Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in ...

International Journal of Educational Planning & Administration.ISSN 2249-3093 Volume 3, Number 1 (2013), pp. 9-24© Research India Publicationshttp://www.ripublication.com/ijepa.htmOccupational Stress of Higher Secondary TeachersWorking in Vellore DistrictDr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya AnuradhaProfessor and Dean, School of Education and HRDDravidian University, Kuppam – 517426 Andhra PradeshE-mail : reddyloka1958@yahoo.co.inPost Doctoral Fellow, Dept. of EducationSchool of Education and HRD, Dravidian UniversityKuppam – 517426, Andhra PradeshE-mail : anu2599@gmail.comAbstractThis study examined the Occupational Stress of teachers working at highersecondary level. Three Hundred and Twenty Seven higher secondary teachersfrom Vellore District in Tamil Nadu were chosen as sample, by using SimpleRandom Sampling Technique and administered with an Occupational StressRating Scale. The statistical techniques employed were percentage, mean, SD,mean ± 1SD, t-test, F-test, and stepwise multiple regression analysis and theobtained results are analyzed accordingly. To overcome occupational stress,the researchers have suggested some measures which could prove beneficial toteachers in coping with stress are: improve self esteem, build self confidence,work on building emotional intelligence competencies, develop a good senseof humour, practice yoga and meditation, exercise regularly, foster asupportive friend circle, cultivate hobbies, develop effective communicationskills, and seek professional help, if necessary.IntroductionStress at work resulting from increasing complexities of work and its divergentdemand, has become a prominent and pervading feature of the modern organizations.The researchers in the area of organizational psychology and management have usedthe term job stress to denote employees’ mental state aroused by a job situation or acombination of job situations perceived as presenting excessive and divergentdemands. Caplan et al. (1975) have accordingly defined occupational stress as ‘anycharacteristics of job environment which poses a threat to the individual’.

10 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya AnuradhaOccupational stress, in particular, is the inability to cope with the pressures in a job(Rees, 1997). It is a mental and physical condition which affects an individual’sproductivity, effectiveness, personal health and quality of work (Comish and Swindle,1994). The ways in which stress manifests itself are generally referred to in terms ofbehavioural, physical or psychological outcomes. Teacher stress is a specific type ofoccupational stress. It is the experience by a teacher of unpleasant emotions such astension, frustration, anger and depression resulting from aspects of his/her work as ateacher (Kyriacou, 1987). Overall, teachers manifesting high levels of stress alsoshow signs of high levels of psychological distress, usually demonstrated by highanxiety and low psychological well-being, as well as decreased job satisfaction i.e.mental ill-health, burnout and job dissatisfaction among the teachers (Traverse andCooper, 1996). Teachers form the crux of the education system, preparing the youngadolescents to build their nation with purpose and responsibility and confront thechallenges of tomorrow. They are the social engineers and custodians of the futureand it is the responsibility of a teacher to mould and shape their future.Teachers are perennially exposed to high level of stress cutting across all cultures(Copper and Kelly, 1993; Reglin and Reitzammer, 1997; Chan, 1998; Mokdad, 2005).The combination of long working hours, insufficient pay, role ambiguity, poorteaching facilities, lack of social recognition, poor organizational climate, strainedrelationship with colleagues makeup a stressful recipe. As Kyriacou (1987) points out,it is the insidious day to day sources of stress with their cumulative effect, and not theless frequent but occasionally intent sources of stress, which teachers are concernedwith. The personality variables that have been linked to stress include locus ofcontrol, self-esteem, Type- A behaviour pattern, hardiness and negative affectivity(Ganster and Schaubroeck, 1991b; Murphy, 1995). Demographic variables that areproven to relate to someone’s job stressor/health relationships include gender, age,marital status, job tenure, job title and hierarchical level (Dua, 1994; Murphy, 1995),among which gender, age and hierarchical level were found to be the most significant,as further explanations reveal.Stress is often accepted as inescapable aspect of teaching. Teachers’ lives areadversely affected by stress leading to physical ill health (Otto, 1986; Mokdad, 2005)and mental ill health (Fletcher and Payne, 1982; Finlay- Jones, 1986; Beer and Beer,1992). Teacher stress often affects the teacher’s ability to function effectively (Blasé,1986; Poornima, 2010), sometimes to the extent of causing burnout (Seldman andZager, 1998; Reddy, 2011). Other common responses listed by Brown and Ralph(1992) includes reduction in work performance and output; inability to manage timeor delegate; feelings of alienation and inadequacy; loss of confidence and motivation;increasing introversion; irritability with colleagues; unwillingness to cooperate;frequent irrational conflict at work; withdrawal from supportive relationships;inappropriate cynical humor; persistent negative thoughts; increased substance abuse;loss of appetite; frequent infections; and accident proneness. In the present study, theinvestigators made an attempt to assess the level of stress experienced by the highersecondary teachers.

