CORRELATES OF STRESS AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS IN PENANG

A thesis submitted to the Graduate School in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science (Management), Universiti Utara Malaysia bY HamdiahBt. Othman

0 Hamdiahl bt. Othman, 1996. All rights reserved

Sekolah Siswazah (Graduate School) Universiti Utara Malaysia

PERAKUAN KER JA TESIS

(Certification Of Thesis Work)

Kami, yang bertandatangan, memperakukan bahawa (We, the undersigned, certify that) HAMDIAH BT. OTHMAN

calon untuk ijazah (candidate for the degree ofi

Sarjana Sains (Pengurusan)

telah mengemukakan tesisnya yang bertajuk (has presented his/her thesis of the following title) Correlates of Stress Among Secondary School Teachers in Penang. seperti yang tercatat di muka surat tajuk dan kulit tesis (as it appears on the title page and front cover of thesis) bahawa tesis tersebut boleh diterima dari segi bentuk serta kandungan, dan meliputi bidang ilmu dengan memuaskan. (that the thesis ia acceptable in form and content, and that a satisfactory knowledge of the field is coverd by the thesis). AJK Tesis (Thesis Committee) Nama (Name) Pn Nama

Afifah Abu Yazid

(Penyeliu Ui4wna/Princi~ Supervioor)

(Name) P.M.Dr. -tapah Hj. Dad

Tandatangan (Signature) Tarikh (Date)

Nama

(Name)

PERMISSION TO USE

In presenting this thesis in partial W-ilment of the requirements for a Post Graduate degree Corn the Universiti Utara Malaysia, I agree that the Library of this University may make it freely available for inspection. 1 further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by my supervisor(s) or, in their absence, by the Dean of the Graduate School where I did my thesis. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts there of for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the Universiti Utara Malaysia in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of material in this thesis in whole or in part should be addressed to: Dean Of Graduate School Universiti Utara Malaysia 060 10 Sintok KedahDarul Aman

ii

ABSTRAK

Tujuan kajian ini adalah untuk mengenal pasti dan menentukan faktor-faktor yang menyebabkan tekanan di kalangan guru sekolah menengah di Georgetown, Pulau Pinang serta mengenal pasti faktor-faktor yang dianggap paling menekan. Kajian ini juga mengukur tahap tekanan dan mengenal pasti manifestasi tekanan yang dialami oleh guru sekolah menengah.

Sebanyak 80 % saiz sampel yang telah dipilih daripada sembifan buah sekolah di sekitar Georgetown. Sejumlah 348 soal selidik telah diedarkan dan sebanyak 75 % (260) soal selidik telah dikembalikan. Dar@& 260 soal selidik tersebut, hanya 249 boleh digunakan. Jumlah responden lelaki ialah 65 orang dan perempuan 184 orang. Kira-kira 55 % daripada responden herumur 40 tahun ke bawah dan 61 % telah berkecimpung dalam profesion perguruan selama lebih daripada 10 tahun.

Soal selidik yang dibentuk mengandungi 51 item telah digunakan untuk mengkaji punca tekanan di kalangan guru. Statistik Deskriptif telah digunakan untuk menganalisis faktor-faktor demografi seperti umur, jantina dan tempoh perkhidmatan. Statistik Inferensi seperti t-Test, Anova (One Way Analysis Of Variance), Pearson Correlation Analysis dan Stepwise Regression Analysis telah digunakan untuk mengkaji korelasi angkubah bebas dan angkubah

iii

bersandar.Analisis tersebut menunjukkan kekuatan dart arah hubungan angkubahangkubah yang dikaji.

Hasil utama daripada kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa tekanan mempunyai hubungan yang signifikan dan positif dengan sistem penilaian guru, gaji dan ganjaran, beban kerja, rakan sejawat, pelajar bermasalah dan pengurusan masa. Dapatan yang diperolehi memperlihatkan bahawa tahap tekanan akan meningkat sekiranya guru menganggap sistem penilaian guru tidak adil dan objektif, dan gaji serta ganjaran yang diterima tidal memuaskan. Tahap tekanan juga akan

meningkat sekiranya beban kerja bertambah, rakan sejawat tidak memberi kerjasama atau sokongan yang diharapkan, masalah di kalangan pelajar meningkat dan pengurusan masa yang tidak cekap. Walau bagaimanapun, tekanan tidak

mempunyai hubungan yang signifikan dengan faktor-faktor demografi seperti umur, jantina dan tempoh perkhidmatan.

Empat angkubah, iaitu pengurusan mass, pelajar bermasalah, beban kerja dan rakan sejawat, secara bersama menjelaskan 34.64 % varians dalam tahap tekanan. Namun demikian, varians dalam tahap tekanan didapati tidak dapat dijelaskan oleh sistem penilaian guru dan gaji dan ganjaran Dapatan ini menunjukkan bahawa 65.36 % varians dalam tahap tekanan masih perlu diperjelaskan. Keadaan ini memperlihatkan bahawa masih terdapat faktor-faktor lam yang hams dipertimbangkan dalam kajian-kajian yang akan datang.

iV

Hasil kajian mendapati pengurusan masa sebagai prediktor terbaik untuk tahap tekanan. Para guru yang mempunyai masalah penguusan masa mendapati bahawa mereka mempunyai sedikit masa untuk berehat dan kekurangan masa untuk rnenyiapkan tugasan yang diberi Dalam kajian ini, tiga petanda tekanan yang menonjol ialah keletihan, berasa tertekan dan sakit kepala.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to investigate the factors which cause stress among secondary school teachers in Georgetown, Penang and factors that they perceived as most stressful. This study also investigated the degree or levels of stress and the manifestations of stress.

A sample size of 80 % was taken from nine secondary schools in Georgetown, Penang. A total of 348 questionnaires were distributed and a response rate of about 75 % (260 questionnaires) was obtained. However, out of the 260 questionnaires returned, 249 were usable. Of the 249 respondents, 65 were males and 184 were females. About 55% of the respondents were below 40 years old and about 61 % of the respondents have been in the teaching profession for more than 10 years.

A self-constructed 51-items questionnaire was used to investigate the correlates of stress among secondary school teachers. Descriptive analysis was used to analyze the respondents demographic factors, Inferential statistics technique such as the tTest, Anova (One Way Analysis Of Variance), Pearson Correlation Analysis and Stepwise Regression Analysis were used to analyze the correlation of the independent and the dependent variables. This analysis showed the strength and direction of the relation.

vi

The major findings of the study showed that stress was significantly and positively related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management. The results showed that stress level tends to increase with poor teacher evaluation system, lower salary and benefits as perceived by the teachers, increased workload, lesser collegial support, increased student misbehavior and poor time management. However, stress among secondary school teachers was not related to demographic factors along age, gender and lengths of service. From the data generated, it was found that there were no significant differences in stress level among teachers of various age groups and lengths of service. Stress level did not differ between male and female teachers.

Four variables, namely time management, student misbehavior, workload and colleagues, jointly explained 34.64 % of the variance in stress level. However, the variance in stress level was not significantly explained by teacher evaluation system and salary and benefits. This implied that 65.36 % of the variance in stress level has yet to be explained. This indicated that there are other factors that need to be considered in future studies of stress among secondary school teachers.

The best predictor for stress level was found to be time management. Teachers who face time management problem found themselves having too little time to relax and insufficient time to complete their work. The three most common symptoms of

vii

stress experienced by secondary school teachers were exhaustion, tension and headache.

Viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Alhamdulillah, praised be to Allah for the completion of this thesis. My gratitude and appreciation to those who have helped, supported and encouraged me, and made this accomplishment possible.

My gratitude and appreciation to Pn Afifah Bt Abu Yazid and Prof. Madya Dr. Mustapah Hj. Daud of Sekolah Pembangunan Sosial, Universiti Utara Malaysia for their professional commitments, guidance and invaluable help throughout their supervision of my thesis.

My thanks and appreciation to the Ministry Of Education, Institut Aminuddin Baki and Universiti Utara Malaysia for providing the opportuni~ master-degree programme. and sponsorship of my

My sincere gratitude and appreciation to Associate Professor Dr. Ibrahim Abdul Hamid, Dean of the Graduate School for his advice, support and encouragement.

My gratitude and appreciation to the Educational Planning And Research Department, Ministry Of Education and the Penang Education Department for their permission to conduct the study.

ix

My special thanks and appreciation to the principals and teachers of the schools who participated in this study for their help and kind co-operation.

My special thanks and appreciation to all my friends who contributed directly or indirectly to this study, especially: Chan Kear Keow, Tan Gaik Suan, Zaleha, Chang Fui Chin and Lim Bee Lee for their help and support.

Finally, my greatest appreciation goes to my beloved husband and family for their love, devotion, immense support and encouragement throughout my studies.

DEDICATED TO:

My husband : Sk. Mohd Sawpi b. Lawi & My beloved children: Muhammad Hazim Muhammad Al Fateh Sheikh Muhammad Zufar Siti Syafawani

xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Title Permission To Use Abstrak Abstract Acknowledgements Dedication Table Of Contents List Of Tables List Of Figures CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Context Of The Problem 1.2 Research Objectives 1.2. I General Objectives 1.2.2 Specific Objectives 1.3 Research Questions 1.4 Research Hypotheses 1.5 Significance Of The Study 1.6 Delimitation Of The Study CHAPTER 2 : CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 2 _1 Review Of Related Literature 2.1-l Stress 2.1.2 Teacher Stress 2.1.3 Stress Level 2.1.4 Demographic Factors 2.1.5 Teacher Evaluation System 2.1.6 Salary And Benefits 2.1.7 Workload

i ii
111

...

vi ix xi xii xv xvii

1 10 10 10 11 12 14 15

16 16 22 26 28 30 31 33

xii

2.1.8 Colleagues 2.1.9 Student Misbehavior 2.1.10 Time Management 2.1.11 Summary of Literature Review 2.2 Research Model 2.3 Definition Of Terms 2.3.1 Conceptual Definitions 2.3.2 Operational Definitions CHAPTER 3 : RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Sources Of Information 3.2.1 Unit Of Analysis 3.2.2 Population 3.2.3 Sample And Sampling Techniques 3.3 Data Collection Techniques 3.3.1 The Instrument 3.3.2 Validation Of Instrument 3.3.3 Data Collection And Administration 3.4 Data Analysis Techniques 3.4.1 Descriptive Analysis 3.4.2 Inferential Statistic 3.4.3 Criteria Used CHAPTER 4 : PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS 4.1 introduction 4.2 Profile Of Respondents 4.3 Major Findings 4.4 Analysis And Discussion Of Findings 4.4.3 Stress Level And Teacher Evaluation, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior And Time Management 4.4.2 Stress Level And Demographic Factors 4.4.3 Stress Level And Various Age Groups 4.4.4 Stress Level And Gender 4.45 Stress Level And Various Lengths Of Service 4.4.6 The Variance In Stress Level And Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior, And Time Management 4.5 Best Predictor For Stress Level 4.6 Other Related Findings 4.6.1 Stress Level 4.6.2 The Manifestations Of Stress

34 36 37 38 39 40 40 46

51 51 51 52 52 54 55 56 59 62 62 62 63

65 66 68 70

70 72 74 76 78

79 81 83 83 84

xiii

CHAPTER 5 : SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND REZCOMME%DATIONS

5.1 summary
5.2 Conclusions 5.3 Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES Appendix A : List Of Secondary Schools In Georgetown, Penang Appendix B : Questionnaires Appendix C : Correspondence

88 92 93 97 107 108 110 122

xiv

LIST OF TABLES Page Table 3.1 Population And Sampling Table 3.2 Distribution Of Questionnaires Table 3.3 Questionnaire Items For Independent Variables Table 3.4 Questionnaire Items For Dependent Variables Table 3.5 Record Of Visits To Schools Table 3.6 Data Collection Table 3.7 Distribution And Retrieval Of Questionnaires Table 3.8 Data Analysis Tools Table 4.1 Profile Of Respondents Table 4.2 Pearson Correlation Coefficients Of Stress Level Table 4.3 Pearson Correlation Coefficients Of Stress Level With Demographic Factors Table 4.4 Analysis Of Variance (Age) Table 4.5 Mean Standard Deviation And T-Test Value Of Stress Level And Gender Table 4.6 Analysis Of Variance ( Length Of Service) Table 4.7 Multiple Regression Coefficient Of Stress Levei Table 4.8 Summary Statistics Of Stepwise Regression Analysis For Stress Level Table 4.9 Percentage And Mean For Stress Level Table 4.10 Frequencies And Mean Of Stress Level (Items 34 - 5 1) Table 4.11 Frequency, Percentage And Mean For Item 34 53 55 57 59 60 61 61 64 67 71 73 75 77 78 81 82 83 85 85

XV

Table 4.12 Frequency, Percentage And Mean For Item 36 Table 4.13 Frequency, Percentage And Mean For ltem 42

86 87

xvi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1.1 The Stimulus Approach To Stress Figure 1.2 The Response Approach Figure 1.3 The Interactionai Approach Figure 2.2 Schematic Diagram Showing The Correlates Of Stress Among Teachers

19 20 21 39

xvii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Context Of The Problem

This study investigated the correlates of stress among secondary school teachers in Georgetown, Penang. The manifestation of stress and factors that contributed to stress among teachers, as well as, factors that they perceived as most stressful were identified.

For several years, the teaching profession, along with most helping profession, has been seen as very stressful, and school factors associated with stress among teachers have been analyzed and debated at length. (Tuettemann and Punch, 1992). Teachers today carry a great deal of responsibilities, having to educate and impart knowledge as well. The Malaysian National Education Philosophy which clearly defined the task and responsibility in the teaching profession, is used as the guiding principles in all matters pertaining to education planning and implementation. Teachers play an important role to uphold this philosophy and to facilitate the achievement of the National Education Goals.

Our present primary and secondary school curriculum which is integrated in nature, were planned, designed, and implemented to reflect the vision, goals and spirit of the National Education Philosophy. Since the implementation of the Integrated Secondary School Curriculum (KBSM - Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah) and the Integrated Primary School Curriculum (KBSR - Kurikuhun Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah), the task, role and responsibility of teachers increased. Consequently, the teachers workload increased. According to a report by the Deputy-Secretary General of The National Union Of The Teaching Profession, many teachers could not complete their charts and course materials on time with the implementation of the new curriculum. Teachers were forced to work on them during their weekends, in addition to marking books and preparing examination papers. (The Star, 11 Sept. 1988)

Nevertheless, the implementation of the new curriculum for primary and secondary schools was aimed at producing all-rounders (right attitudes, good behavior, and balanced physical, mental and spiritual capacities ). Therefore, a teachers first and foremost concern is to mouid students into well-rounded individuals and to ensure that each receives as much personalised help as possible. Students should be disciplined, knowledgeable citizens who will be the future leaders of the country with a sense of responsibility to face the challenges and achieve Vision 2020 (Krishnan, 1995). Thus, teaching offers a wide spectrum of openings, working with children and young people of all ages and backgrounds. Teachers do not merely stand rooted in front of the blackboard

and churn out facts to a particular class, nor do their day ends when the final bell rings. Teachers are also expected to take a full and active part in their pupils development and devise projects, extra-curricular activities and special outings, and cover the relevant academic courses for routine and external examinations. Marking of exercise books, preparing teaching aids and lessons, as well as, keeping abreast with the latest developments of specific subjects or in education, as a whole take up a great deal of the teachers time.

Currently, a lot has been said about the importance of education and teachers role to meet the challenges put forward in Vision 2020 by Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir. The reformation in education and introduction of the Education Mission, which is concerned with the organizational unity, leadership and management style, caring service, empowerment, effective monitoring system, caring school, and the inculcation of a culture of excellence, further stress the responsibilities of teachers toward realizing Vision 2020. Hence, to meet the requirements of Vision 2020, we need a full-force of efficient and well-trained teachers.

However, in the endeavour to attain educational excellence, there are persistent issues in the teaching field. Although teachers are bounded by so many

responsibilities, teachers , in fact, have little authority, especially in dealing with students disciplinary problems. All schools have to follow guidelines regarding the procedures to take when dealing with indiscipline cases. Teachers are not

allowed to cane the students as an act of punishment for their wrong doings. Only, the administrators, namely the principals or senior assistants and the disciplinary teacher are allowed to take such actions (Sunday Strait Times, 30 July 1995). As a result the number of disciplinary problems among students in the secondary schools has increased. Teachers are ridiculed by students because they camrot take action and if they did, they would be assaulted, humiliated and have their cars scratched, or tyres punctured.

In 1993, the number of pupils reported for juvenile delinquency was 138,358 ( New Strait Times, 16 April 1994). Acts of misconduct outlined by the authority include students beating up teachers, fighting, vandalism, truancy, sexual activities, theft, extortion and involvement in drugs. These acts of misconduct often pressured the teachers into punishing the students as a lesson to the others. Unfortunately, the manner in which teachers take to discipline students has attracted much criticism and publicity It has been reported that some parents have even taken the teachers to court and worsen the situation (New Strait Times, 10 August 1996). More often than not, the plight of the teachers have gone unheard; this is indeed demoralizing for the teachers en masse, for who better can assess the situation, if not the teachers who are at the forefront of the battlefield in education. As stated by Tan Sri Awang Had Salleh, Having good curricula, excellent textbooks, and beautiful and comfortable campuses will be of no use if our education army is demoralized (Sunday Straits Times, 28 May 1995).

