Abstract

The study was conducted to assess the burnout of government teachers regarding selected demographic variables. A researcher-made, valid and reliable tool “Teacher’s Burnout Inventory-TBI” was used to assess the burnout level of SSTs. The reliability of the inventory was recorded as 0.822. Three null hypotheses were also devised and accordingly tested. The data analysis revealed that all together, the burnout level among SST teachers of D.I. Khan was. low. On the gender basis, a significant difference was recorded while, no significant differences were noted on the marital status and the locality facets of the burnout. Various recommendations, including increase in pay and allowances, convince and medical facilities. along with trainings regarding coping and diminishing stress and burnout, were made on the basis of data analysis.

Key Words

Burnout, Assessment, Emotional Exhaustion (EE), Depersonalization (DP), Personal              Accomplishment (PA).

Introduction

The world is changing rapidly; These changes affect our societies which in turn affect the entire educational system. The development of the modern technology and its inclusion in schools and classrooms, changing current family structures, and legislative revolutions in the education system have strongly influenced various teaching-learning processes (Rodriguez & Fernandez, 2012).

The present-day teacher has to face over-work and high level of frustration. Factors like ungrateful school heads, intense un-academic work-load, improbable anticipations, poor professional environment, inappropriate planning, contest and disputes among the teachers, poverty and lack of the resources, illiterate parents, students’ discipline related problems, poor service conditions, unusual growing educational system, poor quality teacher trainings, rapidly varying social values, teachers’ social un-acceptability, fastidiousness, poor system policies, teachers’ own dilemmas, impatience and annoyance, inadequate control, lack of rewards and incentives, unfairness and conflict in values are . some of the factors causing stress and then burnout among the teachers (Leiter & Maslach, 2005; Küçüko?lu, 2014; Rajeswari, 2014; Jacobson, 2016). Hence, it is obligatory to make result oriented and serious efforts. to reduce these traumatic factors which eventually lead to burnout. Pleasant organizational environment, democratic and co-operative leadership and teachers’ social success are the major factors that can diminish their stress and hence burnout (Mohua, 2012).

The teachers face emotionally confrontational circumstances that warn their performance, their Psychological and physical welfare, and more generally the entire teaching-learning process (Kokkinos, 2007). Secondary School Teachers in this regard experience more harassment, reduced motivation, and more specifically the symptoms that cause exhaustion  (Miguel & José, 2017) while exhaustion leads to cynicism (Gil-Monte, 2005) that further leads to reduced personal efficiency. Exhaustion, cynicism and reduced personal accomplishment lead to potential burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2005).

Rationale of the Study

The existing literature available on burnout shows that only a few studies have been conducted in Pakistan that spotlight on teachers’ burnout. Teachers’ un-enjoying professional adjustments usually turn into burnout which causes multifarious psychological tribulations and consequently let downs teaching-learning process. Hence, the scholar considered it obligatory to conduct a study on teachers’ burnout. The study was. carried out in the view of three different demographic variables counting gender of teachers, school locality and their marital status as well. 




Statement of the Problem

This study was conducted under the title “Assessment of the Government Teachers’ Burnout Regarding Selected Demographic Variables”. Various empirical studies on burnout verified its sequential growth i.e. initial exhaustion, then depersonalization and afterwards diminished personal accomplishment takes place (Brock & Grady, 2002; Leiter & Maslach, 2005). Exhaustion refers to tiredness due to lack of energy, depersonalization means keeping distance from people and reduced personal accomplishment means job inefficiency. that lead to Burnout (Leiter & Maslach, 2005).




Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study were:

1. To assess the burnout level of SST teachers.

2. To compare the SSTs’ burnout in relation to gender, locality and marital status.




Research Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were considered for this study:

H01: No significant difference occurs in the burnout of SST teachers concerning their gender.

H02: No significant difference occurs in the burnout of SST teachers concerning their school locality.

H03: No significant difference occurs in the burnout of SST teachers concerning their marital status.




Limitations and Delimitations of the Study

A researcher made tool “Teacher Burnout Inventory” was used to collect data from SSTs. The study was delimited to the SST teachers appointed in Government high schools of district DIKhan.




Significance of the Study

Burnout is considered as an important multifaceted psychological disorder in teachers. In the current study, the investigator has aimed to assess the burnout level of SSTs of district DIKhan which will be helpful for the teachers themselves and their school heads, as well as, educational administrators and policy makers to identify and then formulate appropriate actions for coping with their burnout. The true measures in this regard, will undeniably improve teaching learning process. 