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 11Objectives of the Study To develop a tool to assess the level of Occupational Stress of higher secondaryteachers. To find out the significant difference, if any, in the Occupational Stress ofteachers working at higher secondary level due to variations in their Gender(men / women), Age (up to 35 yrs / 36-45 yrs / 46 yrs and above), Community(OC / BC / MBC, SC & ST), Marital status (married / unmarried), Educationalqualification (PG with B.Ed. & M.Ed. / PG with M.Ed. & M.Phil.), Nature ofthe subject the teachers handling i.e. Languages (English, Tamil, Hindi, French)/ Science (Physics, Chemistry, Botany, Zoology) / Mathematics and ComputerScience / Commerce, Salary received (up to Rs.10,000/-, Rs.10,001-Rs 15,000/-,Rs 15,001/-Rs. 20,000/-, Rs.20,001/- and above), Type of school they areworking-in (government / private), Location of school the teachers are workingin(rural / urban) and, Years of experience ( up to 15 yrs / 16 yrs and above). To study how far and to what extent the independent variables such as gender,age, community, marital status, educational qualification, nature of the subjectsthe teachers handling, salary they receive, type of school they are working-in,nature of school the teachers are working-in, and years of experience influencethe occupational stress.Hypothesis of the StudyThere exists a significant difference in the occupational stress of teachers working athigher secondary level due to variations in their gender, age, community, maritalstatus, educational qualification, nature of the subjects the teachers handling, salarythey receive, type of school the teachers are working-in, nature of school the teachersare working-in, and years of experience.MethodologySurvey method was used in the study. For the research tool, the researchers haveadopted and re-modified the rating scale developed by Reddy (2006) and modified byPoornima (2010) for assessing the occupational stress of special education teachers, asthis tool possessed the content, face and intrinsic validity and the calculated reliabilityvalue of the tool was found to be 0.97. However, the investigators felt that home-workinterface which has been left out in the tool, has to be included to know the role andimpact of family as well as work environment on the stress of higher secondaryteachers, keeping in mind the requirements of the present study. Accordingly, certainstatements were modified and the reliability of the modified tool was found to be0.93, by using split-half method. Thus the final form of 56 statements was framed andarranged under the five dimensions of occupational stress i.e. organizational structureand climate, personal and professional efficiency, intra and interpersonal interactions,home-work interface and environmental factors. Three Twenty Seven teachersworking in 32 higher secondary schools of Vellore district in Tamil Nadu werechosen as the sample, by using simple random sampling technique. The school headswere contacted in person, explained the purpose of the study and the OccupationalStress Rating Scale was administered to the teachers according to their convenience to

12 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya Anuradhacollect the data. The data were analyzed by using appropriate statistical techniquessuch as percentage, mean, SD, mean ± 1SD, t-test, F-test, and stepwise multipleregression analysis.Results and DiscussionThe mean and SD of occupational stress scores have been calculated for each teacherworking in the higher secondary schools. Based on mean and SD, the number andpercentage of higher secondary teachers falling under low, moderate and highoccupational stress have been calculated and the same is presented in table-1.Table-1: Number and Percentage of Teachers Working in Higher Secondary Schoolswith Low, Moderate and High Levels of Occupational StressOccupational StressNumber and Percentage of TeachersLow Moderate HighOrganizational Structure and Climate 42 (12.8) 238 (72.8) 47 (14.4)Personal and Professional Efficiency 31 (9.5) 253 (77.4) 43 (13.1)Intra and Interpersonal Interactions 40 (12.2) 242 (74.0) 45 (13.8)Home-Work Interface 52 (15.9) 230 (70.3) 45 (138)Environmental Factors 36 (11.0) 231 (70.6) 60 (18.3)Occupational Stress as a Whole 36 (11.0) 249 (76.1) 42 (12.8)Note: Number in the brackets denotes percentageFrom table-1 it is clear that, out of 327 higher secondary teachers, 232 (72.8%)teachers are showing moderate stress, while 47 (14.4%) and 42 (12.8%) teachers areunder high and low stress due to organizational structure and climate. Under thedimension-personal and professional efficiency, 253 (77.4%) teachers areexperiencing moderate stress, while 43 (13.1%) and 31 (9.5%) teachers are in theextreme ends of high and low stress. In case of intra and interpersonal interactions, theteachers with moderate, high and low stress are 242 (74.0%), 45 (13.8%) and 40(12.2%) in number respectively. With respect to the dimensions – home -workinterface and environmental factors, 230 (70.3%) and 231 (70.6%) teachers are fallingunder moderate stress, 45 (13.8%) and 60 (18.3%) teachers are having high stress and,52 (15.9%) and 36 (11.0%) teachers are showing low stress respectively. Whenoccupational stress as a whole is considered, it was found that 249 (76.1%) teachersare experiencing moderate level of stress, followed by 42 (12.8%) teachers with highstress and 36 (11.0%) teachers with low stress. These findings reflect the results ofJohn (2007), Reddy (2006), Reddy and Poornima (2007), Rao (2010), and Ushasri(2007).