Teachers, too, often encounter negative yet demanding community attitudes, which reflect a lack of understanding of the type of involvement which teachers work require, and many teachers find this quite distressing. Parental pressure could be a threat to current ways of running a school and this could be a source of conflict, stressful particularly when teachers feel that they are losing control over their decision-making rights as professionals.

The teaching profession , hence, is no easy task. The complexity of the task and the challenges faced are said to be one of the reasons for the causes of stress among teachers. Compared with other white collar workers, teachers are among the worst sufferers of stress (Kyriacou, 1987; OConnors and Clarke, 1990 and Sarros & Sarros, 1990). Having to cope with multiple roles and duties, time pressure, problems with pupil discipline, parental expectations, community expectations, increasing responsibilities and decreasing resources, combined with the rapidity of educational changes that characterise the present, would definitely cause teacher stress.

Teacher stress has become a major problem found in schools all over the world. In the United States, attention has been drawn to the large number of teachers who are showing signs of physical and mental exhaustion. This end product is usually referred as the burnout syndrome. The term burnout has been adopted by teachers and physicians to describe the condition amongst teachers which is comparable with cases of battle fatigue among soldiers in action (Dobson,

Clifford B, 1982) The symptoms of this form of stress are easily identifiable: exhaustion, sleeplessness, loss of interest in work, depression, hypertension, coronary heart disease, gastric ulcer, alcoholism and drug dependence.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) has expressed its concern about teachers stress and has reported that stress is being experienced by most 25 percent of the teaching profession in Britain, America and Sweden and is causing serious health problem (Dobson, Clifford B, 1982). Stress among teachers is affecting the general health causing high rates of absenteeism and

reducing classroom efficiency. Numerous surveys have revealed that a majority of teachers experience job stress and that this results in negative physical, emotional, and behavioral consequences for these teachers, as well as negative effects on students and the teaching profession ( Cecil, Marc A. & For-man, Susan G., 1990).

In Malaysia, it was reported that the number of teachers suffering from psychological disturbances has increased. The Deputy Education Minister mentioned that over the past 5 or 6 years, about 1,000 teachers were found to be mentally unstable. Many of the affected teachers suffered from manic depression and other forms of illness which were not violent in nature (New Strait Times, 1992). The day to day interaction with students and colleagues and the incessant and fragmented demands of teaching often lead to overpowering pressure and challenges that result in stress.

Stress among teachers has been seen as one of the factors that has led to the rising demand and aspiration of teachers for early retirement in the country. In a study conducted by The Star, a local daily, in December 1994, among the main reasons why teachers opt for early retirement were excessive workload, stress, low job satisfaction, low wages, poor working conditions, no promotional prospects, lack of commitment, and dissatisfaction over the New Remuneration System ( The Star, 18 December 1994). It was revealed by Datuk Maphor Baba that a total of 7,000 teachers applied for optional retirement in 1995. This, indeed, resulted in a wide gap in the teaching profession.

The country, currently is facing an acute shortage of teachers nation-wide. There are about 280,000 teachers in the country. Deputy Minister of Education, Datuk Dr. Fong Chan Onn reported that primary schools are still facing a shortage of about 10,000 teachers while secondary schools did not have enough staff for pure Science and English (The Star, 7 Sept. 1996) .

The shortage of teachers, particularly those with experience is creating a problem to the country. A continued absence of good teaching staff would hamper the proper development of the education system, which in turn, would affect the growth of the country. Education plays an important role in meeting the

requirements for the nations industrial growth and development. It is an important

C0UIltI-y.

investment

towards continuous progress and development of the

Therefore, in this respect, undertaking this study is of paramount importance in view of the rising demand to realise Vision 2020 and to ensure Malaysia will be in the league of the industrialized nation. In relation to this, factors causing stress among teachers must be investigated and identified, and effective and efficient measures should be taken to tackle the problems relating to teachers stress.

In a number of countries around the world, a considerable body of literature has been generated in the academic and popular press concerning the reasons for high stress and burnout rates among teachers. In the occupational setting, stress has been found to be of etiological significance in numerous disease states.

Employees with poor occupational self-esteem and those who found their jobs too dull or too filled with unexpected crises were more likely to seek medical care ( French, Tupper, & Mueller, 1965 ). Occupational stress in teaching appears to be a widespread, cross-cultural phenomenon (Dunham, J , 1980; Fletcher, C and Payne, R. L., 1982, and Needle, R. H., et. al., 1980). Researchers have shown that teachers who report high levels of stress, want to leave teaching and are not satisfied with their jobs ((Kyriacou, C and Sutcliffe, 1979) and that high levels of stress are associated with high rates of absenteeism (Simpson, J. , 1976; Dworkin, 1987 and Stinnnet & Henson, 1982) and with poor

psychological health (Pratt, J., 1978; Tuettemann, Elizabeth and Punch, Keith F., 1992).

However a lot of findings regarding stress among teachers recognize the need for further research. Kyriacou and Sutcliffe recognized the need for further research to establish the validity of their work (Dobson, Clifford B, 1982). Solman and Feld (1989) indicated that further information is needed concerning the level of stress among teachers. Tuettemann, E and Punch, K. F. (1992) suggested further investigation on sex differences and their relationship with stress since they have not been prominent in the research literature.

In Malaysia, studies on stress among teachers are still a scarcity. Kassim (1990) studied the relationship between stress, job satisfaction and intention to leave among teachers who taught the Integrated Secondary School Curriculum. Seah Kwee Siang (1995) investigated the correlations between stress and administrative support with job satisfaction and health among teachers. Che Yaacob bin Che Mat (1995) investigated the determinants of stress among primary school Mathematic teachers. Abdul Wahid (1996) studied on

occupational stress among teachers and Leong Sow Chew (1995) studied on perceived organizational stressors and burnout among teachers.

To conclude, studies on teacher stress in Malaysia has yet to be carried out to obtain more valid findings. Furthermore, problems associated with teacher stress could be determined and the consequences of stress would then reveal the seriousness of the subject matter and the impact it has on the nation, as a whole.

1.2 Research Objectives

1.2.1 General Objective

The primary objective of this study is to investigate the correlates of stress among secondary school teachers in Georgetown, Penang.

1.2.2 Specific Objectives

Specifically, this study attempted :

i.

to determine the relationship between stress level, teachers evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management;

ii. to determine the relationship between stress level and demographic factors along age, gender and length of service among secondary school teachers; iii. to investigate the difference in stress level among secondary school teachers of various age groups; iv. to investigate the difference in stress level between male and female secondary school teachers; v. to investigate the difference in stress level among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service; and

10

vi. to investigate whether the variance in stress level

could be

significantly explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management.

1.3 Research Questions

This study attempted to provide answers to the following questions:

i. Is stress among secondary school teachers related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management? ii. Is stress among secondary school teachers related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service? iii. Will the stress level differ significantly among secondary school teachers of various age groups? iv. Will stress level differ significantly between male and female secondary school teachers? v. Will stress level differ significantly among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service? vi. Will the variance in stress level be significantly explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management?

11

1.4 Research Hypotheses

This study attempted to investigate the following research hypotheses, based on the test of the null hypotheses.

i. %I :

Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to teacher

evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management

Ha1 : Stress among secondary school teachers is related to teacher evaluation

system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management.

ii. l& :

Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic

factors along age, gender and length of service.

@x2

: Stress among secondary school teachers is related to demgraphic

factors along age, gender and length of service.

iii. I&3

: Stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the

various age groups.

12

Ha3

Stress level will differ among secondary school teachers of the various

age groups.

iv. I-&)4 :

Stress level will not differ between male and female secondary school

teachers.

He4

Stress level will differ between male and female secondary school

teachers

v. I+&,, : Stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service.

)I85 :

Stress level will differ among secondary school teachers of various

lengths of service.

vi. l&j

: The variance in stress level is not significantly explained by teacher

evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management.

J&6

The variance in stress level is significantly explained by teacher

evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management.

13

1.5 Significance Of The Study

This study would hopefully generate knowledge about the determinants of stress among secondary school teachers in the urban areas. Secondly, it is hoped that it would build theories based on the research findings and generate a new framework to investigate the research problem in the context of a Malaysian setting. And thirdly, it would help in the generation of new

hypotheses related to the research study.

The findings of this study would also benefit the Ministry of Education, policy makers, the State Education Department , school administrators, and teachers, on the whole, because the data generated would enable them :

i.

to understand the phenomenon of stress among secondary school teachers;

ii. to realize the significant consequences of stress among secondary school teachers and the effect it has on the education system; iii. to initiate policies and develop stress management programs to reduce teacher stress , with the hope that it could lead to increased teaching effectiveness and improve students performance; iv. to identify and remedy teacher stress; v. to plan, lead, organize, control and coordinate programs towards the advancement of education and generate information for decision making.

14

1.6 Delimitation Of The Study

This study is delimited to an investigation of the relationship between demographic factors and work stressors with stress level among secondary school teachers. The subject for this study was limited to teachers in Georgetown, Penang. secondary school

Since only nine secondary schools in

Georgetown were involved in the study, the findings might not be generalized to all secondary school teachers in the country.

15

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Review Of Related Literature

2.1.1 stress

Stress has become a common metaphor for the modem turmoil of everyday life and part and parcel of the human condition (Powell & Enright, 1990). Although the use of the word stress has become common in both lay and professional circles, theories and researchers have been unable to agree on a common definition on the term.

The earliest and most influential conceptualization of stress came from Han Selye. Selye formulated the General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS) to describe the biological level of how stress can incapacitate an individual (Geiss, R. J., 1985). He observed an identical series of biochemical changes in a number of organism adapting to a variety of environmental conditions (Fincham, R & Rhodes, P.S., 1988). The three stages in this

16

process are labelled alarm, resistance and exhaustion. Whether an activity or stimulus becomes a stressor depends on a persons culture, personal and family background experiences, mood and other circumstances at the time (Geiss, R. J., 1985). Hence, Selye (1976) discussed stress in terms of the bodys physical response to a demand. Regardless of whether the demand (i.e. stressor) was negative or positive, the physiology of the organism responded to it. Therefore, Selye spoke of good ( eustress) and bad (distress) stress (Romano, J. L., 1992).

Selyes discovery of the biochemical and physiological pathways of stress response has been of immense significance. A number of researchers, however, have not followed Selye in seeing stress as simply a response. One major group of writers has argued that stress has to be seen as a function of an individuals appraisal of a situation. People do not respond directly to a stimulus but to the meaning a stimulus may have in relation to their model of the environment. This implies that events in the environment are not themselves stressful: they must be perceived by the individual as a threat before the stress concept can be applied ( Lazarus, A. S. & Folkman,
S. , 1984) According to this view, the impact of a stressor is mediated by

the individuals appraisal of the stressor in terms of risk to the person and his or her ability to cope with the situation.

17

Stress conceived as a stimulus (Life Events Research) has been used to describe situations characterized as new, intense, rapidly changing, sudden, or unexpected. Stressful stimuli can also include stimulus deficit, absence of expected stimulation, highly persistent stimulation, fatigue, and boredom. Other stimulus situations mentioned in the literature as stressful are a) loss of personal, physical, cognitive, or affective functions; b) frustration of anticipated rewards or goal attainment; c) failure of or change in social feedback mechanisms; d) impulse flooding; and e) approach-avoidance conflict situations ( Zegans, L.S., 1993 ). Stress as a stimulus concept has

triggered very active research on possible connections between stress and bodily illness.

A research on stress further found that stress is the physiological and psychological reaction which occurs when people perceived an imbalance between the level of demand placed upon them, and their capability to meet those demands. (Cranwell-Ward, J., 1990). Dubrin (1994) defined stress

as the mental and physical condition that results from a perceived threat or demand that cannot be dealt readily. If you perceive something to be dangerous or challenging, you will experience the bodily response known as stress, Stress is also defined as a dynamic condition in which an individual is confronted with an opportunity, constraints, or demand related to what he or she desires and for which the outcome is perceived to be both uncertain and important. According to Nazar Mohamed Mahmood (1987),

18

for practical purpose, stress can be understood as a phenomenon which results in intense and distressing experience and appears to be of tremendous influence in behavior. It is the cause and effect of stress that is important from the view of the human experience.

A study of expert on stress showed that it can be described in one of three ways- the stimulus approach, the response approach , or the interactional approach (Cranwell-Ward, J., 1990).

The stimulus approach describes stress as an external factor or force. In this theory, stress is considered to be a potential stimulus in the environment. The theory is analogous to an engineering model in that it assumes that people have certain capacity to withstand stress; if a person is stressed more than that amount, the individual begins to deteriorate. Likewise, if a building is subjected to excessive stress, permanent damage will result. This is shown in Figure 1.1.

STRESS

STRAIN

External force EXCESSIVE STRESS COLLAPSE/PERMANENT DAMAGE

Figure 1.1 : The Stimulus Approach to Stress

19

Some researchers have developed this approach further, stating that stress arises when the level of demand on the person departs from optimum conditions. External factors will be referred to as stressors.

The response oriented theory which was adopted by Dr Hans Selye, focus on the reactions made by a person to environmental demands. He called this reaction the general adaptation syndrome (GAS). The response may be physiological or psychological, as shown in Figure 1.2.

Physiological STRESSORS - S T R E S S (in the environment) / Reaction Psychological Reaction Figure 1.2 : The Response Approach

In psychological research, a variety of response oriented measures have been used. These measures emphasized the pattern and amplitude of emotional responses to stress (Dorin, 1985).

The interactional approach takes the understanding of stress a stage further, by intensively studying the interaction between the person and his or her environment. This approach describes stress as the results of imbalance

20

between the level of demand placed on people, as they perceive it, and their perceived capability to meet the demands, This is shown in Figure 1.3.

Demands Potential Stressors

I

Capacity to meet demands

T Appraisal by the
Imbalance = STRESS 1 / Stress Response 1

Physiolo-gical Response Figure 1.3 : The Interactional Approach

Psychological Response

In the Interactional Approach, people are believed to play a more interactive part, weighing up the demands of the situation in which they find themselves and appraising their own capability to meet those demands. Everyone perceives situations differently. Even the same person can perceive the same situation differently on separate occasions (CranwellWard, J, 1990).

Theories, concepts and studies on stress indicate that three sets of factors: environmental, organizational and individual cause stress. However,

21

whether they become actual stress or not depends on individual differences, such as job experiences and personality. Mandler (1979) argued that external stressors are effective, to the extent when they are perceived, interpreted and comprehended as dangerous and threatening, that is to the extent they are cognitively interpreted. But one must also keep in mind that people and groups of people differ in their sensitivity and vulnerability to stress, to the type of events that cause stress and their interpretation and reactions to these events ( Nazar Mohamed Mahmood, 1987)

2.1.2 Teacher Stress

Occupational stress in teaching appears to be a wide spread, cross-cultural phenomenon (Dunham, J.,1980; Fletcher, C. & Payne, R. L. ;1982, Neele et. Al., 1980). A number of researchers have reported the extent to which teachers perceive their job to be stressful ( eg. Kyriacou & Sutcliffe, 1977, 1978a, 1979a,1979b; Broiles, 1982; Laughlin, 1984; Solmon & Feld, 1989). Although variation in the proportion of teachers who rate their job highly stressful is to be expected ( primarily due to differences in the context and the different points in time when the studies were carried out), it does appear from the cited studies (all of which used the same single item measure of self-reported stress) that about one-fifth to one-third of the surveyed teachers considered their job as being either very stressful or extremely stressful (Borg & Falzon, 1991). Numerous surveys have revealed

22

that a majority of teachers experienced job stress and that this resulted in negative physical, emotional and behavioral consequences for these teachers, as well as negative effects on students and the teaching profession.

In order to gain insight into what causes and / or contributes to stress in teaching researchers have sought to identify the major sources of stress for teachers and the dimensional ( factor) structure underlying these sources. Studying the correlates of stress among teachers may improve the understanding of stress in the teaching profession and the factors which cause stress on teachers most, as well as the detrimental effect it has on teachers.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) has identified a number of likely stressors which include : various types of violence in schools, classes which are too large, pressures which occur from long working hours, low salaries of teachers compared with other workers, poor prospect, and job insecurity (Dobson, 1982). The findings by Tuettemann and Punch (1992) are consistent with that identified by the ILO. They singled out the fact that factors in the school environments correlate positively with teacher stress. The four most salient factors were inadequate access to facilities, student misbehavior, excessive societal expectations, and intrusion of school work into out-of-hours time. So does workload, but not as strongly.

23

However, further research on stress found evidence of effects of workload. For example, Spector (1987) and Davis (1992) found significant positive correlations between workload and anxiety, frustration, reported symptoms and job dissatisfaction. Findings by Randall (1993) also cited that workload is one of the main stressors which constitutes teacher burnout. There were significantly high corelations between some dimension s of burnout and depressive symptoms.