Literature Review

Burnout

The word “Burnout” at the first time was explained in the year 1975 by a US clinical psycho-analyst Freudenberger. He defined it as, “a state of emotional and corporal tiredness due to disproportionate demands on energy, potency and resources”. 

According to Colman (2001), “Burnout is a delicate stress disorder or reaction characterized by exhaustion resulting from too much hard work with anxiety, tiredness, fatigue, insomnia (sleeplessness), depression, helplessness and impairment in work performance”. This definition points out burnout to be a disease caused by over dedication. According to Brock & Grady (2002) “Burnout is a syndrome of Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and reduced Personal Accomplishment that can occur among working individuals”. 

Maslach’s Burnout Model 

One of the most famous burnout models was presented by Maslach in the year 1982 that emphasized three constructs of burnout i.e emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment.  Exhaustion refers to “the feelings of physical strain and psychological tiredness as a result of constant personal interactions” while depersonalization means “the development of negative and distant feelings toward other people” and Diminished work performance means “the loss of confidence in personal performance and the presence of a negative self-image” (Rodríguez & Fernández, 2017). Exhausted Persons feel shattered, incapable to deal with, drained and down having insufficient energy along with physical pains and/ or stomach disturbances (Leiter & Maslach, 2005).




Reduction of Burnout

There are two different views to lessen burnout; one is to modify the individual him or herself and the other is to give attention to transform the organization and its working environment (Schaufeli & Buunk, 2003). However, it is relatively trouble-free to change an individual as compar. to modify the entire organization; so, the most favorable approach is to excite the personal agency (Maslach & Goldberg, 1998). 




Burnout and Demographic Variables

Various demographics variables .related to burnout are sex, qualification, age, marital status, experience, pay, rewards and incentives, prizes and punishments, school head’s behavior, organizational policies, teacher’s own problems and various environmental and situational factors. . (Maslach & Jackson, 1981, 1984; Küçüko?lu, 2014). 

Research Methodology

This was an empirical study and mainly falls within the purview of survey research design.  The population of the study consisted of. 884 SSTs (Female=325, and Male=559) posted at Government High Schools of district DIKhan. Keeping in view the nature of the study, purposive stratified sampling technique was adopted. For this purpose, Yamane (1967) formula was used which yield 272 as sample size.

 (Sample size).

The only dependent variable of the study was “Burnout” whereas gender, locality and marital status of SSTs were selected the demographic variables. Required information was gathered from the selected SSTs using researcher- made “Teacher’s Burnout Inventory”, however the central idea for this inventory was taken up from Maslach and Jackson (1981, 1986).The researcher used seven point Likert scale that ranges for exhaustion scale 0-54 (for 9 items)0-30 for depersonalization scale having 6 items and 0-48 for personal accomplishment scale having 8 items.

Standardized procedures were adopted to get validated the tool, using Exploratory Factor Analysis, content and face validity. For reliability analysis, Cronbach’s Alpha was used. In the “Teacher Burnout Inventory- TBI”, 22 items were reserved and other 4 items containing ITC values smaller than 0.4 were accordingly removed as suggested by Pallant (2010).  The Cronbach’s alpha value for TBI was found to be 0.822 which is suitable as proposed by Bryman & Cramer (2010).

Following is the range of scores on three different sub-scales of ‘Teacher Burnout Inventory’ (Range adopted from Maslach & Jackson (1986)).

 

Table 1. Showing Range of Burnout Scores

Burnout Level	Exhaustion	Depersonalization	Personal Accomplishment
High Burnout Level	?27	?13	?30
Average Burnout Level	17 to 26	7 to12	31 to 36
Low Burnout Level	?16	?6	?37

Data Collection Procedure

Administration of Teachers’ Burnout Inventory

For the purpose of data collection, the TBI was distributed among 272 SSTs of district DIKhan out of which only 204 SSTs responded among which 183 SST teachers responded appropriately. So183 inventories were considered for data analysis.

Results & Analysis

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics

Demographic Variables	Categories	N	Percentage
Gender  (N=183)	Male	97	53
	Female	86	47
Locality	Urban	117	63.9
	Rural	66	36.1
Marital Status	Unmarried	47	25.7
	Married	136	74.3

This table shows that out of 183 SSTs, 53% were male while 47% were female. Similarly 63.9% SSTs were posted in urban while 36.1% SSTs were working in rural areas of district DIKhan. Further 25.7% SSTs were unmarried while 74.3% SSTs were married. A graphical representation of the above table is shown below:

Figure 1

Showing Percentage of SSTs on Gender, Locality and Marital Status.