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 13One of the major objectives of the present study is to find out the level ofoccupational stress of teachers working at higher secondary level. To identify thelevel of occupational stress of teachers working at higher secondary schools, meanand SD for each stressor of the occupational stress dimensions have been calculatedfor the whole sample of teachers working at higher secondary schools. By using mean± 1 SD, the low, moderate and high level stressors have been identified. The same ispresented in table-2.Table-2:TeachersMean Scores and Level of Occupational Stress of Higher SecondaryS.No.(1)Statements(2)Mean(3)Level(4)I Organizational Structure and Climate1 Long working hours and expectations to do more work. 3.27 H2 Carrying multiple responsibilities in a short span of time. 2.08 L3 Lack of information in carrying out the professional2.09 Lresponsibilities.4 Working on assignments that are not necessary to the 2.05 Lprofession.5 Lack of equipments and teaching- learning materials. 2.68 M6 Inadequate supportive staff in the school. 2.67 M7 Inadequate trained human resources to carry out the work 1.98 Lassigned.8 Large class size with students of diverse needs. 3.32 H9 Lack of time to pay individual attention to each special needs 2.04 Lstudent.10 Lack of involvement in the decision making process of the 2.83 Mactivities related to the profession.11 Lack of opportunities for promotion in the school. 2.91 M12 Inadequate salary for the work done in the school. 2.87 M13 Stringent rules and regulations in the school that hinders to 2.86 Mact independently.14 Taking responsibilities for the activities of others. 3.35 HII Personal and Professional Efficiency15 Inadequate training to meet the demands of the profession. 2.17 L16 Lack of opportunities for professional enhancement in the 2.96 Mform of participation in professional meetings/ seminars/conferences.17 Inadequate knowledge in using new aids and appliances. 2.52 M18 Thrusting on development of curricular innovations and 2.72 Mmaterials.19 Over qualified to perform the job. 2.79 M

14 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya Anuradha20 Lack of commitment and interest to perform the job. 2.01 L21 Problem in identification and assessment procedures. 2.57 M22 Difficulty in managing students in the classroom. 2.24 L23 Difficulty in solving the problems that arise out of work. 2.14 L24 Face problems in decision making process. 2.99 M25 Unable to complete the task within a stipulated period of 2.53 Mtime.26 Difficult to implement new policies and procedures in place 2.79 Mof those already in practice.III Intra and Interpersonal Interactions27 Difficult to adjust with the fellow teachers in the school. 2.26 M28 Lack of healthy interactions between/among the teachers. 2.17 L29 Inadequate knowledge to give guidance and counseling to 2.15 Lstudents and parents.30 Stressful interactions with parents and lack of parental 2.79 Msupport.31 Lack of teamwork and professional collaboration to meet the 2.83 Mdiverse needs of children.32 Angry with the students for their continuous failure. 2.60 M33 Difficulty in understanding the students’ behaviour. 2.44 M34 Difficult to satisfy the requirements of the management. 2.51 M35 Misunderstood the organizational values and goals. 2.35 M36 Lack of pro-active communication with the management. 2.52 M37 Poor quality of feedback and supervision that address teacher 2.55 Mconcerns.38 Difficult to discuss the failure of the students with their 2.69 Mparents.IV Home-Work Interface39 Financial problems at home are hindering my work. 2.15 L40 Difficult to concentrate in the class due to tension with my 2.10 Lspouse.41 Health of my children is disturbing a lot. 2.34 M42 Education of my children is interfering in my job. 2.30 M43 Insufficient salary is troubling both my family and work 2.33 Menvironment.44 Family needs are taking priority than the teaching. 2.11 LV Environmental Factors45 Bullying and frightening by the students inside and outside 2.26 Mthe school.46 Complaints by the students. 2.58 M47 Complaints by other staff members. 2.48 M48 Problems with students’ indiscipline. 2.98 M49 Seldom opportunity to utilize the abilities and experienceindependently.3.04 H