Davis (1992) identified that lack of support by administration, overcrowded classroom, and apathetic students were the most reported sources of stress. Teachers were reported to be suffering from stress-related physical ailments such as frequent accidents, colitis, headaches, hypertension , and insomnia. Boyes (1993) identified stressors which contributed to

teachers turnover. These were lack of peer support, lack of program leadership and structure, the need to develop curricula and materials, loss of personal time, difftculties in serving multiple schools, heavy teaching assignments, difficulties with teaching both regular and gifted classes, physical demands of the job, inadequate space, scheduling difficulties with meeting the needs of the gifted.

Significant correlations were also found in items for age, sex and years taught (Bunch, 1992). He found that time management, work related stressors (i.e. class size, paperwork, lesson plan) and fatigue were more

24

significant sources and manifestation of stress for women

than men.

Solman & Feld (1989) found that significant differences were detected between teachers of different ages in their response to stress owing to the tone of the school, misbehavior of the pupils and the demands of a changing curriculum. Findings by Kysriacou & Sutcliffe (1979) also showed the differences in sex. Female teachers found pupil misbehavior significantly to be more stressful than did their male colleagues. These findings contradicted with the meta-analytic review conducted by Martocchio and OLeary (1989) that suggested that there were no differences in

experienced stress between men and female in a work setting.

Time management and teacher evaluation (Bergin, 1993, EarlJ993) and colleagues, salary and benefits (Earl, 1993) were also identified as among the top stressors. Earl noted the top three manifestation of stress : headaches and muscle tension, fatigue and exhaustion, and irritability with students with some differences in frequencies of manifestations among teachers at various career stages.

The effect of stress on teachers varies, some perceived high stress levels, others moderate or low stress. Stress can have either short or long-term effect. The effect of stress depends on : the degree of individual reactivity to a stressor; the duration of reactivity over time; the background of long-

25

term

physiological arousal, and whether the stressor cause greater

activation in the pituitary or adrenomedullary system (Pelletier, 1979). Burnout has been identified as one type of chronic response to

cummulative, long-term negative impact of work stress among teachers.

2.1.3 Stress Level

Manifestation of stress reflects the stress level experienced by teachers. This study, will determine whether a teacher is experiencing high, moderate or low stress. Symptoms of stress either physiological, psychological or behavioral will be used as a measure of stress. Walt, S. (1987) revealed that how a person move or hold his or her body conveys a great deal about his or her internal tension or stress.

According to Robbins (1993), stress level may be measured along physiological symptoms such as increase heart and breathing rates, increase blood pressure, headaches, induced heart attack; psychological symptoms such as tension, anxiety, irritability, boredom, procastination; and

behavioral symptoms such as changes in productivity, absence turnover, changes in eating habits, increase smoking, rapid speech, fidgeting or sleep disorder.

26

Walt, S. (1987) reported that stress level exhibit physical distress signals, emotional distress signals, thinking distress signals and behavioral distress signals. The specific meaning and importance of these signals can best be determined by the person experiencing them. Among the distress signals listed are :
physical - dryness of mouth or throat from tension, general fatigue or

heaviness, slow recovery from a stressful event, diarrhea, trembling or nervous twitch, prouding of health from tension, headache, chest pain, neck pain, back pain, upset stomach, lost of appetite , frequent need to urinate and increase appetite;
emotional- depressed feelings, emotional ups and downs, strong urge

to cry, strong urge to run away from it all, strong urge to hurt someone, feelings of being emotionally unstable, feelings of

joylessness, feelings of anxiety, feelings of being fed up, feelings of sadness, fear of the future, fear of others disapproval, fear of failing, fear that others are out to get me, difficulty falling asleep, difficulty sleeping through the night, more impatient than usual, struggling to get up to face another day, feeling that things are out of control and feelings of hopelessness;
thinking - fuzzy, fogy thinking, forgetfulness, mental block, difficult

to organize thoughts, inability to concentrate, bizzarre, disjointed

27

thoughts, inward preoccupation interfering with listening and nightmares; and behavioral - irritability, compulsive, spur of the moment a actions, talking faster than usual, easily startled, shuttering or stumbling in speech, grinding teeth, difficulty sitting still, verbal attack on someone, difficulty staying with one activity very long, significant interpersonal conflict, short-tempered, withdrawn, crying spells and lashing out at something or someone.

2.1.4 Demographic Factors

A number of researchers revealed that the level of teacher stress was constituted differently in some of the teachers demograhic subgroups (Borg & Falzon, 1991; Kyriacou & Sutcliffe, 1978b; Trendall, 1989). The two most salient differences between male and female responses to stressful school factors are those concerning collegial support and excessive societal expectations. The next concerns the ameliorating effects of praiserecognition (Punch & Tuettemann, 1990). In the first case, the perceived extent of collegial support is a powerful factor in the likelihood of psychological distress among male teachers, but much less for female teachers. Thus, for males in potentially stressful situations, inadequate collegial support is very stressful.

28

On the other hand, studies by Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b), Dobson (1982), Borg & Falzon (199 1) revealed that female teachers found several items regarding student misbehavior as greater sources of stress than their male collegues. Female teachers reported greater stress in respect of punishing pupils, pupils not accepting teachers authority, misbehavior, noisy pupils, and impolite behavior or cheek (Dobson, 1982).

Studies also showed that younger and less experienced teachers were more stressed than their colleagues on a number of items: punishing pupils, difficult classes, shortage of equipment, pupils misbehavior, maintaining class discipline, poor facilities, inadequate salary, poor promotion

opportunities, lack of participation in decision making, supervision duties, attitudes and behavior of headmaster, poor career structure and generally low ability of pupils.

This findings contradict that of Borg & Falzon (1991). They found that experienced teachers reported greater stress than their less experienced colleagues. Indeed, one would have thought that with increasing experience and expertise, teachers would find their job less demanding and stressful. However, since the more experienced teachers are also likely to be older, it may be that beyond a certain age, the demands of the job become too great. Perhaps the teachers become increasingly less tolerant of most aspects of

29

their work (eg. Pupil misbehavior, school administration, parental pressure and interference) so the job is perceived as more stressful.

2.1.5 Teacher Evaluation System

Teacher evaluation is part of the life of teachers. It is an integral component in the professional life-cycle of teachers, from the time they decide to join the profession through their process of training, their certification, their employment, and their professional development. But teacher evaluation is usually perceived as a means to control teachers, to motivate them, to hold them accountable for their services, or to get rid of them when their performance is poor (Nevo, D., 1994). Thus teacher evaluation has the image of something that was invented against teachers rather than fur teachers.

In Malaysia, the implementation of the New Remuneration System (SSB) has created dissatisfaction among the teachers (The Star, 18 Dec. ,1994). The increase in pay annually, whether diagonal, vertical, horizontal or static is determined by the evaluation carried out by administrators. It is claimed that those who are close or on good terms with the administrators

30

have a better chance of being rewarded either the diagonal or vertical increment. Teachers should be evaluated for qualities like professionalism, dedication and ability rather than subservience. The success of NRS depends largely on evaluators who are impervious to factors aother than performance. It was reported that NRS did not do justice to teachers. Appraisal unedr tha NRS had been unfair, unobjctive and unreliable (Chua, 1994).

In view of this, teacher evaluation system has created frustration and dissatisfaction, thus stirring stress among teachers. Studies by IL0 (cited by Dobson, 1982), Bergin (1993), and Earl (1993) have identified that teacher evaluation is among the factors that contribute to the stress in teachers.

2.1.6 Salary And Benefits

Lawler ( 1971) developed a multivariate model of determinants of pay satisfaction which suggests that pay satisfaction is a function of two perceptions: the amount of pay a person feels he should receive and the amount of pay a person feels he does receive. The model predicts that a person who feels he has relatively high personal job inputs, a more demanding job, lower non-monetary outcomes and higher past earnings will

31

feel that he should receive a relatively high level of pay. If a person feels that he or she is underpaid, the feeling of stress exists.

The NEA research as cited by Cottrell(l980)

reported that teachers feel that

their low salaries are, in a way a reflection of their communitys respect for them, and this perception decreases their job satisfaction. They feel overworked, unappreciated and underpaid. A study by Edworthy (1988) showed that 54.1% of the respondents experienced stress due to poor salary. Studies by Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b), Laughlin (1984), Payne & Furnham ( 1987) and Okebukola & Jegede (1989) identified that work conditions as one major factor of stress. This factor typically encompasses items dealing with aspects of professional development (eg. poor career structure and inadequate salary). Borg (1990) cited as report by Cox that poor promotion is one main source of stress.

Teachers feel that they are not getting adequate compensation, in terms of recognition for their effort, adequate salary and promotion prospect. The mass rally of 4,000 teachers ( February 1995 ) at the Civic Center in Petaling Jaya, organized by the National Union Of Teaching Profession in Malaysia submitted a memorandum providing details of the grievances of teachers. Among the grievances mentioned were lack of fringe benefits, the

32

implementation of the New Remuneration System (SSB) to determine increase in pay and limited opportunities for promotion.

2.1.7 Workload

Workload in this study refers to work overload. Borg and Riding (1993) defined workload as having to do with excessive work and too much responsibility. Having too much to do can create stress for a person in two

ways: first, the person becomes fatigued and thus less able to tolerate annoyances and irritations; second, a person subjected to unreasonable work demands may feel perpetually behind schedule, a situation that itself is a powerful stressor (Dubrin, A. J. , 1994).

Trendall (1989) found that the most apparent stressor is teaching workload. Teachers have too many responsibilities. Playing too many role, can lead to diversion of attention over many things. The burden of attending to many responsibilities, if sustained too long, can wear a person out (Yeo, A. ,1985). Borg (1990) cited studies by Cox (1977) and DArcy (1989) that identified workload as the main source of stress. Studies by Punch and Tuettenmann (1990,1992) showed the same findings.

33

Overload also occurs when discrepancies exist between professional preparation and actual work assignments. In one study, a group of middle class, college-educated men hired as managers experienced less illness than a second group of men who had not completed college but were promoted to managerial positions. Similarly, Cornwell University researchers found more illness among workers whose education were inconsistent with their occupation than among those whose social background and aspirations coincide with their employment (Gmelch, W.H., 1982).

2.1.8 Colleagues

Colleagues here refer to collegial support, that is the level of school spirit, support and friendliness among teachers at school (Tuettenmann & Punch, 1992). The more they have support, see themselves as effective, receive praise and recgnition, and are given autonomy, the less destructive, in terms of psychological distress they are. In general, people with established

support network ( eg. close relationship with family members, friends, coworkers) are in better mental physical states than the unsupported individuals (Walt, S. , 1987). A person manifests less fear and stress and greater courage in the presence of others than alone.

34

Hence, poor staff relationship (conflict among colleagues or staff, lack of friendly and supportive atmosphere among staff) were identified as stress factor (Payne & Furnham, 1987; Borg & Falzon, 1991). Teachers who experienced high levels of burnout, find stressors associated with interpersonal relationships to be more stressful than teachers who experienced low levels of burnout. This is not surprising considering that one of the characteristics of burnout is depersonalized attitude toward others (Pierce $ Molloy, 1990).

The findings above are in agreement with the literature which contends that social support helps to reduce the negative effects of stress (eg. Pinneau, 1976; House, 1981; Walt, S., 1987). In particular, these results support Laughlins (1984a) finding that teachers perceptions of stress were reduced by perceived support from colleagues and special friends on their school staff and that poor psychological health was attenuated by colleagues support. These results suggest that teachers who work in an environment which they perceived as being supportive are less likely to experience high levels of burnout (Pierce & Molloy, 1990).

In a study of staff stress in two West German and two English comprehensive schools, Dunham (1980) asked 59 German and 69 English

35

teachers to complete a checklist meant to identify stress situations in schools. The interview data showed that the two major sources of stress reported by both groups of teachers were pupil behavior and poor staff communication.

2.1.9 Student Misbehavior

Dealing with troublesome students has always been a source of stress for many teachers, especially those undergoing their probationary period, and with fewer sanctions available to teachers today, this problem has been aggravated (Dobson, C. B., 1982). Classroom indiscipline may be rated on a continuum ranging from cheek to the more serious forms of violent and disruptive behavior. Indeed some students become so disruptive that they have to be sent to special centers for disruptive children. Before this stage is reached, however, some teachers will have paid the price of trying to cope with anti-social behavior in their students.

Students indiscipline in particular, have frequently been identified as important source of stress for teachers ( Trendall, 1989; Kyriacou & Sutcliffe , 1979a) and any teacher knows that disruptive and badly behaved

36

pupils are particularly demanding and stressful to deal with (Tuettemarm & Punch, 1992).

A research carried out by Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b, 1979a) found that the highest mean value were pupil poor attitude to work, poorly motivated pupils, individual ppupils who continually misbehave,and pupil who show a lack of interest. These fmdings are in line with a study carried out by Coldicott (1985) that identified difficult individual pupil, pupils attitude to work as great source of stress ( represented a very stressful situation to about 28 % of the respondent ) This makes it clear that disruptive behavior of students is an important area of potential stress for many teachers

2.1.10 Time Management

Too much work can create too little time. Too little time or lack of time may also be due to poor time management. Poor time management may result in a person finding himself or herself with insufftcient time to complete his or her work at a given time. Work is not organized efftciently. For example taking on extra jobs before completing on-going assignments, and doing tomorrows work before completing todays (Yeo, A., 1985).

37

Pierce & Molloy (1990) cited the findings of Beasley et al. (1983) that the total sample in their study ranked time management problems as being the most stressful factors. Trendall (1989) in her study of stress in teaching and teacher effectiveness, found that the most apparent stressors were lack of time. A study by Solman & Feld (1989) on teachers in Catholic Schools in New South Wales, Australia, identified that insufficient time to carry out their teaching and organizational task as giving rise to the greatest stress.

Wilkinson (1988) found that time pressure is a source of stress while Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b) mentioned that lack of time to spend with individual pupils, not enough time to do the work and lack of time for marking are among the factors that cause stress to the teachers.

2.1.11 Summary Of Literature Review

In summary, the review of literature on correlates of stress among teachers are categorized by their determinants of stress levels which exhibit itself through physiological, psychological and behavioral distress. The levels of stress, whether high, moderate or low, depends on how each determinant is perceived by teachers and how they cope with it. Individual differences such as sex, gender and teaching experience also convey to a different level of stress among teachers. The variables identified in this study to be associated with stress levels are demographic factors, work stressors such as

38

teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management, which lead to a conceptual framework as shown in Figure 2.2 .

2.2 Research Model

Independent Variables Demographic Factors

l

age gender length of service + -

Dependent Variables , Stress Levels i. Physiological Symptoms

0 b c

Work Stressors
l

ii. Psychological Symptoms

Teacher Evaluation System Salary and benefits Workload Colleagues Student Misbehavior Time Management 1

a
l

iii. Behavioral Symptoms 1

Figure 2.2 : Schematic Diagram Showing The Correlates Of Stress Among Teachers

39

The model in Figure 2.2 shows the expected relationships between the dependent and the independent variables. The dependent variable is stress level which is measured by physiological symptoms, psychological symptoms and behavioral symptoms. The independent variables are

demographic factors, teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management.

2.3 Definition Of Terms

2.3.1 Conceptual Definitions

i. Stress

Stress is described in terms of the pressure on the individual, the effects of such pressure and the individuals response to this pressure (Borg, 1990). There is a general consensus, however, that stress is a physical, mental or emotional reaction from an individuals response to environmental tensions, conflicts, pressures, and similar stimuli. Kyriacou & defined the state of stress in teachers as: Sutcliffe (1978)

40

a response syndrome of negative effects (such as anger or depression) mediated by an appraisal of threat to teachers selfesteem or well-being.. . . . . .It is usually accompanied by other phenomena which may be regarded as response correlates of teacher stress; these.. . . May be psychological. . . . .physiological . . _ .or . behavioral..

The symptoms of teacher stress or distress include : physical or physiological manifestations such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, peptic ulcer, sleep disturbances, and stomach upsets; behavioral manifestations such as deterioration in interpersonal relations or in work performance, increase defensiveness or self concern, irritability, extreme apathy or withdrawal; and psychological or emotional manifestations such as anxiety, confused thinking, depression, feelings of inadequacy, frustration, panic and phobias (Punch, K. F & Tuettemann, 1990).

ii. Teacher Evaluation System

Teacher evaluation system is a performance evaluation. According to Robbins, S. P. (1993), an employees future is closely tied to his or her appraisal - promotions, pay raises, and continuation of employment are among the most obvious outcomes. The performance appraisal represents an assessment of an employeess work. While this can be objective (for example, a salesperson is appraised on how many dollars of sales she

41

generates in her territory), many jobs are evaluated in subjective terms, such as in the case of teacher evaluation system. Subjective measures are, by definition, judgemental. The evaluator forms a general impression of an employees work. To the degree that administrators use subjective measures in appraising employees, what the evaluator perceives to be good or bad employee characteristics/ behavior will significantly influence the appraisal outcome. A major goal of performance evaluation is to assess accurately an individuals performance contribution as a basis for making reward allocation decisions. If the performance evaluation process emphasizes the wrong criteria or inaccurately appraises actual job performance, employee will be over- or underrewarded (Robbins, 1993). This can lead to negative consequences such as reduced effort, increases in absenteeism, or search for alternative job opportunities.

iii. Salary And Benefit

Salary and benefits refers to extrinsic reward which include direct compensation, indirect compensation, and nontmancial rewards (Robbins, 1993). An employee expects some form of direct compensation: a basic wage or salary, overtime, holiday premium pay, and bonuses. Employees will expect their direct compensation generally to align with their

42

assessment of their contribution to the organization and, additionally, will expect it to be comparable to the direct compensation given to other employees with similar abilities and performance.