Table 2. Number and Percentage of SSTs on three Burnout Levels

Burnout Dimension	Burnout Level	N=183   %age		Mean Burnout Score with Interpretation
Emotional Exhaustion	Low	97	53.0	15.09 Low
	Average	40	21.9
	High	46	25.1
Depersonalization	Low	119	65.00	7.31 Moderate
	Average	31	16.90
	High	33	18.00
Personal Accomplishment	Low	49	26.80	37.63 High
	Average	27	14.80
	High	107	58.50

This table shows that that at Emotional Exhaustion aspect, 53% SSTs are showing low burnout while 21.9% SSTs are showing average and remaining 25.1% SSTs are lying in high burnout level. About 1/4^th of the entire sample showing high burnout on EE is highly shocking. This will highly disturb their domestic as well as professional life. Further, more than half teachers are lying in low burnout level. The mean value for entire sample (N=183) for EE is 15.09 which also falls under low EE.

On Depersonalization aspect of burnout, 65% SSTs are showing low burnout while 16.9% SSTs are showing average and remaining 18% SSTs are in high burnout. About 1/5^th sample showing high burnout on depersonalization aspect of burnout which is again highly shocking. This depersonalization will cause social detachment. Again more than half SSTs are lying in low burnout level. The mean value for entire sample (N=183) for DP is 7.31 which falls under moderate DP.

On Personal Accomplishment, 26.80% SSTs are showing high burnout while 14.8% SSTs are showing average and remaining 58.50% SSTs are at low burnout because lower means on PA means higher burnout and vice versa. About 1/4^th sample is showing high burnout on Personal accomplishment which is again highly terrible. This shows that they are no more efficient in their professional engagements. Here again more than half SSTs are lying in low burnout level. The mean value for entire sample (N=183) for PA is 37.63 which also falls under high PA.

From . Table 2, it is clear that the SSTs were facing low EE, moderate DP and High PA which collectively means low burnout. Percentage of SSTs on 3 aspects of burnout is shown in . figure 2. 

Figure 2

Showing Percentage of SSTs on three Dimensions of Burnout



Table 3. Gender based Analysis of data of SSTs on Burnout

Burnout Dimensions	Group	N	Mean	SD	‘t’	‘p’
Emotional Exhaustion	Male	126	19.619	10.366	2.054	p=0.041< .05 Sig
	Female	57	16.158	10.962
Depersonalization	Male	126	11.87	6.102	3.955	0.000<.05 Sig
	Female	57	07.96	6.344
Personal Accomplishment	Male	126	16.070	6.997	1.817	0.071>0.05 Not Sig
	Female	57	18.119	7.104

This table shows that 't' value 2.054 comparing the mean values of emotional exhaustion of male and female SSTs was significant (at 0.05 level) which depicts that a substantial difference occurs among the means of male and female SST teachers. This means emotional exhaustion was influenced by gender and cannot be characterized to a chance factor of sampling error. The higher means of the male SSTs (M=19.619) than the female SSTs (M=16.158) shows that the male SSTs were more burned out than the female SSTs on the emotional exhaustion aspect of burnout.

 

Further 't' value 3.955 comparing the mean values of depersonalization aspect of burnout of male and female SSTs was also significant (at 0.05 level) which shows that there exists difference between the means of male and female SST teachers. This means depersonalization was influenced by gender and cannot be characterized to a chance factor of sampling error. The higher means of the male SSTs (M=11.87) than the female SSTs (M=7.96) shows that the male SSTs were more burned out than the female SSTs on the aspect of depersonalization.

The table further reveals that‘t’ value 1.817 was not found significant (P=0.071>.05). It pointed out that the male and the female SST teachers don’t differ significantly with regard to burnout in terms of personal accomplishment. The observed differences in their means occurred by chance. Further mean score of the female SST teachers was greater than that of the male SST teachers (M = 18.119 > M = 16.070), it may be said that the male SST teachers experienced more burnout than their female colleagues on the personal accomplishment aspect (because high scores of personal accomplishment indicates lesser burnout and vice versa).  As a whole, the male SSTs were more burned out than the female SSTs. Therefore, hypothesis H₀₁ is rejected.

Figure 3



Table 4. Locality based Analysis of data of SSTs on Burnout

 

Burnout Dimensions	Group	N	Mean	SD	‘t’	‘p’
Emotional Exhaustion	Urban	80	17.41	9.387	1.641	P=0.102>.05 Not Sig
	Rural	103	20.00	11.99
Depersonalization	Urban	80	10.51	7.050	-.255	P=0.799>.05 Not Sig
	Rural	103	10.76	5.922
Personal Accomplishment	Urban	80	18.413	8.034	1.568	P=0.119>.05 Not Sig
	Rural	103	16.757	6.244

This table shows that ‘t’ value 1.641, comparing the mean values of emotional exhaustion of urban and rural SSTs, was not significant at 0.05 level indicating that the difference between the means of urban and rural SSTs can be endorsed by a chance factor of sampling error. It also means that emotional exhaustion was not influenced by the locality. Both the urban and the rural SSTs experienced emotional exhaustion of the same degree. However, higher mean of the rural SSTs (M=20.00) than the urban SSTs (M=17.41) shows that the rural SSTs were more burned out than the urban SSTs on the emotional exhaustion aspect.