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 1550 Seldom rewarded for the hard labor and efficient2.96 Mperformance.51 Problems faced with drug abuse by the students. 2.50 M52 Problems arising out of fraud and financial mismanagement 2.29 Mwithin the school.53 Polluted working environment. 2.59 M54 Difficult to solve students disputes. 2.39 M55 Problems with the theft and damage of the property by the 2.64 Mstudents.6 Lack of respect for teachers by the pupils, parents and the 2.78 Msociety.Note: Levels of Occupational Stress - Low: 2.25 and below; Moderate: 2.26 to 2.99;High: 3.00 and aboveWith respect to the occupational stress dimension - organizational structure andclimate, it is clear that, the long working hours and expectations to do more work,large class size with students of diverse needs and taking responsibilities for theactivities of others (S. No. 1, 8 & 14 respectively) are the major stressors causing highlevel of stress among the higher secondary teachers. Contrary to this, the teachers arehaving low level of occupational stress in certain aspects such as; carrying multipleresponsibilities in a short span of time, lack of information in carrying out theprofessional responsibilities, working on assignments that are not necessary to theprofession, inadequate trained human resources to carryout the work assigned andlack of time to pay individual attention to each special needs student (S. No. 2, 3, 4, 7& 9 respectively). Further, the same teachers are showing moderate level ofoccupational stress in 6 aspects such as; lack of equipments and teaching learningmaterials, inadequate supportive staff in the school, lack of involvement in thedecision making process of the activities related to the teaching profession, lack ofopportunities for promotion in the school, inadequate salary for the work done in theschool and stringent rules and regulations in the school that hinders to actindependently (S. No. 5, 6, 10, 11, 12 & 13 respectively).Certain aspects related to the personal and professional efficiency, such as;inadequate training to meet the demands of the profession, lack of commitment andinterest to perform the job, difficulty in managing students in the classroom anddifficulty in solving the problems that arise out of work (S. No. 15, 20, 22 & 23respectively) are evoking low level of stress among teachers, whereas, the aspectssuch as; lack of opportunities for professional enhancements in the form ofparticipation in professional meetings / seminars / conferences, inadequate knowledgein using new aids and appliances, thrusting on development of curricular innovationsand materials, over qualified to perform the job, problem in identification andassessment procedures, facing problems in decision making process, unable tocomplete the task within a stipulate period of time and difficult to implement newpolicies and procedures in place of those already in practice (S. No. 16, 17, 18, 19, 21,24, 25 & 26 respectively) are making the teachers experience moderate level of stress.

16 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya AnuradhaWith regard to the dimension intra and interpersonal interactions, the highersecondary teachers exhibit moderate level of stress with regard to; difficulty inadjusting with the fellow teachers in the school, stressful interactions with parents andlack of parental support, lack of teamwork and professional collaboration to meet thediverse needs of children, being angry with the students for their continuous failure,difficulty in understanding the students behaviour, difficulty in satisfying therequirements of the management, misunderstanding the organizational values andgoals, lack of pro-active communication with the management, poor quality offeedback and supervision that address the teachers’ concern and difficult to discussthe failure of the students with their parents (S. No. 27, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 27& 38 respectively). On the other hand, the teachers are showing low level of stress inonly two aspects i.e. lack of healthy interactions between / among the teachers andinadequate knowledge to give guidance and counseling to students and parents (S. No.28 & 29 respectively).Under the dimension home-work interface, the higher secondary teachersexperience equal amount of low and moderate levels of stress with 3 aspects in eachof them. The financial problems at home, difficulty in concentrating in the classroomdue to tension with the spouse and priority for family needs (S. No. 39. 40 & 44respectively) are placing the teachers under low level stress category, whereas, healthof their children, education of their children and insufficient salary (S. No. 41, 42 &43 respectively) are the sources of moderate level of stress.With regard to the dimension environmental factors, the higher secondary teachersare showing high level of stress due to the seldom opportunities to utilize theirabilities and experience independently. In the remaining aspects i.e. bullying andfrightening by the students inside and outside the school, complaints by the students,complaints by the staff members, problems with students indiscipline, lack of rewardfor the hard labor and efficient performance, problems of students with drug abuse,problems due to fraud and financial mismanagement within the school, pollutedworking environment, difficult to solve students disputes, problems with the theft anddamage of the school property by the students, and lack of respect for teachers by thepupils, parents and society (S. No. 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 & 56respectively), the teachers are experiencing moderate level of stress.To know the significant differences, if any, in the occupational stress of highersecondary teachers due to variations in their personal and demographic variables,mean and SD has been calculated for each group in a variable and t / F-tests has beenused appropriately. T-test is used to know the significant difference between twogroups and F-test is used when more than two groups are involved in a variable andthe results are presented in table-3.