Employees want pay systems and promotion policies that they perceive as being just, unambiguous, and in line with their expectations. When pay is seen as fair based on job demands, individual skill level, and community pay standards, satisfaction is likely to result. The key in linking pay satisfaction is not the absolute amount one is paid; rather , it is the perception of fairness. Similarly, employees seek fair promotion policies and practices. Promotions provide opportunities for personal growth, more responsibilities, and increased social status.

iv. Workload

Workload refers to quantitative overload and qualitative overload. Quantitative overload exists when the individual has too much work to do in a given period of time. He may be fully competent in his work but the time restriction is what elicits the stress reaction (Beech, Burns & Sheffield, 1983). Quantitative overload could involve working for long hours without appropriate rest periods, as with excessive time. It can be created by an

43

inability to complete work due to frequent interruptions or by the imposition of unrealistic deadlines.

Qualitative overload exists when the work exceeds the technical or intellectual competence of the individual (Beech, Burns & Sheffield, 1983). The work may demand continuous concentration, innovation and meaningful decisions. An important factor contributing to qualitative

overload is job complexity. The higher the inherent difficulty of the work, which may require a great deal of sophisticated information and high-level academic skills, the more stressful the job.

v. Colleagues

For most employees, work also fills the need for social interaction. Colleagues play an important part in providing social supports that can help people to cope with stress. Since social supports provide the individual with a means of expressing his or her feelings, finding meaning in crises with others, receiving material and, providing information, developing realistic goals and receiving feedback, lack of it (lack of social support) can create stress. (Walt, S, 1987)

44

Many organization theorists have , in fact, suggested that good relations between organization members can be a key factor in improving organizational health (Adam, J. D., 1980). Poor relations have been defined as those which include low trust, low supportiveness, and low interest in listening to and trying to deal with the problems that confront the organization member.

vi. Student Misbehavior

Student misbehavior refers to the behavior of students that are against the the school regulations. Truancy continues to be the major disciplinary problem among secondary school students. other misbehavior problems are impoliteness, smoking, wasting time, malingering, criminal activities such as gambling, theft, blackmail, threatening other students and go against the teachers. All schools have to follow guidelines regarding the procedures to take when faced with indiscipline cases.

45

vi. Time Management

Many people manage their time poorly. The things they have to accomplish in any given day or week are not necessarily beyond completion if they manage their time properly (Robbins, 1993). When people complain of lack of time, it may be that they are not organizing their work effectively.

Time management is more exactly the management of activities we engage in during our of time. Time management is self-management. Managing oneself is like managing anything else. It invovles certain skill, planning, organizing, implementing and controlling. (Ferner, J. D. ,198O). So an understanding and utilization of basic time management principles can help individuals better cope with job demand.

2.3.2 Operational Definition

i. Stress Level - In this study, stress level refers to the negative stress or distress experienced by secondary school teachers. This stress level can be either high, medium or low and be measured along physiological symptoms, psychological symptoms and behavioral symptoms.

46

Physiological

symptoms

- refer to signs of exhaustion, neck pain,

headache, stomach upset, back pain and slow recovery from stressful event by secondary school teachers in Penang. The teachers were assessed by items 34 -39 in the questionaire.

Pcychological

Smptoms - refer to the experience of tension, emotional

ups and downs, short tempered, feel bothered when dependent upon the actions of others, feelings of impatience, and feeling of having to struggle to face another day by secondary school teahers in Penang. This variable was tapped through item 40 - 45 in the questionnaire.

Behavioral Symptoms - refer to the behavior experienced such as easily startled, talking faster than usual at the workplace, facing difficulties in sitting still, tendency being absent from work, difficulty in staying with one activity very long and difficulty sleeping through the night by secondary school teachers in Penang. This variable was tapped through item 46 - 51 in the questionnaire

47

ii. Age - En this study, age refers to the present age of teachers in a range of below 30 to above 45. This variable was tapped through item 1 in the questionnaire.

iii. Gender - In this study, gender classifies teachers as male or female and was tapped through item 2 in the questionnaire.

iv. Length of Service - In this study, length of service refers to the number of years in the teaching profession in a range from below 5 years to above 15 years. This variable was tapped through item 3 in the questionnaire.

v. Teacher Evaluation System - Teacher evaluation system refers to the objectivity and fairness in the implementation of the evaluation system under the New Remuneration System (NRS) or SSB (Sistem Saraan Baru) which was implemented in 1992. This variable was tapped through items 4 - 8 in the questionnaire.

48

vi. Salary And Benefits - In this study, salary and benefits refer to the amount of salary earned per month and the benefits gained from the salary scheme in the teaching profession. This variable was tapped through items 9 - 13 in the questionnaire.

vii. Workload - Workload refers to the amount of responsibilities handled by the teachers such as too much paperwork, heavy teaching assignments, and involvement in co-curriculum activities. This variable was tapped through items 14 - 18 in the questionnaire.

viii. Colleagues - In this study, colleagues refers to collegial support and the interpersonal relationships among the teachers. This variable was tapped through items 19 - 23 in the questionnaire.

ix. Student Misbehavior

- Student misbehavior refers to student

disciplinary problems or acts of students which violates school regulations. This variable was tapped through items 24 - 28 in the questionnaire.

49

x. Time Management

- Time management refers to how a teacher

manages his or her work within a given period of time. This variable was tapped through items 29 - 33 in the questionnaire.

50

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This is a descriptive study which investigated the correlates of stress among secondary school teachers in Penang. This study investigated the significant sources and manifestations of stress among secondary school teachers, and identified factors that they perceived as most stressful

3.2 Sources Of Information

3.2.1 Unit Of Analysis

The unit of analysis of this study is the individual. The individual here refers to a teacher of a secondary school in Georgetown, Penang. The data was gathered from each individual.

51

3.2.2 Population

Population refers to the entire group of people, events or things of interest that the researcher wishes to investigate (Sekaran,U., 1992) There are 41

secondary schools on Penang Island, of which 32 are classified as urban secondary schools and are situated in Georgetown. The total population of teachers in Georgetown is 2 16 1 _

3.2.3 Sample And Sampling Technique

In this study, systematic sampling technique was used in the selection of nine urban secondary schools in Georgetown, Penang. Firstly, a list of all secondary schools in Georgetown was obtained from the Penang State Of Education (Jabatan Pendidikan Pulau Pinang ). (Refer to the list attached in Appendix A.) From this list the researcher used every fourth school to choose the nine secondary schools for the study. The total teacher

population of the nine secondary schools was 437. According to Table 8.3 ( Sekaran, U., 1992), a minimum of 205 is required as the sample size from a population of 440. However in this study, a sample size of about 80% was taken from each of the nine school. A total of about 348 questionnaires were distributed to the secondary school teachers in nine schools as shown in Table 3.1.

52

Table 3.1 : Population And Sampling NO. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. NAME OF SCHOOL ADDRESS

N 34 54 52 34 43 80 65 16 59 437

n 28 43 41 27 35 64 50 13 47 348

SMKA Almashoor (P) Medan Lim Cheng Teik, 10250, P. Pinang. SM Convent Datuk Jln. Datuk Keramat, Keramat 10150, P. Pinang. . SM Datuk Hj Mohd Kpg. Kastam, 11700 Nor Ahmad P. Pinang. S M Hutchings L e b u h F a r g u h a r , 1 0 2 0 0 P. Pinang. SM Padang Polo Sepoy Lines, 10450 P. Pinang. SM Perempuan Sri Jln. Air Itam, 10460 Mutiara P. Pinang. SM Teknik (TARP) Jln. Ibbetson, 11400 P. Pinang. SM Bukit Gambir Jln. Bukit Gambir, P. Pinang. SM Convent Lebuh Lebuh Light, 10200 Light P. Pinang. TOTAL

In the selection of respondents (n), the list of names of teachers were obtained from either the principal or the senior assistant. From the list provided, the Simple Random Sampling Approach was used to select 80% of teachers from each school.

53

3.3 Data Collection Techniques

3.3.1 The Instrument

A 5 l-item self-constructed questionnaire patterned after Gmelch (1982) and Walt, S. (1987) was used for this study. The questionnaire consists of three parts:

i.

Demographic Factors (age, gender, length of service) - 3 items

ii. Work Stressors (Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior, and Time Management.) iii. Stress Level (Physiological Symptoms, Psychological Symptoms, and Behavioral Symptoms) - 18 items - 30 items

The details of distribution of the questionnaire items are shown in Table 3.2.

The first three items in Part A regarding demographic factors is a selfconstructed questionnaire. The three items were used to gather information on the age, gender and length of service of the respondents. The respondents were required to fill in the appropriate spaces provided for items 1,2 and 3.

54

Table 3.2 : Distribution Of Questionnaire Variables/ Indicators

Major Area Of Interest:

Item No.

Total

Stress Level i. Physiological Symptoms ii. Psychological Symptoms iii. Behavioral Symptoms
Independent Variables

34,35,36,37,38,39 40,41,42,43,44,45 46,47,48,49,50,51

6 6 6

i. Demographic Factors l Age l Gender l LengthOf Service ii. Work Stressors l Teacher Evaluation System l Salary And Benefits l Workload l Colleagues l Student Misbehavior l Time Management Grand Total

1 2 3

1 1 1

4,X 6,7, 8 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 19,20,21,22,23 24,25,26,27,28 29,30,3 1,32,33

5 5 5 5 5 5 51

However, some of the questionnaire items for Part B (Work Stressors)were adapted from Gmelch (1982). In this section, 30 items were constructed to measure 6 independent variables, namely Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior, and Time Management. The respondents were required to rate their responses on a five-point Likert Scale to determine the extent of their agreement or

55

disagreement to a given statement. The response options include: strongly agree, agree, uncertain, disagree and strongly disagree.

In Part C,

18 items were constructed to measure stress level among

secondary school teachers in Penang. These questionnaire items were adapted from Distress Symptoms Scale by Walt, Schafer (1987). In this section, respondents were required to rate their responses on a five point scale to each of the item that best describes their situation or feelings. The response options include : always, often, occasionally, seldom and never. The details of the questionnaire items used to measure the independent and dependent variables are shown in Table 3.3 and 3.4 respectively.

3.3.2 Validation Of Instruments

The questionnaire items which constitute the instruments for this study were checked by a university lecturer who is expert in the field of stress. The questionnaire was checked by a language expert for proper usage of the language, English and its translation into Bahasa Melayu (Malay Language). This established the validity of the questionnaire for the study.

56

Table 3.3 : Questionnaire Items For Independent Variables NO. ITEMS Teacher Evaluation System The Teacher Evaluation System under the NRS is fair. It is easy to get promoted under the NRS. I personally feel that the Teacher Evaluation System under the NRS creates anxiety. The Teacher Evaluation System should be changed. The Teacher Evaluation System under the NFCS encourages healthy competition among the teachers. Salary And Benefits The amount of salary received per month is reasonable. The benefits provided in the teaching scheme is good enough. I feel that the salary scheme for teachers should be improved. I feel that I am not fully rewarded for the effort that I have put into my work. The amount of salary earned per month is not enough. Workload I find my work infringing upon my leisure hours. There is constant pressure to work every minute with little opportunity to relax. I get depressed when I consider all the task that need my attention. I find difficulty in finding enough time to relax. I feel that I have too much responsibility. c011eagues My colleagues always give me support/ help to get work done. I like working with my colleagues. I normally socialize with my colleagues during my free time. I always share my problems with my colleagues. I enjoy working in a group.

4 5. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

57

NO.

ITEMS
Student Misbehavior

24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

Nowadays, students are difIicult to control. I get tired of controlling my students. Students misbehavior really bothers me. I feel frustrated with my students behavior. Student misbehavior prevents me from performing at my best.
Time Management

I tind myself with insufficient time to complete my work. It is difficult to complete my work in a given time. I have to work fast to get work done. There is hardly enough time to do the work. I have to bring my work home to get them done.

To determine the reliability of the questionnaire, a pilot test was carried out in Sekolah Menengah Georgetown. The teacher population size of this school was 46. A random sample of 37 was taken and the data was analyzed using the Cronbachs Alpha Test in the SPSS program. The reliability coefficients measured by Cronbachs Alpha for the independent variables (work stressors) was found to be 0.8413 and for the dependent variables (stress levels) the reliability coefficients was 0.9418., implying that the questionnaire was valid and reliable for the study. According to Uma Sekaran (1992) the reliability coefficients measure by Cronbachs Alpha for each set of items to measure a variable will be considered good if it is over 0.8, to be acceptable if those in the range of 0.7 and reliabilities less than 0.6 are generally considered to be poor

58

Table 3.4 : Questionnaire Items For Dependent Variable NO. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. ITEMS
Physiological Symptoms

Exhausted after a days work. Experiencing neck pain Headache Stomach upset Slow recovery from a stressful event Backache
Psychological Symptoms

Experiencing emotional ups and downs Lately, more impatient than usual Feel very tense being a teacher Have to struggle to get up to face another day Feel bothered when plans are dependent upon the actions of others Short tempered.
Behavioral Symptoms

Easily startled Talk faster than usual at the work place Difficulties in sitting still Difficulty staying long with one activity very long Difficulty sleeping through the night Absent from work to release tension

3.3.3 Data Collection And Administration

A letter of approval to CT out the research from the Education Planning and Research Department was received on 6 Spetember, 1996. Permission to distribute and administer the questionnaire in Georgetown from the

59

Education Department was obtained on 11 September, 1996. The nine secondary schools that were identified earlier were visited starting from 11 September, 1996. Table 3.5 shows the record of the visits and Table 3.6 shows when the data was collected.

Along with an explanatory cover letter, the researcher approached the principals or senior assistants of each school to seek their assistance in the administration of the questionnaire. A list of teachers in each school was obtained and after selecting randomly the respondents, the questionnaires were given to the principals or senior asssistants requesting them to help in the administration of the questionnaires. All the principals or senior assistants of the nine schools were helpful.

Table 3.5 : Record Of Visits To Schools Date Of Distribution 11. 09. 9 6 Schools 1. SM Hutchings 2. SM Al Mashoor (P) 3. SM Perempuan Sri Mutiara 1. SM Teknik (TARP) 2. SM Bukit Gambir 3. SM Datuk Hj. Mohd. Nor Ahmad 1. SM Convent Datuk Keramat 2. SM Padang Polo 3. SM Convent Lebuh Light

12. 09. 9 6

13. 09. 9 6

60

Table 3.6 : Data Collection

Dates Of Collection I 12. 09. 96 13. 09. 96

Schools 1. SM Al Mashoor (P) 2. SM Hutchings 1. SM Convent Datuk Keramat 2. SM Bukit Gambir 3. SM Perempuan Sri Mutiara 1. 2. 3. 4. SM Teknik (TARP) SM Datuk Hj. Mohd. Nor Ahmad SM Convent Lebuh Light SM Padang Polo

19. 09. 96

A date was set to collect the data. The respondents were assured of confidentiality. Tgble 3.7 shows the number of questionnaires that were distributed, the number of questionnaires that were returned and the number of questionnaires that were usable.

Table 3.7: Distribution And Retrieval Of Questionnaires No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Name Of School SM AlMashoor (P) SM Convent Datuk Keramat SM Datuk Hj. Mohd. Nor Ahmad SM Hutchings SM Padang Polo SM P. Sri Mutiara SM Teknik (TARP) SM Bukit Gambir SM Convent Lebuh Light TOTAL 1 No. Of Dist. No. Returned No. Usable 28 43 41 27 35 64 50 13 47 348 20 32 31 19 26 48 39 10 35 260 20 32 29 17 23 46 39 9 34 249

61

Among the 260 questionnaires that were returned, 11 were rejected, 2 with one full page unanswered and 9 with more than 3 items unanswered.

3.4 Data Analysis Techniques

3.4.1 Descriptive Analysis

To analyze the respondents demographic factors along age, gender and length of service and their responses towards every item, descriptive statistics including mean, frequencies, standard deviation and percentage were used.

3.4.2 Inferential Statistics

Inferential Statistics techniques such as the t-Test, ANOVA (One Way Analysis Of Variance), Pearson Correlation Analysis and Stepwise Regression Analysis were used to analyze the correlation of the

independent and the dependent variables. This analysis showed the strength and direction of the relation.

Table 3.8 describes the statistical tools which were used to analyze data collected from the questionnaire.