 

This table further shows that 't' value -.255, comparing the mean values of depersonalization of urban and rural SSTs, was also not significant at 0.05 level, indicating that the difference between the means of urban and rural SSTs can be characterized by a chance factor of sampling error. It also means that depersonalization was not influenced by the locality. Both the urban and the rural SSTs experienced depersonalization of the same degree. The higher mean of the rural SSTs (M=10.76) than the urban SSTs (M=10.51) also shows that the rural SSTs were more burned out than the urban SSTs on the aspect of depersonalization.

The table also shows that ‘t’ value 1.568, comparing the mean values of personal accomplishment of urban and rural SSTs, was too not significant at 0.05 level, indicating that the difference between the means of urban and rural SSTs can be ascribed by a chance factor of sampling error. It also means that personal accomplishment was not influenced by the locality. Both the urban and the rural SST teachers experienced personal accomplishment of the same degree. However, greater mean of the urban SSTs than the rural SSTs (M = 18.413> M = 16.757) indicates that the rural SSTs experienced more burnout than the urban SSTs (because higher scores of personal accomplishment indicates lower level burnout and vice versa).

As a whole, no significant difference exists in the burnout of SSTs on the locality aspect. Thus, hypothesis H₀₂ is accepted.

 

Table 5. Data Analysis based on Marital status of SSTs on Burnout

 

Burnout Dimensions	Group	N	Mean	SD	‘t’	‘p’
Emotional Exhaustion	Unmarried	46	18.20	12.104	-.254	P=0.800>.05 Not Sig
	Married	137	18.66	10.157
Depersonalization	Unmarried	46	10.50	6.696	-.183	P=0.855>.05 Not Sig
	Married	137	10.70	6.352
Personal Accomplishment	Unmarried	46	17.609	8.007	.141	P=0.888>.05 Not Sig
	Married	137	17.438	6.814

This table shows that ’t’ value -.254, comparing the mean values of emotional exhaustion of unmarried and married SSTs, was not significant at 0.05 level, pointing that the difference between the means of married and unmarried SSTs can be endorsed by a chance factor of sampling error. It also means that emotional exhaustion was not influenced by marital status. Both the unmarried and the married SSTs experienced emotional exhaustion of the same degree. However, higher mean of the married SSTs (M=18.66) than the unmarried SSTs (M=18.20) shows that the married SST teachers were more burned out than the unmarried SST teachers on the aspect of emotional exhaustion.

Table also shows that  't' value -.183, comparing the mean values of depersonalization of unmarried and married SSTs, was not significant at 0.05 level, indicating that the difference between the means of unmarried and married SSTs can be endorsed by a chance factor of sampling error. It also means that depersonalization was not influenced by the marital status. Both the unmarried and the married SSTs experienced depersonalization of the same degree. The higher mean of married SSTs (M=10.70) than unmarried SSTs (M=10.50) shows that married SST teachers were more burned out than unmarried SSTs.

 The table further reveals that ‘t’ value -.183, comparing the mean values of personal accomplishment of unmarried and married SSTs, was not significant at 0.05 level, indicating that the difference between the means of the unmarried and the married SSTs can be ascribed by a chance factor of sampling error. It also means that the personal accomplishment was not influenced by the marital status. Both the unmarried and the married SSTs experienced personal accomplishment of the same degree. Since the mean score of unmarried SST teachers was greater than that of married SSTs (M = 17.609 > M = 17.438), it may be said that the married SSTs experienced more burnout than the unmarried SSTs (because higher score of personal accomplishment shows lower burnout).

As a whole, no significant difference occurs in the burnout of SSTs on marital status basis. Hence, hypothesis H₀₃ is accepted.

Findings and Discussions

The study entitled, “Assessment of government teachers’ burnout regarding selected demographic variables” aimed at finding the burnout level of SSTs along with the comparison of their burnout in connection with certain demographic variables. The study was delimited to the SST teachers of district D.I.Khan. Required data using “Teacher Burnout Inventory” was collected from 183 SSTs. The collected data was analyzed using SPSS (Version 22.00). 