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 17Table-3: Mean and SD of the Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers andthe Calculated t / F-values with respect to Certain Variables.Variables / GroupsCalculatedMean SD t / F-valuesGenderMenWomen153.56134.1032.5327.695.69 **Marital StatusMarriedUnmarried141.44146.2531.9728.311.18 @Educational QualificationsPG / B.Ed. & M.EdPG / M.Ed. & M.Phil144.14139.3530.8731.961.32 @Type of School the Teachers Working-inGovernmentPrivate147.06137.9332.8229.232.65 **Location of the SchoolRuralUrban143.57141.1333.5628.870.70 @Years of ExperienceBelow 15 YearsAbove 16 Years142.53142.1830.0532.890.09 @Age GroupsUp to 35 years36 to 45 yearsAbove 46 years145.00141.59139.9830.3134.1328.080.68 @CommunityOCBCMBC / SC and ST145.40139.81147.0138.1932.2523.691.98 @

18 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya AnuradhaNature of Subjects the Teachers TeachingLanguagesScienceMathematicsCommerce136.6138.4154.39144.4429.4826.2142.0026.103.87 **Salary ReceivedUpto Rs.10,000Rs.10,001 to Rs.15,000Rs.15,001 to Rs.20,000Above Rs.20,001140.1135.2144.97149.6429.5128.8730.5635.472.99 *Note: @ Not Significant at 0.05 level; * Significant at 0.05 level; ** Significantat 0.01 levelFrom table-3 it is clear that, the obtained t-value (5.69) for occupational stress ofhigher secondary teachers with respect to the variable gender is significant at 0.01level, which indicates that men and women teachers are significantly differ in theiroccupational stress. The mean occupational stress scores of men (153.56) and women(134.10) teachers also reveal that men teachers are experiencing more stress than thewomen teachers. This result is in line with the findings of Aftab & Khatoon (2012),Anbuchelvan (2010), Chopra & Gartia (2009), Cooper & Kelly (1993), DeNobile &McCormick (2007), Okoza et al. (2010), Reddy (2011), Ushasri (2007) and Yang etal. (2009); and contradicted by the results of Doyle & Hind (1998), Mazzola et al.(2011), and Sabu & Jangaiah (2005).In case of type of school the teachers are working-in, the t-value (2.65) indicatesthat there exists a significant difference between government and private highersecondary teachers. John (2007) and Ravichandran & Rajendran (2007) also found thesignificant influence of type of school on the occupational stress of special educationteachers and higher secondary teachers respectively. Also, the mean scores show thatthe government school teachers (147.06) are more stressed than the private schoolteachers (137.93). This is in contradiction with the results of Balaswamy (2011) andVijayalakshmi (2004), who found that private school and college teachers are morestressed than their counterparts respectively. Further, the F-value (3.87), which issignificant at 0.01 level for the variable nature of subjects the teachers teachingimplies that there exists a significant difference in the occupational stress of teachershandling different subjects. This result is supported by Vijayalakshmi (2004), whoestablished the influence of ‘subject teaching’, on the stress of women lecturers andcontradicted by Soyibo (1994) and Aftab & Khatoon (2012), who found its noninfluence on the stress of teachers. Also, the mean values reflect that the teachershandling mathematics (154.39) are showing higher stress followed by the teachersteaching commerce (144.44), science (138.40) and languages (136.60) respectively.The teachers also significantly differ in their stress due to variations in the salary they

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 19receive, as its F-value (2.99) is significant at 0.05 level. The findings of Litt & Turk(1985), Sun et al. (2011), Yong and Wang (2011), Balaswamy (2011) and John(2007) also found the impact of ‘salary received’ on the stress of teachers. Further, themean values show that, the teachers receiving salary above Rs.20,001 (149.64) arehaving more stress followed by the teachers receiving salary between RS.15,001 toRs.20.000 (144.97), upto RS.10,000 (140.10) and between Rs.10,001 to Rs.15,000(135.20).Contrary to this, the variable-marital status (t-value: 1.18) of teachers is notinfluencing the occupational stress of teachers and it is also strengthened by theresults of Aftab & Khatoon (2012), Anbuchelvan (2010), Mathew (2005) and Yahayaet al. (2010). Further, the variation in the educational qualification of highersecondary teachers is not showing any influence on their occupational stress (1.32) asthe calculated t-value is not significant at 0.05 level. This result is in tune with theresults of Balaswamy (2011) on primary school teachers, Naik (2011) on Anganwaditeachers, Poornima (2010) and Ramkumar (2007) on special education teachers,Reddy (2011) on university teachers and Yahaya et al. (2010) on technical teachers;whereas, it is rejected by the studies of Aftab & Khatoon (2012), Anbuchelvan(2010), John (2007) and Manoj Kumar (2006). The occupational stress of teachersdue to variations in the location of the school does not differ significantly as its t-value (0.70) is not significant at 0.05 level. This result is supported by Soyibo (1994),who found that location of school is not influencing the stress among Jamaican highschool teachers and contradicted by Naik (2011) and Ramkumar (2007). With respectto years of experience, the t-value (0.09) indicates its non influence on occupationalstress of higher secondary teachers. This result is supported by the studies ofAnbuchelvan (2010), Balaswamy (2011), and Al-Amir (2004). The variable age (tvalue:0.68) is also not influencing the occupational stress of higher secondaryteachers. Studies of Balaswamy (2011), John (2007), Naik (2011), Chona & Roxas(2009), Yahaya et al. (2010) and Okoza et al. (2010) supported the non influence ofage on occupational stress. On the otherhand, Manoj Kumar (2006), Ramkumar(2007), Ravichandran & Rajenderan (2007), Yang et al. (2009) and Sun et al. (2011),found age as a significant predictor of stress among teachers. With respect to thecommunity, the F-value (1.98) is not significant at 0.05 level, which means that thereexists no significant difference among the teachers due to variations in theircommunity. The findings of Naik (2011) and Poornima (2010) also found the noninfluence of the variable ‘community’ on the occupational stress of teachers.One of the objectives of the study is to know how far and to what extent theselected independent variables (gender, age,----) are influencing the dependentvariable-occupational stress of higher secondary teachers. For this, multipleregression analysis has been calculated and the results of the same are presented intable-4.