62

3.4.3 Criteria Used

i. Level Of Significance The 0.05 level of significance is set, a priori, as critical level for decision making.

ii. Decision about the null hypotheses Reject the null hypotheses (Ho) if FO.05. Accept the null hypotheses (Ho) if p> 0.05.

iii. Strength Of Relationships

The scale suggested by Davis (1971) was used to describe the relationships between the independent variables and the dependent variables. Coefficient Value ( r ) 1.0 0.70 - 0.99 0.50 - 0.69 0.30 - 0.49 0.10 - 0.29 0.01 - 0.09 0.0 Strength Of Relationship Perfect relationship Very Strong relationship Strong relationship Moderate relationship Weak or Low relationship Negligible relationship No relationship

63

Table 3.8 : Data Analysis Tools

Statistical Tools 1. Descriptive Statistics 2. T-Test

Area Of Investigation To describe the trends of responses of stress level among secondary school teachers in Georgetown. To determine the difference in stress level between male and female secondary school teachers. To determine the difference in stress level among secondary school teachers in various age group. To determine the difference in stress level among secondary school teachers of various length of service. To determine the relationship between stress level with: Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior, and Time Management. To determine the most probable sources of stress in explaining the variance in stress level.

3. ANOVA (One Way Analysis Of Variance)

4. Pearson Correlation

5. Stepwise Regression Analysis

64

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the profile of the respondents and results of the study. It discusses the major findings based on the research hypotheses and other related findings.

The primary objective of this study was to investigate the relationships between levels of stress and demographic factors along age, gender and length of service, teacher evaluation system (tes), salary and benefits (sab), colleagues (colle), workload (work), student misbehavior (stumis) and time management (timan) among secondary school teachers. This study also investigated the stress level and the manifestations of stress among teachers.

In this study, the following null hypotheses (Ho) were tested. i. I& Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, colleagues, workload, student misbehavior and time management.

65

ii.. bZ

Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service.

iii. b3 Stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the various age groups.

iv. Ho4 Stress level will not differ between male and female secondary school teachers.

v. H 05

Stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the various lengths of service.

v i & The variance in stress level is not significantly explained by teacher evaluation, salary and benefits, colleagues, workload, student

misbehavior and time management.

4.2 Profile Of Respondents

This study analyzed the correlates of stress among 249 secondary school teachers in Georgetown, Penang. The teacher-respondents consisted of 65 (26.1 %)

males and 184 ( 73.9 %) females.Thirty-six (36) or 14.5% of the respondents are in the below 30 age group, 55 or 22.1 % are in the 30 - 34 age group, 46 or 18.5 % are in the 35 - 39 age group, 38 or 15. 3 % are in the 40 - 44 age group, and

66

74 or 29.7 % are in the 45 and above age group. The frndings indicated that the majority of the respondent are above 45 years of age,

Table 4.1 : Profile Of Respondents Demographic Factors

Gender

Frequencies

Percentage

Male Female Total

65 184 249

26.1 73.9 100

*ge Below 30 years 30 - 34 years 35 - 39 years 40 - 44 years 45 years and above Total
Length Of Service

36 55 46 38 74 249 36 61 33 119 249

14.5 22.1 18.5 15.3 29.7 100 14.5 24.5 13.3 47.8 100

below 5 years 5 - 9 years 10 - 14 years 15 years and above Total

In terms of length of service, the majority of the teachers (119 teachers or 47.8% ) have been in the teaching profession for more than 15 years . Sixty-one (61) or 24.5 % of the teachers have been in the service for 5 - 9 years, 36 or 14.5 % of them have been in the service for less than 5 years, and 33 or 13.3 % for 10 - 14

67

years. Table 4.1 shows the profile of the respondents along age, gender and length of service.

4.3 Major Findings

Investigation of the data generated the following results:

i.

The null hypothesis that stress among secondary school teachers is not related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management was rejected. Empirical evidence generated showed that stress is significantly and positively related to teacher evaluation system (r = 0.1705, p = 0.007 < 0.05), salary and benefits (r = 0.2028, p = 0.001 < 0.05), workload ( r = 0.4287, p = 0.000 < 0.05), colleagues ( r = 0.1288, p = 0.042 < 0.05), student misbehavior (r = 0.4468, p = O.OOO< 0.05). and time management shown in Table 4.2 . ( r = 0.4738, p = 0.000 < 0.05) as

ii. The null hypothesis that stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service was accepted. Emperical evidence showed that stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age ( p = 0.948 > 0.05), gender ( p = 0.446 > 0.05) and length of service ( p = 0.448 > 0.05). Refer Table 4.3 for details.

68

iii. The null hypothesis that stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the various age groups was accepted. No difference in stress level was noted among secondary school teachers of the various age group ( F = 0.2596, p = 0.9036 > 0.05). Refer Table 4.4 for details.

iv. The null hypothesis that stress level will not differ between male and female secondary school teachers was accepted. Empirical evidence gathered indicated that there was no difference of stress level between male and female secondary school teachers ( t-value = 0.73, p = 0.466 > 0. OS) Refer Table 4.5 for details.

v. The null hypothesis that stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the various lengths of service was accepted. From the data generated, it was found that there was no difference of stress level shown among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service ( F =

1.0803, p = 0.3580 > 0.05). Refer Table 4.6 for details.

vi. The null hypothesis that the variance of stress level is not significantly explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, colleagues, workload, student misbehavior and time management was rejected. From the empirical evidence generated, it was found that the four variables, namely time management, student misbehavior, workload and colleagues explained

69

34.64 % of the variance in stress level (F = 32.32176, p = 0.0000 < 0.01). Refer Table 4.7 for details.

4.4 Analysis And Discussion Of Findings

4.4.1 Stress Level And Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior And Time Management

Research Question 1

Is stress among secondary school teachers related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management?

Hypothesis 1 HOI

Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior , and time management.

The Pearson Correlation Analysis was used to find the relationship between stress level and teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management as shown in Table
4.2 .

70

Table 4.2 : Pearson Correlation Coefficients Of Stress Level Independent Variables Correlation Coefficients ( r ) Significance

Tes 0.1705 0.007 Sab 0.2028 0.001 Work 0.4287 0.000 Colle 0.1288 0.042 Stumis 0.4468 0.000 Timan 0.4738 0.000 ____________.____._.________.._____________________.__._.....___........___.___________.___________. ._ . . . . . Isis-.AtP.<O:!? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . ..-..-.. _____ .___.. _.._ . . . . .._...... _..._.. Tes = Teacher evaluation system = Salary and benefits Sab Work = Workload Colle = Colleagues Stumis = Student misbehavior Timan = Time management

Empirical evidence generated showed that stress level is significantly and positively correlated to teacher evaluation system ( r = 0.1705, p = 0.007 < 0.05), salary and benefits ( r = 0. 2028, p = 0.001 < 0.05), workload ( r = 0.4287, p = 0.000 < 0.05), colleagues ( r = 0.1288, p = 0.042 < 0.05), student misbehavior ( r = 0. 4468, p = 0. 000~ 0.05), and time management ( r = 0.4738, p = O.OOO< 0.05). The positive correlation showed that the level of stress as perceived by the teachers will increase with poorer teacher evaluation system, lower salary and benefits, increased workload, lesser collegial support, increased student misbehavior and poorer time management. However, the relationship was found to be weak in teacher

71

evaluation system, salary and benefits and colleagues, but moderate in workload, student misbehavior and time management. Therefore the null hypothesis that stress level among secondary school teachers is not related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management was rejected.

These findings concur with that of Bergin (1993) and Earl (1993) in which stress were found to be related to teacher evaluation system. Similarly, stress was found to be related to salary and benefits (Edworthy, 1987; Earl, 1993), workload (Boyes, 1993; Spector, 1987; Davis, 1992; Randall, 1993), colleagues ( Boyes, 1993; Payne & Furnham, 1987; Borg & Falzon, 199 l), student misbehavior ( Tuetemann & Punch, 1992; Davis, 1992; Kyriacou & Sutcliffe, 1979a), and time management ( Solman & Feld, 1989; Bergin, 1993; Earl, 1993).

4.4.2 Stress Level And Demographic

Factors

Research Question 2 Is stress among secondary school teachers related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service?

72

Hypothesis 2 Ho2 Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service.

The Pearson Correlation Analysis was used to find the relationship between stress level and demographic factors along age, gender and length of service. Table 4.3 depicts the results of the Pearson Correlation Analysis.

An investigation of the analysis showed that stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age ( p = 0.948 > 0.05), gender ( p = 0.446 > O.OS), and length of service ( p = 0.448 > 0.05). This indicated that the null hypothesis that stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service was accepted.

Table 4.3 : Pearson Correlation Coefftcient Of Stress Level With Demographic Factors ( n = 249) Demographic Factors Correlation Coefficient ( r ) - 0.0042 - 0.0464 - 0.0483 Significance 0.948 0.446 0.448

Age
Gender Los

______________._________._____.___.__._______________.____..____.__________.____

*Sig. at p < 0.05 __.__...________________________1_______......~..~...____........_....-... Los = Length of service

. . .._.

73

The results obtained from this analysis differed from the findings reported by Bunch (1992) who found significant correlation in items for age, sex and the numbers of years taught.

4.4.3 Stress Level And Various Age Groups

Research Question 3 Will the stress levels differ significantly among secondary school teachers of the various age groups?

Hypothesis 3
Ho3

Stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the various age groups.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the difference in the means of stress level amongst secondary school teachers of various age groups. Table 4.4 summarises the findings between stress level and age.

From the empirical evidence generated, it was found that stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of the various age groups ( F = 0.2596, p = 0.9036 > 0.05). Therefore the null hypotheses that stress level

will not differ among secondary school teachers was accepted. This means

74

that the stress level is the same regardless of whether the teachers are young or old.

Table 4.4 : Analysis Of Variance (Age)

Source

D. F.

Sum of Squares

Mean Squares

Between group 4 174.5810 43.6453 Within group 244 4 1028.2704 168.1486 Total 248 41202.8514 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...~......~.........................~......~~..............._.......__..._ F Ratio = 0.2596 F Prob. = 0.9036

This finding, however contradicts the findings of Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b). They identified that younger and less experienced teachers were more stressed than their older and more experienced colleagues. Solman & Feld (1989) also found that significant differences were detected among teachers of different ages in their response to stress owing to the tone of the school, misbehavior of the pupils and the demands of a changing curriculum.

75

4.4.4 Stress Level And Gender

Research Question 4 Will stress level differ significantly between male and female secondary school teachers?

Hypothesis 4 Ho4 Stress level will not differ between male and female secondary school teachers.

To determine the differences in the mean of stress level between male and female secondary school teachers, the t-test was used.

Empirical evidence was generated which showed that stress level will not differ between male and female secondary school teachers ( t - value = 0.73, p = 0.466 > 0.05). Table 4.5 shows the details of the findings.

Hence, the null hypothesis that stress level will not differ between male and female secondary school teachers was accepted. These findings indicated that male and female secondary school teachers experienced the same levels of stress.

76

Table 4.5 : Mean Standard Deviation And T-test value of Stress Level and Gender Gender No. Of Cases Mean SD

Male 65 59.8923 14.355 Female 184 58.5326 12.353 . ..__._.........._...-.....-.........--.....~~-.~...._........_.~~~....__._._._.___ t-value = 0.73 * p < 0.05 2-Tail Sig. = 0.466

These findings replicate the findings of Solman & Feld (1989) that no differences were detected between male and female teachers on the six sources of stress studied.

However, the results were contrary to the results found by ISyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b), Punch & Tuettemann (1990), Borg 8~ Falzon (199 l), and Pierce & Molloy (1990). Their findings showed that female teachers were more stressed than their male counterparts. Punch & Tuettemann (1990) argued that the sociological significance of these findings may be that female teachers invest rather more of themselves in teaching than males, making them more vulnerable to stress (distress) brought about by the school.

77

4.4.5 Stress Level And Various Lengths Of Service

Research Question 5 Will stress level differ significantly among secondary school teachers of the various lengths of service.

Hypothesis 5 Has Stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the difference in the mean of stress level among teachers of various lengths of service. The details of the findings are shown in Table 4.6.

Table 4.6 : Analysis of Variance (Length Of Service)

Source

D.F.

Sum Of Squares

Mean Squares

Between group 3 537.9247 179.3082 Within group 245 40664.9267 165.9793 Total 248 41202.8514 ___~~______~~~___~~_~_.~__~__~............~..~~._____~_______~_~_.....~.~.~.~~~..~...~~... F Ratio = 1.0803 * p< 0.05 F Prob. = 0.3580

From the empirical evidence generated, it was found that stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service ( F

78

= 1.0803, p = 0.3580 > 0.05). Therefore the null hypothesis that stress level will not differ among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service was accepted.

These findings

contradict those of Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1978b),

Tuettemann & Punch (1992), and Borg & Falzon (1991). A study conducted by Kyriacou & Sutcliffe and Tuettemann & Punch showed that less experienced teachers were more stressed than their more experienced colleagues. However, Borg & Falzon (1991) discovered that experienced . teachers reported greater stress than their less experienced colleagues. They argued that it might be because the more experienced teachers were likely to be older, thus beyond a certain age, the demands of the job became too great and perhaps the teachers became increasingly less tolerant of most aspects of their work and hence, the job was perceived as more stressful.

4.4.6 The Variance In Stress Level And Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior And Time Management

Research Question 6 Will the variance in stress level be significantly explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management?

79

Hypotheses 6

Ho6

The variance in stress level is not significantly explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management.

Stepwise Regression Analysis was used to find the variance in stress level which will be explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management. The details of the findings are shown in Table 4.7.

Empirical evidence showed that time management, student misbehavior, workload, and colleagues significantly explained the variance in stress level ( F = 32.32176, p = 0.0000 < 0.01). The four variables, jointly and

significantly explained 34.64 % of the variance in stress level ( R Square = 0.34635) Therefore, the null hypotheses that the variance of stress level is not significantly explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior, and time management was rejected.

These findings tend to indicate that stress level increases with poorer time management, increased student misbehavior, increase in workload, and lesser collegial support.

80

Table 4.7 : Multiple Regression Coefficients Of Stress Level (n = 249)

Independent Variables Timan Stumis Work Colle

Regression B 0.916006 0.800663 0.571387 0.493272

Coefficient Beta 0.261023 0.2288235 0. 184287 0. 115607

Rsq Change 0.2245 0.3096 0.3330 0.3463

Sig T ~1.0001 0.0000 0.0044 C .0266

Multiple R = 0.58851 R Square = 0.34635 Adjusted R Square = 0.33563 ** Sig. at p < 0.01 Legend: Timan = Time management Stumis = Student misbehavior

F value = 32.32176 Signif F = 0.0000

______.....__.____..._._._______...____.____...._________.....____...~..__________._________.....~~ * Sig. at p < 0.05

.___._..........___........__._..._..__..__._.........._......~....._...........~....~......___._._ Work = Workload Colle = Colleagues

However, the variance in stress level was not significantly explained by teacher evaluation system and salary and benefits ( Teacher evaluation system ( p = 0.9738 > 0.05), Salary and benefits ( p = 0.8792 > 0.05)).

4.5 Best Predictor For Stress Level

Based on the Stepwise Regression Analysis results, the best predictor for stress level was time management because it explained 22.45 % of the variance in stress level the second variable ( student misbehavior) explained only 8.51 %. Time

81

management was the first variable that entered the Stepwise Regression Analysis. The details of the findings are shown in Table 4.3.

The positive beta value ( 0.4738) tends to indicate that stress level increases with poorer time management. According to Robbins ( 1993 ), many people manage their time poorly. The things they have to accomplish in any given day or week are not necessarily beyond completion if they manage their time properly. Therefore, with regards to the findings, the results showed that majority of the teachers manage their time poorly and thus could not complete their work within the targeted time. This may result in stress among teachers.

Table 4.8 : Summary Statistics Of Stepwise Regression Analysis For Stress Level (n = 249) Variables Timan Stumis Work Colle Beta 0.4738 0.3 142 0.1891 0.1156 F 71.511 55.165 40.766 32.322 Sig F 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

** Sig. at p < 0.01 Legend Timan = Time management Stumis = Student Misbehavior

Work = Workload Colle = Colleagues

82

4.6 Other Related Findings

4.6.1 Stress Level

Stress level was the dependent variable and it was measured by 18 items which manifest the symptoms of stress: physiological stress, psychological stress and behavioral stress. The items were measured on a five-point scale rating from the value 1 = always, 2 = often, 3 = occasionally, 4 = seldom and never. A mean of 1.00 - 2.33 indicated high stress level, a mean of 2.34 - 3.67 indicated moderate stress level and a mean of 3.68 - 5.00 indicated low stress level.

Table 4.9 : Percentage And Mean For Stress Level Value 1 2 3 4 5 = Always = Often = Occasionally = Seldom = Never Frequency 4 24 115 98 8 249 % 1.6 9.6 46.2 39.4 3.2 100.0
.......

Total = 3.33 Mean Std Dev. = 0.76

____..__.__.___________.__..__________......________.............-

83

Table 4.9 depicted the frequency, percentage and mean for stress level. Empirical evidenced generated showed that the mean for stress level was 3.33 indicating that on the whole the respondents were experiencing moderate stress level.

4.6.2 The Manifestation Of Stress

A further investigation of the analysis in the mean of every item in the dependent variables ( item 34 - 51) showed that the three most common symptoms of stress were exhaustion (item 34), headache (item 36) and tension (item 42). A mean of 2.149 for item 34 indicated that majority of the respondents felt exhausted after work, a mean of 2.992 for item 36 indicated that headache was commonly experienced by the teachers and a mean of 2.831 indicated that majority of the respondents feel very tense being a teacher. Table 4.10 shows the details of the findings for every item in stress level.