1. The results show that burnout is present among SSTs of district D.I.Khan in varying degrees in all its three aspects. Overall SSTs are facing low burnout level (Ref Table 2). 

2. Testing of Hypothesis H01: The data analysis clearly depicts that the significant difference exists in the SSTs’ burnout in consideration of their gender. So H01 is rejected (Ref Table 3). The means of male and female SSTs on EE, DP and PA were recorded as 19.619, 11.87, 16.070 and 16.158, 7.96, 18.119 respectively which shows that male SSTs were more burned out than female SSTs.

3. Testing of Hypothesis H02: The data analysis clearly depicts that null significant difference exists in the SSTs’ burnout as far as their school locality is concerned. So H02 is accepted (Ref Table 4).The means of the urban and the rural SSTs on EE, DP and PA were recorded as 17.41, 10.51, 18.413 and 20.00, 10.76, 16.757 respectively which show that rural SSTs were more burned out than urban SSTs.

4. Testing of Hypothesis H03: The data analysis also depicts that null significant difference exists in the SSTs burnout concerning their marital status. So H03 is accepted (Ref Table 5).  The means of unmarried and married SSTs on EE, DP and PA aspects were recorded as 18.20, 10.50, 17.609 and 18.66, 10.70, 17.438 respectively which shows that the married SST teachers were more burned out than the unmarried SSTs.

Conclusions

From the above findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. Overall, SSTs of district D.I.Khan were facing low burnout.

2. The male SSTs were more burned out than the female SSTs.

3. The rural and the urban SSTs were facing the same burnout. 

4. The married and the unmarried SSTs were also facing the same burnout level. 

Recommendations

From the above conclusions, the following recommendations were drawn:

1. Proper measures must be made to eliminate the burnout of all D.I.Khan SSTs, so that teaching-learning process may be accomplished smoothly. School climate should be pleasant and friendly. Suitable salaries and incentives along with medical, transport, compensatory allowances, hard area allowance and other facilities should be given to all teachers. 

2. In Pakistani context, males are considered as the head of family. They have diverse responsibilities. Hence, Government should take measures to reduce their burnout by providing facilities and paying those sound salaries. 

References

• Brock, B. L., & Grady, M. L. (2002). Avoiding Burnout: A Principal's Guide to Keeping the Fire Alive. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.
• Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2010). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 10 for windows: A guide for social scientists. New York: Routledge.
• Colman, A. M. (2001). A Dictionary of Psychology. New York/ Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff Burn-Out. Journal of Social Issues, 30 (1), 159-165.
• Gil-Monte, P. (2005). The burnout syndrome: An occupational disease in the welfare society. Madrid: Pirámide .
• Jacobson, D. A. (2016). Causes and Effects of Teacher Burnout. Walden University.
• Kokkinos, C. M. (2007). Job stressors, Personality and Burnout in Primary School Teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology , 77, 229-243.
• Küçükoğlu, H. (2014). Ways to Cope with Teacher Burnout Factors in ELT Classrooms. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2741-2746.
• Leiter, M., & Maslach, C. (2005). Banishing Burnout: Six Strategies for Improving Your Relationship with Work. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Maslach, C. (1982). Burnout: The Cost of Caring. Psychiatric Services, 34 (7).
• Maslach, C., & Goldberg, J. (1998). Prevention of burnout: New perspectives. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 7 (1), 63-74.
• Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1984). Burnout in Organizational Settings. Applied Social Psychology Annual, 5, 133-153.
• Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1986). Maslach burnout inventory manual (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
• Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced Burnout. Journal of Orgazinational Behavior, 2 (2), 99-113.
• Miguel, R.-M. J., & José, F.-D. M. (2017). The effect of interpersonal relationships on burnout syndrome in Secondary Education teachers. Psicothema, 29 (3), 370-377.
• Mohua, B. (2012). Professional burnout in relation to emotional intelligence, mental health and social success of elementary school teachers. Department of education. Chandigarh: Punjab University.
• Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using the SPSS program (4th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
• Rajeswari, H. (2014). Burnout- Impact on Nursing. Narayana Nursing Journal: Love For Care .
• Rodríguez-Mantilla, J. M., & Fernández, M. J. (2017). The effect of interpersonal relationships on burnout syndrome in Secondary Education teachers. psicothema, 29 (3), 370-377.
• Schaufeli, W. B., & Buunk, B. P. (2003). Burnout: An overview of 25 years of research in the orizing. In M. J. Winnubst, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The handbook of work and health psychology (pp. 383-425). Chichester: Wiley.
• Yamane, Taro. (1967). Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 2nd Ed., New York: Harper and Row.