20 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya AnuradhaTable:4 Prediction of Independent Variables (gender, age,….) to the DependentVariable- Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary TeachersDependentvariableOccupationalStressIndependentVariablesBetaCoefficients(β)Individualcontribution ofVariable(R 2 )% wisecontribution ofVariableAge - 0.063 0.004 0.4 %Community 0.040 0.002 0.2 %Marital Status 0.061 0.004 0.4 %Educational -0.074 0.005 0.5 %QualificationSubject 0.147 0.022 2.0 %TeachingSalary Received 0.129 0.017 1.7 %Location of theSchool-0.039 0.002 0.2 %From table-4, it is clear that, except for the variables gender, type of school theteachers are working-in and years of experience, the remaining independent variablesconsidered in the study, such as age, community, marital status, educationalqualification, nature of the subjects the teachers teaching, salary received by theteachers and location of the school are significantly predicting the occupational stressof higher secondary teachers. The variable ‘subject teaching’ is a significant predictorof occupational stress with 2 percent variance, followed by ‘salary’ with 1.7 percent,‘educational qualification’ with 0.5 percent, ‘age’ and ‘marital status’ with 0.4 percenteach, ‘location’ and ‘community’ with 0.2 percent of variance each. This result showsthat there are some other variables that are not covered in this study may haveinfluence on the occupational stress of higher secondary teachers and furtherresearches are needed to identify such variables so as to reduce the occupational stressof teachers.Implications of the StudyFrom the results it was found that, around 88 percent of higher secondary teachers areexperiencing moderate and high levels of occupational stress. This indicates the needfor interventions in strengthening and reinforcing teacher’s self-confidence andpositive attitude, and weakening the stress creating factors. The first step towardstackling stress is to acknowledge its existence. Recognizing the manifestation of stressamong teachers and identifying the major stressors could go a long way inameliorating the menace of occupational stress while designing suitable stress copingmechanism for teachers. Both ‘direct action’ and/or ‘palliative techniques’ could beemployed. Direct action or problem focused approach concerns itself with thestressors and is a powerful proactive way of handling stress related problems.Palliative techniques or emotion focused strategy involves attempting to limit the

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 21emotional fallouts of stress. Here one accepts the stress causing situation but makesefforts to minimize its impact though some level of stress becomes inevitable. Someother measures which could prove beneficial to teachers in coping with stress are:improve self esteem, build self confidence, work on building emotional intelligencecompetencies, develop a good sense of humour, eat well balanced meals, get adequatesleep, practice yoga and meditation, exercise regularly, foster a supportive friendcircle, cultivate hobbies, develop effective communication skills, engage in creativeactivities, review priorities on a regular basis and seek professional help, if necessary.These coping strategies need to be incorporated on a priority basis so that the teachersare well prepared to deal with job stress as and when it surfaces. These measures cango a long way in reducing stressful work situations and improving the effectiveness ofthe teachers.Stresses of job life can be conveniently managed, to a large extent, at differentstages through various institutional interventions such as; a) prevention of stressthrough organizational interventions at the management level, like, selection ofsuitably qualified teachers, proper job designing and training, adequate workconditions, effective supervision and incentive system, effective communicationsystem, participative management, etc. b) minimizing the frequency and intensity ofstressful situations integral to the job at the organizational level. c) moderating theintensity of integral job stressors and their consequent strains through the effect ofother variables of positive values, such as high or extra salary, non-financialincentives, social support, generating team feeling, participative decision making, etc.References[1] Caplan, R.D., Cobb, S., and French, J.R.P., 1975, “Relationships of Cessationof Smoking with Job Stress, Personality, and Social Support”, J. AppliedPsychology, 60, pp. 211-219.[2] Rees, K., 1997, “Journey of Discovery: A Longitudinal Study of LearningDuring a Graduate Professional Programme”, Ph.D. thesis, Case WesternReserve University, Cleveland.[3] Comish, R., and Swindle, B., 1994, “Managing Stress in the Workplace”,National Public Accountant, 39 (2), pp. 24-28.[4] Kyriacou, C., 1987, “Teacher Stress and Burnout: An International Review”,Educational Research, 29 (2), pp. 146-152.[5] Traverse, C.J., and Cooper, C.L., 1996, Teachers under Pressure: Stress in theTeaching Profession, Routledge: London.[6] Cooper, C.L., and Kelly, M., 1993, “Occupational Stress of Head Teachers: ANational UK Study”, British J. of Educational Psychology, 73 (1), pp. 130-143.[7] Reglin, G., and Reitzammer, R.A., 1997, “Dealing with the Stress of Teachers”,Education, 118 (4), pp. 590-597.[8] Chan, D.W., 1998, “Stress, Coping Strategies and Psychological Distressamong Secondary School Teachers in Hong Kong”, American EducationalResearch J., 35 (1), pp. 145-163.