An inspection of data for item 34 showed that 29.6 % respondents always felt exhausted, 32.1 % respondents often felt exhausted, 32.9 % respondents occasionally felt exhausted and 5.6 % respondents seldom felt exhausted. The details of the data generated are shown in Table 4.11.

84

Table 4.10 Frequencies And Mean or Stress Level ( Item 34 - 51) (n=249) Items
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Always Often Occasionally Seldom Never

73 18 17 8 26 18 28 30 23 17 16 10 9 13 11 14 4 80 52 52 16 51 38 44 61 44 48 59 26 44 46 38 21 14 82 103 108 72 82 70 79 87 97 70 96 89 66 80 62 72 69 26 14 55 60 96 76 71 73 67 43 61 60 61 104 81 90 91 82 44 0 21 12 57 44 31 41 23 18 51 28 24 43 35 38 37 63 161

Mean
2.149 3.036 2.992 3.715 3.410 3.120 3.325 3.052 2.831 3.293 3.137 3.072 3.578 3.357 3.378 3.422 3.639 4.382

15

32

Table 4.11 : Frequency, Percentage And Mean For Item 34 (n = 249) Value 1 = = = = = always often occasionally seldom never Frequency Percentage Cum. Percent.
73 80 82 29.3 32.1 32.9 5.6 29.3 61.4 94.4

2 3 4 5

14 0
249

100.0

0 100

Total Mean = 2.149

85

A further investigation of item 36 , found that 6.8 % of the respondents always experience headache, 20.9 % of the respondents often experience headache, 43.4 % of the respondents occasionally experience headache, while only 24.1 % of the respondents seldom experience headache and 4.8 % of the respondents never experience headache. Details of the findings are shown in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12 : Frequency, Percentage And Mean For Item 36 (n = 249) Value 1 2 3 4 5 = = = = = always often occasionally seldom never Frequency 17 52 108 60 12 249 Percentage 6.8 20.9 43.3 24.1 4.8 100.0 I Cum. Percent. 6.8 27.7 71.1 95.2 100.0

Total

Mean = 2.992

A close examination of item 42, shows that 12.0 % of the respondents always feel very tense being a teacher, 24.5 % often feel very tense of being a teacher, 39.0 % occasionally feel very tense of being a teacher, while

only 17.3 % of the responsdents seldom feel very tense of being a teacher and 7.2 % of the respondents never feel very tense of being a teacher. Table 4.13 shows the details of the findings.

86

Table 4.13 : Frequency, Percentage And Mean For Item 42 (n = 249) Value 1 = always 2 = ofken 3 = occasionally 4 = seldom 5 = never Total Mean = 2.831 Frequency 30 61 97 43 18 249 Percentage Cum. Percent. 12.0 24.5 39.0 17.3 7.2 100.0 12.0 36.5 75.5 92.8 100.0

87

CHAFTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlates of stress among secondary school teachers in Penang. Specifically, it attempted to:

i.

determine the relationship between stress level and teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management;

ii. determine the relationship between stress level and demographic factors along age, gender and length of service;

iii. investigate the difference in stress level among secondary school teachers of various age groups;

iv. investigate the difference in stress level between male and female teachers;

88

v. investigate the difference in stress level among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service; and

vi. investigate

whether the variance in stress level could be significantly

explained by teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management.

The sample consisted of 249 teachers from 9 secondary schools in Georgetown, Penang. Systematic Random Sampling technique was used to select the 9 secondary schools from a list of 32 urban secondary schools in Georgetown which was obtained from the Education Department ( Jabatan Pendidikan Negeri Pulau Pinang ). The respondents were selected randomly from the list of teachers taken from each school. A sample size of about 80 % was taken from each of the school. A total of about 348 questionnaires were distributed and a response rate of about 75 % was obtained . However, out of the 260 questionnaires returned, 249 were usable. Of the 249 respondents, 65 or 26.1 % were males and 184 or 73.9 % were females. About 55 % of the respondents were below 40 years old and 45 % above 40 years old. About 61 % of the respondents have been in the teaching profession for more than 10 years.

A self-constructed 5 l-item questionnaire was used to investigate the correlates of stress among secondary school teachers. The instrument consists of three parts : Part A - Demographic Factors ( age, gender and length of service), Part B- Work

89

Stressors (Teacher Evaluation System, Salary And Benefits, Workload, Colleagues, Student Misbehavior and Time Management), and Part C - Stress Level (Physiological Symptoms, Psychological Symptoms and Behavioral Symptoms). The first three items in Part A were self-constructed. However, for Part B which consists of 30 items, some of the items were adapted from Gmelch (1982). Part C consists of 18 items adapted from Distress Symptoms scale by Walt, S (1987).

A pilot test was carried out to determine the validity and reliability of the instrument. The reliability coefficients measured by Cronbachs Alpha for the independent variables (work stressors) was found to be 0.8413 and for the dependent variables (stress level) the reliability coefficients was 0.9418, reflecting the validity and reliability of the questionnaire.

To analyze the respondents demographic factors and their responses, descriptive statistics including mean, frequencies, standard deviation and percentage were used. Inferential statistics techniques such as t-Test, ANOVA (One Way Analysis Of Variance), Pearson Correlation Analysis and Stepwise Regression Analysis were used to analyze the data. The 0.05 level of significance was set a priori to determine the levels of rejection or acceptance of the null form of hypotheses. The SPSS for Windows statistical package was used in analyzing the data. Investigation of the data yield the following major findings:

90

Stress is significantly and positively related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management. However the relationships were found to be weak in teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, but were moderate in workload, student misbehavior and time management. The findings showed that stress level tends to increase with poor teacher evaluation system as perceived by the teachers, lower salary and benefits, increased workload, lesser collegial support, increased student misbehavior and poor time management.

ii. Stress among secondary school teachers is not related to demographic factors along age, gender and length of service.

iii. There was no difference of stress level among secondary school teachers of various age groups.

iv. From the data generated, it was found that there were no difference of stress levels between male and female secondary school teachers.

v. Stress level did not differ among secondary school teachers of various lengths of service.

vi. Four variables, namely time management, student misbehavior, workload and colleagues jointly explained 34.64 % of the variance in stress level. However,

91

the variance in stress level was not significantly explained by teacher evaluation system and salary and benefits.

5.2 Conclusions

Results of the findings showed that stress was related to teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management. Stress levels increases when teachers perceived teacher evaluation system under the New Remuneration System (NRS) as being unfair and unobjective. Low salary scheme and inadequate benefits, increased workload, lack of collegial support, increase in student misbehavior and insufficient time to carry out the teaching and organizational tasks are perceived by the teachers as possible causes of stress.

Demographic factors such as age, gender and length of service were not related to stress. There was no difference in stress level between male and female teachers. They appear to experience the same stress level. It was also found that there was no difference in stress level among secondary school teachers of various age groups and various lengths of service. This findings indicated that the older and the more experienced teachers were experiencing the same stress level as the younger and least experienced colleagues.

92

Empirical evidence showed that time management, student misbehavior, workload and colleagues significantly explained the variance in stress level. These four variables jointly explained 34.64 % of the variance in stress level. This implies that there are 65.36 % of the variance in stress level that has yet to be explained. These findings indicate that there are other factors that need to be considered in future studies of stress among secondary school teachers.

The best predictor for stress level was time management. Poor time management may result in insufficient time or lack of time to complete a certain amount of work at a given time. Teachers who face time management problem could find themselves having too little time to relax and insufficient time to complete their work.

In this study, the sample Georgetown, Penang.

was obtained from nine secondary schools in

The sample was limited to the urban schools. The

conditions and differences in school setting may limits the generalizability of the findings of the study. However, they may serve as the framework for further research on a larger scale involving a bigger sample size.

5.3

Recommendations

The findings of this study bear implications on research. These findings could be used as a new framework to investigate the correlates of stress among teachers in

93

the context of a Malaysian setting. Further research could be carried out and other factors investigated. Furthermore, the findings in this study showed that 65.36% of the variance in stress level has yet to be explained, implying that further research on the subject matter is recommended.

The statistically significant findings of the relationship between stress and work stressors, namely teacher evaluation system, salary and benefits, workload, colleagues, student misbehavior and time management, suggests that the working environment and the demands faced by teachers increased the possibility of stress and its negative consequences. The impact of stress is not restricted to illness. It has also a detrimental effect on important functions of management such as the effectiveness of decision making, the quality of interpersonal relationships, the standard of work, the quality of work life and ultimately the level of productivity. These, therefore, bear implications on the students performance and the teaching profession. In view of this, the following recommendations are put forward.

i.

For the Ministry of Education, policy makers, State Education Department, policies and programs to reduce and manage teachers stress should be

formulated, planned, organized and implemented. This is to ensure that teachers can carry out their responsibilities efficiently and play an active role in realizing Vision 2020. To meet the requirements of Vision 2020, we need a full-force of efficient and well-trained teachers.

94

ii.

Support from the principal is needed to help the teachers to cope with stress. Effective administrative practices have great implications on reducing teacher stress. Therefore, the Ministry of Education should initiate policies and develop training programs for principals, particularly in the area of human resource management to enable them to support, advise and counsel teachers experiencing high to moderate levels of stress.

111.

...

Teachers should be exposed to stress management programs. This is important because a teacher job has become increasingly more demanding. Organizations are undergoing rapid technological changes; this results in feelings of uncertainty and insecurity amongst teachers. Developing resistance to stress is an important aspect of stress management. Hence, knowledge on stress and its negative consequences should be made known so that teachers are aware of the symptoms of stress and know how to cope with it, enabling them to reduce the stress they faced. Furthermore, people are now becoming much more healthconscious as they realize that being healthy makes them more resistant to the impact of stressti situations.

iv. A study on time management is recommended. The findings showed that time management which is highly predictive of stress level is significant. Results showed that insufficient time to complete work is due to poor time management. Results of the poor time management study could provide a basis for initiating proper programs within the schools to expose teachers to

95

understanding and utilizing of basic time management principles that can help them better cope with job demands.

96

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdul Wahid (1996) Stress Pekerjaan Di Kalangan Guru. Unpublished M. (Munagemenr) Thesis, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok.

SC.

Adams, J. D. (1980). Understanding And Managing Stress : A Book Of Readings. San Diego: University Associates, Inc. Azham, M. A (1988). Curbing Negative Stress. Malaysian Management Review, 23 ( 2 ) : 51 - 62. Beech. H. R. ; Burns, L. E. & Sheffield, B. F. (1983). A Behavioral Approach To The Management Of Stress : A Practical Guide To Techniques. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Beehr, T. A. & Newman, J. E. (1978). Job Stress, Employee Health And Organizational Effectiveness: A Facet Analysis, Model, And Literature Review. Personnel Psychology, 3 1 : 665 - 699. Bergin, M. L. M. (1993). Coping With Occupational Stress: A Study Of Educational Administrators. Dissertation Abstracts. University Of New South Wales. Blase, J. J. (1982). A Social-psychological Grounded Theory Of Teacher And Burnout. Education Administration QuarterZy, 18 ( 4 ) : 93 - 113. Borg, M. G. & Falzon, J. M. (1989) Stress And Job Satisfaction Among Primary School Teachers in Malta. Educational Research, 41 : 271 - 279. Borg, M. G. (1990). Occupational Stress In British Educational Setting : A Review. Education Psychology, 10 ( 2 ) : 103 - 126. Borg, M. G. Riding, R. J. & Falzon, J. M. (1991). Stress in Teaching : A Study Of Occupational Stress And Its Determinants, Job Satisfaction And Career Commitment Among Primary School Teachers. Educational Psychology, 11 ( 1 ) : 59 - 75. Borg, M. G. & Riding, R. J. (1993). Teacher Stress And Cognitive Style. British
Journal Of Educational Psychology, 63 ( 2 0 : 271 - 286.

Boyes, S. R. (1993). Turnover And The Work Perceptions Of The Teachers Of The Gifted: A Qualitative Study (Teacher Turnover). Dissertation Abstracts. University Of Virginia

97

Broiles, P. H. (1982) An Inquiry into Teacher Stress : Symptoms, Sources, And Prevalence. Unpublished PhD Thesis (Claremont Graduate School), Dissertation Abstracts International, 43 ( 4 ) pp. 1077 - A. Bunch, E. R. (1992). The Sources And Manifestations Of The Job Stress For Special Education Teachers (Stress Sources, Stress Management). Dissertation Abstracts. University Of La Verne. Burden, R. L. (1988). Stress And The School Psychologist - A Comparison Of Potential Stressors in The Professional Lives Of School Psychologists in Three Continents. School Psychology International, 9 ( 1 ) : 55 - 59. Capel, S. A. (1987). The Incidence Of And Influences On Stress And Burnout In Secondary School Teachers. British Journal Of Educational Psychology, 57
( 3) : 279 - 288.

Capel, S. A. (1991). A Longitudinal Study of Burnout in Teachers. British Journal Education Psychology. 61 (1) : 36 - 45. Cecil, M. A. & Forman, S. G. (1990). Effects Of Stress Inoculation Training And Coworker Support Groups On Teachers Stress. The Journal Of School Psychology, 28 ( 2 ) : 105 - 118 Chan, D. W. & Hui, Eadaoin IS. P. (1995) Burnout & Coping Among Chinese Secondary School Teachers In Hong Kong. British Journal Of Educational Psychology, 65 ( 1 ) : 15 - 25. Che Yaakob, C. M. (1995). Punca Ketegangan Guru Matematik Sekolah Rendah Di Kelantan. Unpublished A4. S C. Thesis . Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok. Coates, T. J. & Thoresen C. E. (1976). Teacher Anxiety: A review With Recommendations. Review Of Educational Research, 46 ( 2 ) : 159 - 184. Coldicott, P. J. (1985). Organizational Causes Of Stress On The Individual Teacher. Educational Management And Administration, 13 ( 1 ) : 90 - 93. Cooper, C. L. (1986). Job Distress : Recent Research And The Emerging Role Of The Clinical Occupational Psychologist. Bulletin Of The British Psychological Society, 39 : 325 - 331. Cooper, C. L. (1995). Life At The Chalkface- Identifying And Measuring Teacher Stress. British Journal Of Educational Psychology, 65 ( 1 0 : 69 - 71.

98

Cooper, C. L. & Payne, R. (1991) Personality And Stress : individual D$Grences In The Stress Process. Chichester : John Wiley & Sons. Cox, T. (1978). Stress. London : The Macmillan Press Ltd. Cox, T. & Brockley, T. (1984). The Experience And Effects Of Stress In Teachers. British Educational Research Journal, 10 ( 1 ) : 83 - 87. Cranwell-Ward, J. (1990). Thriving On Stress. London : Routledge. Davis, D. G. (1992). Secondary School Teachers Coping Resources And Perceived Symptoms And Sources Of Job Stress. Dissertation Abstracts. University Of San Francisco. D Arty, J. (1989) Stress In Teaching The Research Evidence, Northern Ireland Council For Research, Occasional Paper No. 1. Dobson, C. B. (1982). Stress: The Hidden Adversary. England : MTF Press Ltd. Dorm, F. P. (1985) The Relationship Of Job Characteristic To Employee Stress. A Dissertation. Michigan : U.M.T. Dissertation Information Service. Dubrin, A. J. (1994). Appiying Psychology: Individual And Organizational Effectiveness ( 4 th. Edition). New Jersey : Prentice Hall Career And Technology. Dunham, J . (1980). An Exploratory Comparative Study Of Staff Stress In English And German Comprehensive Schools. Educational Review, 32 : 11 - 20. Dunham, J. (1986) A Decade Of Stress In Teaching Research In The United Kingdom (1976 - 1986). School Organisation And Management Abstracts, 5 : 161- 173. Dworkin, A. G., Haney, C. A., Dworkin, R. J., & Telschow, R. L. (1989). Stress And Educational Illness Behaviour Among Public School Teachers. Administration Quarterly, 26 : 60 - 72. Earl, J. C. (1993). The Relationship Between Career Development And Stress In Elementary Teachers ( Teacher Stress). Dissertation Abstracts. Texas A & M University. Edworthy, A. (1988). Teaching Can Damage Your Health. Feature On A Research Report. Education. 8 January, 171, p. 7.

