耗竭的平均值为26.8403 。它是高水平的情绪耗竭。人格解体的平均值为11,它是高水平的人格解体。个人修养的平均值是高水平的既遂。 62.6818总应力的平均值,它是适度的压力。
    如表9所示,它表明,教师有低于10岁的教师经验,具有更高的比教师情绪衰竭有10年或以上的教师经验。
    讨论
    本研究的中心目的是检查工作压力和教师的倦怠的三个维度之间的相关性。的分析有一些研究的影响。
    虽然我们有结果指导工作和情绪衰竭和人格解体之间的相关性,因为它没有一个非常明确的指导工作压力的原因背后的原因。这种压力的原因可能有两个,一个是工作量和时间的压力来进行工作的指导意见,另一种可能是角色冲突。进一步的研究可以调查的主要原因应力原因的指导工作。
    参考文献
    阿贝尔,勋章休厄尔, J. (1999) 。在农村和城市的中学教师的压力和体力透支。杂志教育研究, 92 (5) , 287-293
    拜恩, B.M. (1994) 。倦怠:测试整个小学,初中和高中教师的因果结构的有效性,复制和不变性。美国教育研究, 31(3 ) , 645-673
    松树, A. &阿伦森, E. (1988) 。职业倦怠。纽约:自由出版社。
    香港教育专业人员协会( 2005年11月25日) 。优质教育不可能与老师的燃尽率较高。 PTU新闻, 498: 127
    香港专业教师联盟( 1995年3月18日) 。 PTU新闻,299 ,1
    佟S.K. &莉莲P.K. 。旺角。 ( 2007年)。工作压力,学校社工在香港知觉不平等和倦怠。国际社会工作, 48 (4 ) , 467-483
    马斯拉奇, C. (1996) 。工作倦怠量表手册。帕洛阿尔托。 CA :咨询心理学按下。
    Hasida , B.Z.可人,男(2007年) 。倦怠,社会支持和应对社会工作者,心理学家,护士的工作:挑战/控制评价的作用。社会工作在医疗保健, 45(4) ,63 - 82
    Ioannouu ,我Kyriakides , L. (2007) 。构建一个模型职业教师职业倦怠的决定因素。教育部,赛勒斯大学。 http://www.topkinisis.com/conference/CCEAM/wib/index/outline/PDF/IOANNOU % 20Ioannis.pdf
    塔塔尔, T. & Yahav ,五( 1999年) 。教师倦怠中学学生的看法。英国教育心理学杂志,69, 457-468
    科德斯, C.L.多尔蒂,T.W. (1993) 。对工作倦怠的回顾与整合研究。管理学院, 19 (4 ) , 621-656
    Kyriacou这样, C. (2001) 。教师的压力:为今后的研究方向。教育评论“, 53 (1) , 27-35
    回族, E. K. P.陈,D.W. ( 1996年) ,在香港中学教师的教师应力和指导工作。英国辅导与咨商学报, 24 (2 ) , 199-211
    林,S.F. , YUON F.L.麦, Y. S. (1998) 。支持服务在香港的中学教师。教育杂志, 26 (1 ) , 77-99
    Manlove , E.E. ( 1994年) 。在工作角色冲突和模糊性:儿童护理员职业倦怠的影响。早期教育和发展, 5(1) , 41-55
    黑斯廷斯,号馀BHAM的,M.S. (2003年) 。学生模式和教师职业倦怠的关系。学校心理学, 24(1) , 115-126
    一拿口Bilbou , Stogiannidou , A. , & Kiosseoglou , G. (1999) 。教师职业倦怠,教师regading办学行为问题的归因和实践之间的关系。学校心理学, 20(2) , 209-217
    Friredman ,一, A. (2001) 。学生的行为模式促进教师职业倦怠。教育研究杂志,88, 281-289
    Kokkinos的,C.M. ( 2007年)。在小学教师的工作压力,个性和倦怠。英国心理学学会, 77 , 229-243
    N. Santavirta , Solovieva Theorell , T (2007年) 。在一组1028芬兰教师工作压力与情绪耗竭之间的关联。英国心理学会, 77,213-228
    莫伊塞斯, Sailinas 。 (2004年) 。教师压力和体力透支,体力活动和家长参与的作用。中央康涅狄格州立大学。
    扬森, PPM , Schaufeli ,世界银行Houkes , I. (1999) 。与工作有关的三个倦怠尺寸和教师个别决定。工作与压力, 13(1) , 74-86
    扬森, PPM , Schaufeli ,世界银行Houkes , I. (1999) 。 Worload和护士职业倦怠。社区及应用社会心理学杂志,11, 211-215
    马斯拉奇,C &杰克逊,S.E. (1981) 。经验丰富的职业倦怠的测量。职业行为杂志,2, 299-113
    谭S.K.旺角, P.K. (2005年) 。工作压力,学校社工在香港知觉不平等和倦怠。国际社会工作, 48(4) ,467 -483
    米勒, KI ,埃利斯, BH ,祖克, EG ,莱尔斯, JS (1990) 。集成模型沟通,在工作场所的压力和体力透支。传播学研究, 17(3) , 300-326
    施瓦布,R.L.and舒勒, R.S.的(1986) 。教育家的倦怠:来源和后果。教育研究, 10 (3 ) , 14-30
    刘S.Y. ,源,M.T.陈,M.C. (2005年) 。人口特征有所作为香港中学教师倦怠?社会指标研究,71, 491-516
    凌S.O. (1995) 。职业学校教师之间的压力:研究结果形成相关政策的审查。教育杂志, 23(2) , 105-124
    皮尔逊L.C. & Moomaw , W. (2005) 。教师自主和压力,工作满意度,增强能力和专业之间的关系。教育研究季刊,29, 37-53
    罗素,D.W. , Altmaier , E. , & Velzen D.V. (1987) 。与工作相关的压力,社会支持和倦怠任课教师。应用心理学杂志, 72(2) , 269-274
    杰克逊,S.E. ,施瓦布,R.L.and ,舒勒, R.S. (1986) 。走向倦怠现象的理解。中华应用心理学, 71,630-640 (在审查报价)
    丽贝卡,S.L.温迪, P. (2007) 。决定因素公立医院护士倦怠,澳大利亚高级护理杂志,25(1 ) 8-16
    明了,C., Schaufeli , W.B.雷特,熔点(2001年) 。职业倦怠。年度回顾心理学,52, 397-422
    格林格拉斯, ER ,伯克, RJ , Filsenbaum , L. (2001) 。护士的工作量和工作倦怠。社区及应用社会心理学杂志,11, 211-215
    贝克,L.M.奥布莱恩, K.M.的( 2007年)。住房工人是否已经烧坏? :考试的压力,社会支持和应对家庭暴力,期刊, 22(6) , 465-475
    套环, S.A. (1991) 。倦怠的教师,在教师职业倦怠英国,61, 36-45的纵向研究
    芬兰人, J.D. , Pannozzo ,G.M. ,跟腱,C.M. (2003年) 。 “为什么”每班学生人数:小班的学生行为。回顾教育研究, 73 (3) , 321-356
    金, W.O. (1991) 。教师职业倦怠与压力,人格和社会支持的关系。香港中文大学教育学报, 19(1) ,3-11
    法伯,B.A. (1991) 。教育危机:在美国老师的压力和职业倦怠。旧金山:乔西低音