22 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya Anuradha[9] Mokdad, M., 2005, “Occupational Stress among Algerian Teachers”, AfricanNewsletter on Occupational Health and Safety, 15, pp. 46-47.[10] Ganster, D.C., and Schaubroeck, J., 1991b, “Work Stress and EmployeeHealth”, J. of Management, 17, pp. 235-271.[11] Murphy, K.R., 1995, “Is the Relationship between Cognitive Ability and JobPerformance Stable over Time?”, Human Performance, 2, pp. 183-200.[12] Dua, J., 1994, “Job Stressors and their Effects on Physical Health, EmotionalHealth and Job Satisfaction in a University”, J. of Educational Administration,32 (1), pp. 59-79.[13] Otto, R., 1986, “Teachers under Stress: Health Hazards in a Work Role andModes of Response”, Hill of Content, Melbourne.[14] Fletcher, B., and Payne, R.L., 1982, “Levels of Reported Stressors and Strainamongst School Teachers: Some UK Data”, Educational Research, 34, pp. 267-278.[15] Finlay-Jones, R., 1986, “Factors in the Teaching Environment Associated withSevere Psychological Distress among Teachers”, Australian and New ZealandJ. of Psychiatry’, 20, pp. 304-313.[16] Beer, J., and Beer, J., 1992, “Burnout and Stress, Depression and Self-esteemof Teachers”, Psychological Reports, 71 (3), pp. 1331-1336.[17] Blasé, J.J., 1986, “A Qualitative Analysis of Sources of Teacher Stress:Consequences for Performance”, American Educational Research J., 23, pp.13-40.[18] Poornima, R., 2010, “Emotional Intelligence, Occupational Stress and JobSatisfaction of Special Education Teachers”, Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Education,Dravidian University, Kuppam.[19] Seldman, S., and Zager, J., 1998, “The Teacher Burnout Scale”, EducationalResearch Quarterly, 11(1), pp. 26-33.[20] Reddy, G.L., 2011, “Occupational Stress, Professional Burnout and JobSatisfaction of University Teachers in South India”, UGC Major ResearchProject, Dept. of Education, Dravidian University, Kuppam.[21] Brown, M., and Ralph, S., 1992, “Towards the Identification of Stress inTeachers”, Research in Education, 48, pp. 103-110.[22] Reddy, G.L., 2006, “Occupational Stress, Professional Burnout and JobSatisfaction among Special Education Teachers in South India”, MajorResearch Project Report submitted to the Ministry of Social Justice andEmpowerment, Govt. of India, New Delhi.[23] John, B., 2007, “Occupational Stress of Teachers Working in the Schools forVisually Impaired Children in the Malabar Region of Kerala”, M.Phil.Dissertation, Dept. of Education, Alagappa University, Karaikudi.[24] Reddy, G.L., and Poornima, R., 2007, “A Study on Occupational Stress ofTeachers Working in the Special Schools for Visually Impaired Children”,Paper presented at the International Conference on Educational Research in theEra of Globalization held at the Dept. of Education, Periyar University, Salemfrom 28 th to 30 th November.