99

Farber, B. A. (1983) Stress And Burnout In The Human Service Profession. New York : Pergamon. Ferner, J. D. (1980). Successful Time Management - A Self Teaching Guide. New York : John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Fincham, R. & Rhodes, P. S. (1988). The Individual, Work And Organizatio: Behavioral Studies For Business And Management Studies . London : George Weidenfeld And Nicolson Limited. Fletcher, C. & Payne, R. L. (1982). Levels Of Reported Stressors And Strains Amongst School Teachers : Some United Kingdom Data. Educational Review, 34 : 267 - 278. Fontana, D. & Abouserie, R. ( 1993). Stress Levels, Gender And Personality Factors In Teachers. British Journal OfEducation Psychology, 63 ( 2) : 261 - 270. Friedman, D., Prokop, C. M., and Sarros, J. C. (1988). Why Teachers Burn Out. Educational Research Quarteriy, 12 ( 3 ) : 9 - 19. Friedman, I. A. (1991). High And Low Burnout Schools: School Culture Aspects Of Teacher Burnout. Journal Of Educational Research, 84 ( 6 ) : 325 - 333. Geiss. R. J. (1985). Stress Factors In Suburban Female Oficers. PhD. Illinois: University Microfilm International. Goldberger, L. 8z Breznitz, S. (1993). Handbook Of Stress : Theoritical And Clinical Aspects (2 nd Edition). New York : The Free Press. Gmelch, W. H. (1982). Beyond Stress To Efictive Management. New York : John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hanson, P. G. (1989). Stress For Success : Thriving On Stress At Work Toronto: Collins Publisher. Hendrix, W. H., Ovalle, N. K., and Troxler, R. G. (1985). Behavioral And Physiological Consequences Of Stress And Its Antecedent Factors. JournaZ Of Applied Psychology, 70 ( 1) : 188 - 201. House, J. S. (1981). Work Stress And Social Support. Reading, Massachussets: Addison-Wesley. Jenkins, R. (199) . Demographic Aspects Of Stress in Cooper & Payne (editor), Personality And Stress : Individual DifSerences In Stress Process. Chichester : John Wiley & Sons.

100

Jick, T. D. & Mitz, L. E (1985). Sex Differences In Work Stress. Academy Of Management Review, 10 : 408 - 420. Kassim, A. S. (1990). Hubungan Di Antara Tekanan Kerja, Kepuasan Kerja Dan Kecenderungan Untuk Berhenti Kerja Di Kalangan Guru-guru KBSM. Unpublished Thesis, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur. Kloska, A. & Ramasut, A (1985). Teacher Stress. Maladjusment & Therapeutic Education, 3 ( 2 ) : 19 - 26. Kyriacou, C. & Sutcliffe, J. (1978a). Teacher Stress: Prevalence, Sources And Symptoms. British Journal Of Educational Psychology, 46 (2), 159 - 167. Kyriacou, C. & Sutcliffe, J. (1978b) A Model Of Teacher Stress. Educational Studies, 4(l):&6. Kyriacou,C. & Sutcliffe, J. (1979a). Teacher Stress And Satisfaction, Educational Research, 21 ( 1 ) : 89 - 96. Kyriacou, C. & Sutcliffe, J. (1979b). A Not On Teacher Stress And Locus Of Control. Journal Of Occupational Psychology, 52 : 227 - 228. Kyriacou, C. (1987). Teacher Stress And Burnout: An International Review. Educational Research, 29 ( 2 ) : 146 - 152. Laughlin, A. (1984). Teacher Stress In An Australian Setting : The Role Of Biographical Mediators. Educational Studies, 10 (1 ) : 7 - 22. Lazarus, R. S (1966) . Psychological Stress And Coping Process. New York : McGraw- Hill. Lazarus, R. S. & Folkman (1984). Stress Appraisal And Coping. New York : Springer. Lawler, E.E. (197 1) . Pay And Organizational Efictiveness: A Psychological View. New York : McGraw-Hill. Leach, D. J. (1984). A Model Of Teacher Stress And Its Implications For Management. Journal Of Educational Administration, 22 : 157 - 172. Leong S. C. (1995). Perceived Organizational Stressors And Burnout Among Teachers Of Selected Secondary Girls Schools In Kinta District, Perak. Unpublished A4. SC. Management Thesis, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok.

101

Maddens, J. (1979). Stress And Relaxation: Self-help Techniques For Everyone. United Kingdom : PQ Publishing Pte Ltd. Manthei, R. & Solman, R (1988). Teacher Stress And Negative Outcomes In Canterbury State Schools, New Zealand. Journal Of Educational Studies, 23: 145 - 163. Martocchio, J. J. & OLeary, A. M. (1989). Sex Differences In Occupational Stress: A Meta -Analytic Review. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 74 ( 3 ): 495 - 501. Meichenbaum, D. (1983). Coping With Stress. New York : Facts On File Publication. Mottowildo, S. J., Packard, J. S., & Manning, M. R. (1986). Occupational Stress: Its Causes And Consequences For Job Performance. JournaE Of Applied Psychology. 74 ( 3 ): 495 - 50 1. Nazw, M. M. (1987). An Understanding Of The Meaning Of Being In Stress: A Study Of The Phenomenon Of Stress Of Malaysian Administrators In A Job-related Situation. Michigan: A Bell e Howell Information Company. Needle, R. H. , Griffin, T., Svendsen, R., & Bemey, C. (1980). Teacher Stress: Sources And Consequences. The Journal Of School Health, 50 ( 1) : 96 - 99. Needle, R. H. Griffin, T., & Svendsen, R (1981). Occupational Stress: Coping And Health Problems Of Teachers. Journal Of School Health, 5 1 ( 2 ) : 175 - 181. Nevo, D. (1994). How Can Teachers Benefit From Teacher Evaluation? Journal Of Personnel Evaluation, 8 ( 2 ) : 109 - 117. Noriah, M. I. (1994) Patterns Of Choices Of Coping Responses And The Relationship To The Stressor Among Teachers. Unpublished Master Of Education Thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi. OConnor, P. R. & Clarke, V. A. (1990). Determinants Of Teacher Stress. Australian Journal OfEducation, 34 ( 1 ) : 41 - 5 1. Okebukola, P. A. & Jegede, 0. J. (1989) Determinants Of Occupational Stress Among Teachers in Nigeria. Educational Studies. 15 ( 1 ) : 23 - 36. Payne, M. A. & Fumham, A. (1987). Dimensions Of Occupational Stress In West Indian Secondary School Teachers. British Journal Of Educational PsychoZogy, 57 ( 2 ) : 141 - 150. Pelletier, K. R. (1979). Holistic Medicine: From Stress To Optimum Health. New York: Delacorte Press.

102

Pierce, C. M. B. & Molloy G. N. (1990). Psychological And Biographical Differences Between Secondary School Teachers Experiencing High And Low Levels Of Burnout. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 60 ( 1 ) : 37 - 5 1. Pierce, C. M. B. & Molloy, G. N. (1990). Relation Between School Type, Occupational Stress, Role Perceptions And Social Support. Australian Journal Of Education, 34 ( 3 ) : 330 - 338. Pinneau, R. S. (1976). Effects Of Social Support On Psychological And Physiological Stress. Dissertation Abtracts, Int. 36,53598 - 53560B. Pithers, R. T. (1979). Teacher Stress Research: Problems And Progress. British Journal Of Educational Psychology, 65 ( 3 ) : 387 - 392. Powell, T. & Enright, S. (1990). Anxiety And Stress Management. London : Routledge. Pratt, J. (1978). Perceived Stress Among Teachers: The Effects Of Age And Background Of Children Taught. Educational Review, 30 ( 1 ) : 3 - 14. Prick, L. G. M. (1989). Satisfaction And Stress Among Teachers. International Journal Of Educational Research, 18 ( 3 ) : 363 - 377. Punch, K. F. & Tuettemann, E. (199). Correlates Of Psychological Distress Among Secondary School Teachers. British Educational Research Journal, 16 ( 4 ) :
369 - 382.

Randall, S. C. (1993). Teacher Burnout, Depressive Symptoms, And Coping Strategies: Their Relationship In Two Samples Of Teachers (Burnout, Urban Education). Dissertation Abstracts. University Of Pennsylvania. Raschke, D. B., Dedrick, C. V., Strathe, M. I., & Hawkes, R. R. (1985). Teacher Stress : The Elementary Teachers Perspective. Elementary School Journal,
85 : 559 - 564.

Rohani, A. (1984). Tekanan Guru: Satu Kajian Ke Atas Guru-guru Yang Menggunakan KBSR. Unpublished Thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia : Bangi. Robbins, S. P. (1993). Organizational Behavior: Concept, Controversies, And Applications (6 th edition). New Jersey: Prentice Hall International Inc. Romano, J. L. (1992). Psychoeducational Interventions For Stress Management And Well-being. Journal Of Counseling And Development, 71 ( 2 ) : 199 - 202.

103

Russel, D. W., Altmaier, E., & Van Valzen, D. (1987). Job-Related Stress, Social Support And Burnout Among Classroom Teachers. Journal Of AppZied Psychology, 72 ( 2 ) : 269 - 274. Sarros, J. C. and Sarros, A. M. (1992). Social Support And Teacher Burnout. Journal Of Educational Administration. 30 ( 1 ) : 55 - 69. Seah, IS. S. (1995). Job Satisfaction, Health, Stress And Administrative Support Among Secondary School Teachers In Kuala Terengganu. Unpublished M SC. Management Thesis . Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok. Sekaran, U. (1992). Research Methods For Business: A Skill-Building Approach (2 nd. Edition). New York : John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Selye, H. (1974). Stress Without Distress, Philadelphia: Lippincott. Selye, H. (1976). The Stress Of I$+ (Revised Edition), New York : McGraw-Hill. Simpson, J. ( 1976). Stress, Sickness, Absence And Teachers in National Association Of School Masters (ed.) Stress In Schools. National Association Of School Masters, Hemel Hempstead. Siti Rohani, M. S. (1991). Pengaruh Faktor Sekolah Ke Atas Tekanan Guru. Unpublished M Ed Thesis, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur. Solman, R. & Feld. M (1989). Occupational Stress: Perceptions Of Teachers In Catholic Schools, Journal Of Educational Administration, 27 ( 3 ) : 55 - 68. Sowa, C. J. (1992). Understanding Clients Perceptions Of Stress. Journal Of Counseling And Development, 7 1 ( 2 ) : 179 - 183. Spector, P. E., Dwyer, D. J. & Jex, S. M. (1988). Relation Of Job Stressors To Affective Health, And Performance Outcomes: A Comparison Of Multiple Data Sources. Journal OfApplied Psychology. 73 ( 1 ) : 11 -19. Stanford, S. C. & Salmon, P. (1993). Stress : From Synapse To Syndrome. London: Academic Press. Stinnet, T. M. & Hensen, K. T. (1982). American Public Schools In Transition: Future Trends And Issues. New York: Teachers College Press. Trendall, C. (1989). Stress In Teaching And Teacher Effectiveness- A Study Of Teachers Across Mainstream And Special Education. Educational Research, 31( 1) : 52 - 58.

104

Tunnecliffe, M. R., Leach, D. J., & Tunnecliffe, L. P. (1986).Relative Efficacy Of Using Behavioral Consultation As An Approach To Teacher Stress Management. Journal Of School Psychology, 24 ( 2 ): 123 - 13 1. Tuettemann, E. & Punch, K. F. (1992). Psychological Distress In Secondary Teachers: Research Findings And Their Implications. Journal Of Educational
Administration, 30 ( 1 ) : 42 - 54.

Tuettemann, E. & Punch, K. F. (1992). Teachers Psychological Distress: The Ameliorating Effects Of Control Over The Work Environment. Educational Review, 44 : 181 - 194. Walt, S. (1987). Stress Management For Wellness. Chicago: Hott, Rinehart And Winson, Inc. Wilkinson, G. R. (1988). Teacher Stress And Coping Strategies - A Study Of Eastlake Comprehensive. School Organization, 8 ( 2 ) : 185 - 195. Wilson, J. M. (1988). An Analysis Of The Correlation Between Coping Factors & Clinical Symptoms. Michigan : Universiti Microfilms International.
Yeo, A (1985). Living With Stress. Singapore: Times Books International.

Zegans, L. S. (1993) . Stress And The Development Of Somatic Disorders in Goldberger, L. & Breznitz, S. Handbook Of Stress : Theoritical And Clinical Aspects (2 nd. Edition), New York : The Free Press.

Documents

Awang Had Salleh ( 1995, May 28). Bahasa Must Also Improve With English. SST. Chua, K. (1994, April 8). Teachers These Days Are Unhappy Lot. New Straits Times. Krishnan (1995, Oct. 8). Teachers Role Not Just To Teach. The Sunday Star. Chin, V. K. (1995, June 29). Solving Teacher Shortage A Major Task Of Ministry.
Sunday Times.

Fong Tells Why Teachers Cannot Retire Earlier (1996, September 7). The Star.

105

Guru, Murid Dan Sikap Masyarakat (1996, Ogos 8). utusan Melap. Malaysia Needs 17,309 Teachers, Says Ministry (199 1, Dec. 2 1). New Straits Times. Please Be Fair, Sir (1993, Jan. 30). N&v Strait Times. Satisfied Teachers Serves Better (1993, March 14). The Star. Teachers These Days Are Unhappy Lot ( 1994, April 8). New Straits Times. Temporary Teachers Worrisome, Says Mps (1993, May 6). New Straits Times. Toyad : No Danger From ill Teachers ( 1992, Dec. 19). New Straits Times. Truancy Still Main Problem Among Secondary School Students (1993, March 3). New Straits Times.

106

APPENDICES

107

Appendix A LIST OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN GEORGETOWN, PENANG NO. NAME OF SCHOOL ADDRESS Jln. P. Ramlee, 10460 Pulau Pinang. Jln. Thean Teik, Air Itam 11500 Pulau Pinang. Jln. Air ham, 10460 Pulau Pinang. Medan Lim Cheng Teik, 10250 Pulau Pinang. d/a SM Hamid Khan Lrg.Delima 8, Tmn. Mutiara, 11700 Gelugor, P. Pinang. Persiaran Tembaga, 11600 Pulau Pinang. Kpg. Baru, Jln. Air Itam, 11400 Pulau Pinang Jln. Datu Keramat, 10150 Pulau Pinang. Jln. Masjid Negeri, 11600 Pulau Pinang. Lebuh Light, 10200 P.P. Lorong Maktab, 10250 P.P. Lorong Batu Lanchang, 11600 P. Pinang. Kampung I&tam, 11700 P.P. Jln. Scotland, 10460 P.P

1. Sek. Abdullah Munsyi 2 . SMAir Itam 3. 4. 5. SMKA Almashoor (Lelaki) SMKA Almashoor (Perempuan) SM Bukit Gambir

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

SM Chung Hwa Confucian SM Chung Ling SM Convent Datuk Keramat SM Convent Green Lane SM Convent Lebuh Light SM Convent Pulau Tikus

12. SM Georgetown 13. 14. SM Datuk Hj . Mohd Nor Ahmad Sek. Hj. Zainul Abidin

108

NO. NAME OF SCHOOL

ADDRESS

15.

SM Hamid Khan

Lrg.Delima 8, Tmn. Mutiara, 11700 Gelugor, P. P. Jln. Hamilton, 11600 P.P. Lebuh Faguhar, 10200 P.P. Lorong Sekolah, 11600 Lorong Batu Lanchang, 11600 P.P. Jln. Air Itam, 10460 P.P. Jln. Sepoy Lines, 10450 P.P. Jln. Masj id Negeri, 11600 Pulau Pinang. Jln. Gottlieb, 10350 P.P. Jln. Anson, 10400 P.P. Jln. Air Itam, 10460 P.P. Jln. Macalister, 10450 P.P. Jln. Bagan Jermal, 10250 Pulau Pinang. Lebuh Farquhar, 10200 P.P. Jln. Ibbetson, 11400 P.P. Jln. Sepoy Lines, 10450 P.P. Jln. York, 10450 P.P. Jln. Khaw Sim Bee, 10400 Pulau Pinang.

16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

SM Heng Ee S M Hutchings SM Jelutong SM Vokasional P.Pinang SM Laki-laki Methodist SM Padang Polo SM Penang Free

23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

SM Perempuan Cina SM Perempuan Methodist SM Perempuan Sri Mutiara SM Perempuan St. George SM Phor Tay

28. 29. 30. 31. 32.

SM St Xavier SM Teknik (TARP) SM Tunku Puan Habsah SM Union SM Westlands

109

Appendix B UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

Code I

01 02 03 Dear TuanPuan,

The undersigned, a graduate student of Universiti Utara Malaysia, is currently undertaking a research entitled Correlates Of Stress Among Secondary School Teachers in Penang , in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a masters degree (M. SC, Mgt.).

2. In line with this, may I request for your co-operation by participating in my undertaking by please responding to my questionnaire which herein attached.

3.

Your responses shall be held in strictest confidence.

Thank you for your co-operation.

Very truly yours, HAMDIAHBT OTHMAN Graduate School, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok.

110

Part A: Personal Data Please supply the information requested by placing your answer/ or placing a tick in the spaces provided for.

1. Age 2. Gender

30- 34 35 - 39 40 - 44 above 45 below 30 Male Female

R
El

Code I05

I06

3 . Length of service below 5 years 5 - 9years 10 - 14 years above 15 years

l 07

Part B: Work Stressor For each of the following statements, circle the level of agreement or disagreement that you personally feel: SA = Strongly Agree A =Agree U = Uncertain D = Disagree SD = Strongly Disagree Scoring: Positive SA=5 U =3 Reversed SA=l U =3 Statements For A=4 f researcher D=2 SD=l> Coded (Negative) only A=2 > D=4 SD=5)

111

lhcher Evaluation System Code 4.