Occupational Stress of Higher Secondary Teachers Working in Vellore District 23[25] Rao, K.P., 2010, “Occupational Stress of Teachers Working in DravidianUniversity”, M.Ed. Dissertation, Dravidian University, Kuppam.[26] Ushasri, V., 2007, “An Analysis of Occupational Stress of Special EducationTeachers of Salem District”, Paper presented in the International Conference onEducational Research in the Era of Globalization held at the Dept. ofEducation, Periyar University, Salem from 28 th to 30 th November.[27] Aftab, Maria., and Khatoon, Tahira., 2012, “Demographic Differences andOccupational Stress of Secondary School Teachers”, European Scientific J., 8(5), pp. 159-175.[28] Anbuchelvan, C., 2010, “Occupational Stress of High School Teachers”,EduTracks, 9 (9), pp. 31-33.[29] Chopra, R., and Gartia, R., 2009, “Accountability of Secondary SchoolTeachers in Relation to their Occupational Stress”, EduTracks, 8 (7), pp. 41-43.[30] Cooper, C.L., and Kelly, M., 1993, “Occupational Stress of Head Teachers: ANational UK Study”, British J. of Educational Psychology, 73 (1), pp. 130-143.[31] DeNobile, J.J., and McCormick, J., 2007, “Occupational Stress of CatholicPrimary School Staff: Investigating Biographical Differences”, A Paperpresented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Researchin Education, Fremantle, held between November 25-29.[32] Okoza, J., Imhonde, H.O., and Aluede, O., 2010, “The jailor or the jailed:Stress and prison workers in Nigeria”, Research J. of Social Sciences, 2 (2), pp.65-68.[33] Yang, X., Ge, C., Hu, B., Chi, T., and Wang, L., 2009, “Relationship betweenQuality of Life and Occupational Stress among Teachers”, Public Health, 12(11), pp. 750-755.[34] Doyle, C., and Hind, P., 1998, “Occupational Stress, Burnout and Job Status inFemale Academics”, Gender, Work and Organization, 5, pp. 67–82.[35] Sabu, S., and Jangaiah, C., 2005, “Stress and Teaching Competence”,International Educator, 17 (1), pp. 19-21.[36] Mazzola, Joseph.J., Schonfeld, Irvin.S., and Spector, Paul.E., 2011, “WhatQualitative Research has Taught us about Occupational Stress”, Stress andHealth, 27 (2),http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smi.v27.2/issuetocpp. 93-110.[37] Ravichandran, R., and Rajendran, R., 2007, “Perceived Sources of Stressamong the Teachers”, J. of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 33 (1),pp. 133-136.[38] Balaswamy, R.C., 2011, “Occupational Stress of Primary School TeachersWorking in Kuppam Mandal”, M.Phil. Dissertation, Dravidian University,Kuppam.[39] Vijayalakshmi, G., 2004, “Stress among Women Lecturers Working inColleges in Relation to Some Variables”, EduTracks, 4 (4), pp. 29-30.[40] Soyibo, K., 1994, “Occupational Stress Factors and Coping Strategies amongJamaican High School Science Teachers”, Research in Science and TechnologyEducation, 12 (2), pp. 187-192.

24 Dr. G. Lokanadha Reddy and Dr. R. Vijaya Anuradha[41] Litt, D.M., and Turk, C.M., 1985, “Sources of Stress and Dissatisfaction inExperienced High School Teachers”, J. of Educational Research, 78 (3), pp.178-185.[42] Sun, Wei., Wu, Hui., and Wang, Lie., 2011, “Occupational Stress and itsRelated Factors among University Teachers in China”, J. of OccupationalHealth, 53 (4), pp. 280-286.[43] Yong, and Wang., 2011, “Research on the Sources of Occupational Stress ofCollege Teachers”, Research paper presented in the International Conferenceon Human Health and Biomedical Engineering (HHBE), held at the College ofArts, Changchun University of Technology, Changchun, China, from 19-22August.[44] Mathew, L., 2005, “Sources, Effects and the Coping Strategies of OccupationalStress among Special Education Teachers in India”, Ph.D. thesis, Dept. ofPsychology, Calicut University.[45] Yahaya, N., Yahaya, A., Tamyes, F.A., Ismail, J., and Jaalam, S., 2010, “TheEffect of Various Modes of Occupational Stress, Job Satisfaction, Intention toLeave and Absenteeism on Companies Commission of Malaysia”, Australian J.of Basic and Applied Sciences, 4 (7), pp. 1676-1684.[46] Naik, B.K., 2011, “Occupational Stress of Anganwadi Teachers Working inKuppam Mandal”, M.Ed. Dissertation, Dravidian University, Kuppam.[47] Manoj Kumar, K., 2006, “Occupational Stress and Coping Styles of HighSchool Teachers in Nellore District”, M.Phil. Dissertation, Madurai KamarajUniversity.[48] Ramkumar., 2007, “Occupational Stress of Special Education TeachersWorking in Schools for Mentally Retarded Children in Malabar Region ofKerala”, M.Phil. Dissertation, Alagappa University, Karaikudi.[49] Al-Amri, A.A., 2004, “Job Stress among Teachers”, J. of King SaudUniversity-Arts, 16 (2), pp. 36-42.[50] Chona, C., and Roxas, M.A., 2009, “Stress among Public Elementary SchoolTeachers” University of Cordilleras Research J., 1 (4), pp. 86-108.