The Teacher Evaluation System under the NRS is fair. It is easy to get promoted under the NRS. I personally feel that the Teacher Evaluation System under the NRS creates anxiety. changed.

SA A IJ D SD SA A U D SD SA A U D SD SA A U D SD

I9 I10 011 I12

5.
6.

7. The Teacher Evaluation System should be 8.

Teacher Evaluation System under the NRS encourages healthy competition among teachers.

SA A U D SD 113

Salary And Benefits

9.

The amount of salary received per month is reasonable.

SA SA SA

A U A A U U

D D D

SD 014 SD015 SD 016

10. The benefits provided in the teaching scheme is good enough. 11. I feel that the salary scheme for teachers should be improved. 12. I feel that I am not fully rewarded for the effort that I have put in my work. 13. The amount of salary earned per month is not enough.

SA A U

D SD 117

S A A U D S D I8 1

Workload 14. I find my work infringing upon my leisure hours. SA A U D SD 019

112

1 5 . There is constant pressure to work every minute with little opportunity to relax. 16. I get depressed when I consider all the task that need my attention. 1 7 . I find difficulty in finding enough time to relax. I8. I feel that I have too much responsibilities.

SA

SD c

l2 0

S A A U D

S D I2 1

SA SA

A A

U U

D D

SD 0 22 SD023

Colleagues 1 9 . My colleagues always give me support/ help to get work done. 20. I like working with my colleagues. 2 1. I normally socialize with my colleagues during my free time. 22. I always share my problems with my colleagues. 23. I enjoy working in a group. SA SA A A U U D D SD024 SD 125

SA

SD

026

SA SA

A A

U U

D D

SDn27 SD 128

Student Misbehaviour 24. Nowadays students are difficult to control. 25. I get tired of controlling my students. SA SA A A U U D D SDn SD 0 29 30

26. Students misbehaviour really bothers me. 27 . I feel frustrated with my students behaviour.

SA

SD

031

SA

SD cl 3 2

113

28. Student misbehavior prevents me from performing my best. Time Management

SA

SD=33

29. I find myself with insufficient time time to complete my work. 30. It is difficult to complete my work in a given time. 3 1. I have to work fast to get work done. 32. There is hardly enough time to do the paperwork. 33. I have to bring my work home to to get them done.

SA SA SA SA

A A A A

U U U U

D D D D

SD

034

SD 135 SD 036

SD 0 3 7 38

SA A U D SD 0

Part C: Stress Level Instructions: Please indicate your agreement or disagreement for each of the following statement by encircling your response according to the following code: 1= Always 2 = Often 3 = Occasionally 4 = Seldom 5 = Never PHYSIOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS 34. Exhausted after a days work 3 5 Experiencing neck pain 36. Headache. 37. Stomach upset 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 Code 1 4 0 j-q41 042

5 143

114

38. Slow recovery from a stressful event 39. Backache PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMS 40. Experiencing emotional ups and downs 41. Lately, more impatient than usual 42. Feel very tense being a teacher. 43. Have to struggle to get up to face another day 44. Feel bothered when plans are dependent upon the actions of others 45. Short tempered

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

044 045

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4

5 I46 5 cl 47 5 048 5 049 5 050 5 051

BEHAVIOURAL SYMPTOMS 46. Easily startled 47. Talk faster than usual at the work place 48. Difficulties in sitting still 49. Difficulty staying with one activity very long 50. Difficulty sleeping through the night 5 1. Absent from work to release tension 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 052 5 I53 5 154 5 055 5 056 5 057

THANK YOU

115

UNIWRSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

Code I

01 02 03 Tuan/Puan yang dihormati, SOAL SELIDK TENTANG CORRELATES OF STRESS AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS IN PENANG Penyelidikan ini dijalankan sebagai memenuhi sebahagian daripada keperluan Ijazah Sarjana Sains (pengurusan) UUM. Tujuan soal selidik ini adalah bagi mendapatkan maklumat tentang stress atau tekanan serta faktor-faktor yang menimbulkan stress di kalangan guru sekolah menengah. 2. Segala maklumat yang diperolehi akan dirahsiakan dan diproses secara kumpulan dengan menggunakan komputer. Maklumat yang diperolehi hanyalah untuk tujuan penyelidikan ini sahaja. Ketepatan hasil kajian adalah bergantung kepada kejujuran tuan/puan dalam memberi maklumat. Oleh itu jawapan yang spontan serta jujur adalah sangat-sangat diharapkan. 3. Kerjasama tuan/puan sangat dihargai dan didahului dengan ucapan setinggi-tinggi terima kasih. Yang benar,

(HAMDIAH BT. OTHMAN) Pelajar Sarjana Sains (Pengurusan), Sekolah Siswazah, UUM.

116

Nama dan Alamat Sekolah:

Bahagian A: Demografi Sila jawab soalan-soalan berikut dan tandakan ( / ) pada kotak yang disediakan. Code 1. Umur bawah 30 3 0 - 34 3 5 - 39 4 0 - 44 45 tahun ke atas Lelaki Perempuan I3 5

R c El E l07 l 06

2. Jantina

3. Tempoh perkhidmatan (sebagai guru) kurang drp.5 tahun 5 - 9 tahun lo- 14tahr.m 15 tahun ke atas

Bahagiao B : Work Stressors Sila nyatakan sejauh mana anda bersetuju dengan setiap pernyataan di bawah. Bulatkar jawapan anda pada nombor yang berkenaan. 1. Sangat bersetuju 2. Bersetuj u 3. Tidak Pasti 4. Tidak Bersetuju 5. Sangat Tidak Bersetuj u Code 4. Sistem penilaian guru di bawah Sistem Saraan Bar-u (SSB) adalah adil. 5. Adalah mudah untuk mendapat kenaikan pangkat di bawah SSB. 1 2 3 4 5 cl 0 9 I 10

117

6. Sistem penilaian guru di bawah SSB menimbulkan keresahan. 7. Sistem penilaian guru yang sedia ada patut diubah. 8. Sistem peniliain guru di bawah SSB menggalakkan persaingan yang sihat di kalangan guru. 9. Jurnlah gaji yang saya terima setiap bulan adalah berpatutan. 10. Ganjaran-ganjaran yang diperuntukkan kepada guru adalah memuaskan 11. Saya merasakan bahawa skim gaji guru patut dibaiki lagi. 12. Saya merasakan bahawa saya tidak mendapat ganjaran yang setimpal dengan tugas yang saya jalankan. 13. Jumlah gaji yang diperuntukkan kepada guru adalah tidak memuaskan. 14. Saya mendapati tugasan saya mengganggu masa lapang saya. 15. Sentiasa terdapat desakan untuk menjalankan tugas dengan peluang yang sedikit untuk berehat . 16. Saya selalu merasa tertekan apabila memikirkan semua tugas yang perlu dilaksanakan. 17. Saya menghadapi masalah untuk mendapatkan masa yang cukup untuk berehat. 18. Saya merasakan bahawa saya mempunyai tanggungjawab yang banyak di sekolah 19. Rakan setugas saya selalu memberi kerjasama yang memuaskan dalam melaksanakan sesuatu tugas.

1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

cl 1 1
I 12 I13 E l 14 15 III I1 6

3 4 5 3 4 5

l 17

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 5 4 5

cl 1 8 I19

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

l20

I2 1 I2 2 I2 3

l 24

118

20. Saya suka bekerja dengan rakan-rakan setugas. 2 1. Saya selalu bergaul dengan rakan setugas ketika waktu IapangIrehat. 22. Saya selalu berkongsi masalah dengan rakan setugas saya. 23. Saya berasa seronok bekerja dalam satu kumpulan. 24. Saya mendapati pelajar-pelajar kini sukar dikawal. 25. Saya berasa bosan bekerja kerana terpaksa mengawal tingkah laku pelajar. 26. Masalah disiplin pelajar selalu mengganggu saya. 27. Saya berasa kecewa dengan sesetengah sikap pelajar. 28. Masalah disiplin di kalangan pelajar menghalang saya menjalankan tugas dengan sempuma. 29. Saya mendapati bahawa saya tidak mempunyai masa yang cukup untuk menyiapkan kerja saya. 30. Saya sukar menyiapkan kerja dalam masa yang dipexuntukkan. 31. Saya harus bekerja dengan pantas untuk menyiapkan kerja saya. 32. Masa sangat terhad untuk saya menyiapkan sesuatu tugas. 33. Saya terpaksa membawa balik tugasan ke rumah untuk menyiapkan tugasan tersebut.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4

5 5

I3 5
cl 2 6

4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 5

cl 2 7 El 2 8 I2 9 I3 0 c l 31

3 I2 I3 3

4 5

1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3

I3 4 I3 5 0 36 7 I I3 8

4 5 4 5

4 5 4 5

119

Bahagian C: Tahap Tekanan Sila nyatakan sejauh mana anda bersetuju dengan setiap pemyataan di bawah ini dengan membulatkan nombor yang berkenaan. 1 2 3 4 5 Sentiasa (Always) Kerap kali (Often) Kadang-kadang (Occasionally) Jarang (Seldom) Tidak pemah (Never) Code 34. Berasa sangat letih setiap hari selepas bekerja. 35. Mengalami sakit tengkuk. 36. Mengalami sakit kepala. 37. Mengalami sakit perut. 38. Mendapati bahawa saya lambat pulih selepas mengalami sesuatu insiden yang buruk. 39. Mengalami sakit belakang. 40. Mengalami masalah emosi. 41. Sejak kebelakangan ini, saya berasa kurang sabar. 42. Berasa tertekan bekerja sebagai seorang guru43. Berasa terpaksa menghadapi hari esok. 44. Berasa terganggu apabila dalam melaksanakan perancangan saya, saya terpaksa bergantung kepada tindakan orang lain. 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5

I40
I4 0 c l 41

I 42

3 3 3

4 4 4

5 5 5

I 43 I 44 I 45

I 46

I 47 I 48

I 49

120

~ Mudah marah. 45. 46. Mudah terkejut. 47. Mendapati bahawa saya bercakap lebih pantas daripada biasa. 48. Sukar untuk duduk diam. 49. Sukar kekal dalam sesuatu aktiviti dalam jangka masa panjang. 50. Menghadapi masalah untuk tidur pada waktu malam. 5 1. Tidak menghadirkan diri untuk menghilangkan rasa tertekan kerana tugas.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5

I5 0
I5 1

cl 5 2
I5 3

0 54

I5 5 cl 5 6

TERIMA KASIH

121

Appendix C

Hamdiah bt Othrnan, Sekolah Siswazah, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok, Kedah Darul Aman.

Pengarah Pendidikan Negeri, Jabatan Pendidikan Pulau Pinang, Bangunan Syed Putra, 10900 Pulau Pinang. (U-p. Ketua Penolong Pengarah, Unit Perhubungan dan Pendaflaran) Tuan,

9 SEPTEMBER 1995.

MEMOHON KEBENARAN UNTUK MENJALANKAN KAJIAN DI SEMBILAN BUAH SEKOLAH MENENGAH DI GEORGETOWN, PULAU PINANG Surat daripada Unit Perancangan dart Penyelidikan, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, Ruj.: KP (BPPP) 13/15 Jld. 46 (452) yang bertarikh 30 Ogos 1996, adalah dirujuk. 2. Sehubungan dengan itu, saya ingin memohon kebenaran daripada pihak tuan untuk membolehkan saya menjalankan kajian tentang Correlates Of Stress Among Secondary School Teachers in Penang di sembilan buah sekolah menengah di Georgetown pada bulan September dan Oktober, 1996. Sekolah-sekolah tersebut ialah: i. SMKA Almashoor (Perempuan) ii. SM Bukit Gambir iii. SM Convent Datuk Keramat iv. SM Datuk Hj. Mohd Nor Ahmad v. SM Hutchings vi. SM Padang Polo vii. SM Perempuan Sri Mutiara viii, SM Teknik (TARP) ix. SM Convent Lebuh Light 3 . Kajian ini perlu dibuat sebagai memenuhi sebahagian syarat ijazah Sarjana Sains Pengurusan di Universiti Utara Malaysia.

122

4. Kerjasama daripada pihak tuan amat saya hargai dan saya dahului dengan ucapan setinggi-tinggi terima kasih.

Saya yang benar,

(hAh4DIAH BT. OTHMAN)

123

Telefon: 2556900 Kanw: PENDIDIKAld Faks: (U-2554960

Huj. Tuarv:

Ruj. Kami.

Pn. Hamdiah bt. Othman, 273E, Tanjong Tokong , 10470 Pulau Pinang.

KP(BPPP) 13/15 Jld 46 (QQ) ogos 1996. Tarikh:@

Puan \

Kebenaran Eagi Menjalankan Kajian Ke Sekolah-Sekolah, Jabatan-Jabatan Dan Institusi-Institusi Di Bawah Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia
Adalah saya diarah untuk memaklumkan bahawa permohonan puan menjalankan kajian mengenai

untuk

Correlates Of Stress Among Secondary School Teachers Penang . diluluskan

In

2. K e l u l u s a n ini a d a l a h b e r d a s a r k a n k e p a d a h a n y a apa y a n g terkandung di dalam cadangan penyelidikan yang puan kemukakan ke B a h a g i a n ini. Kebenaran baqi mensqunakan sampel kaiian perlu diperolehi d a r i p a d a K e t u a BahaqianlPenqarah P e n d i d i k a n N e q e r i yanq b e r k e n a a n , 3. Puan juga d i k e h e n d a k i m e n g h a n t a r s e n a s k h a h hasi. kajian puan k e B a h a g i a n ini s e b a i k s a h a j a s e l e s a i k e l a k . Sekian. BERKHI DMAT UNTUK NEGARA CINTAILAH BAHASA

KITA"
perintah,

Saya y a n g menurut

(DR. ABD. KARIMBIN MD. NOR) b.p. Pengarah Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Pendidikan, b.p. P e n d a f t a r B e s a r S e k o l a h - S e k o l a h d a n G u r u - G u r u , Kementerian Pendidikan.

124

sk. Pengarah J Jabatan Pendidikan P. Pinang. Dekan, Sekolah UUM .

Siswazah,

125

XO, Telefono

O&-625339/625448 624532/625340

i:uj, Kamin ( 36 )dlmpPely,P.P.0051-20Jld. 1. Tari.kh : 11 September, 1996.

13

Puan EQwdiah bt. Otkman, 273-E, Tanjong Tokong, 10470 FULAUPLMWG.

,.

Penyelidikan Pendidikan Permohonm Irienggunakan Sampel Peqyelidikan Dan Melibatkan Sekolah-sekolah Di Pulau Pinang

.;.

Saya adal& diarah merujuk kepada permohanan %X?B/puan tersebut di atas. 2. 'Bpraar/puan adalah dimaklumkan bahawa permohonan %xzm/puan untuk menggun&an sampel pcqyelidikan seperti yang dikemukakan ke jabatan ini dan juga untuk melibatkan sokolah-sekalah seperti dalam senarai yang dikepilkan adalah diluluskand Kelulusan ini. haqya dilrerikanberdasarkan kepada apa yang ter3. kanlung dalam alat pengukur a:tau instrumen yang &xxn/puan kemukakan ke jabatani.nL Untuk menentukan kerja-kerja biasa sekolah tidak terjejas adalah diminta mewubungi guru besar/pengetua sekolah untuk menentukan tarikh, mass dan kelas (bukan kelas peperiksaan rasmi kerajaan) yang &an dilibatkan dalam pcnyelidikan wpuanc

l oo

50

m/puan adalah diminta memnjukkan surat kelulusan ini apabila men&ubungi @.wu besw/pen@?tua sokolah.

126 . ..2/-

wpuan adalah jugs dimints menghnntar senaskah hasil 6, penyelidikm %xx&puan ke jabstan ini sebaik sahaja ianyn siape

_ Saya yang menurut perintah, I. . . -A( AJXIO BAKAR BIN +MD.NUX

b,p. Pensarah Pendidikan Pondaftar Sekolah-sekolah, / Pulau Pinanga

s.ks IS Pengarah, Bahagian Perancangan Dan Penyelidikan Pendidikano Kementerian Fendidikan Malaysia, 1 l 4 Parss 29 3 & 59 Blok J, _ PusatBandarDamans;zra, 30604 KuaLa Lumpur, @*py . Dr. Abd. &&iibin ? IW. Nor ) . - Surat tuan KP(BPPP) 13/15 Jld.46(452) a.dalah berkaitan. . 0 ., Pegawai PorxIidik,an Dac3rah PLllau/mra L Tengah./Sela%ar$ Pultm Pinang. , .. *. Pengetua/Guru Besax, sekolah-sekolah berken&no - - Pengetua SMKA Almashcm (Permpuan) b .Pengetua SM Bukit Gambira Pengetua SM Convent Datuk Keramat Pengetua SM Datuk Hj. I%hd. Nor Al-mad , Pengetua SM Hutchjngs Pengetua SM Padang Polo 'Peigetua SM Permpuan Sri Mutiara Pengetua SM Teknik (TARP) Pengetua,SM Convent Letmh Light I. . b
I * 1

_.'
_..

^
_._

bert=iJboogos 1996

2.

3.

-.

127

b!yi:

IcTH/hmn
131092