Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/63082
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBoyle, Gregory J.-
dc.contributor.authorBorg, Mark G.-
dc.contributor.authorFalzon, Joseph M.-
dc.contributor.authorBaglioni, Anthony J.-
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-02T08:38:54Z-
dc.date.available2020-11-02T08:38:54Z-
dc.date.issued1995-
dc.identifier.citationBoyle, G. J., Borg, M. G., Falzon, J. M., & Baglioni, A. J. (1995). A structural model of the dimensions of teacher stress. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65(1), 49-67.en_GB
dc.identifier.issn0007-0998-
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/63082-
dc.description.abstractA comprehensive survey of teacher stress, job satisfaction and career commitment among 710 full-time primary school teachers was undertaken by Borg, Riding & Falzon ( 1991) in the Mediterranean islands of Malta and Gozo. A principal components analysis of a 20-item sources of teacher stress inventory had suggested four distinct dimensions which were labelled: Pupil Misbehaviour, Time/Resource Difficulties, Professional Recognition Needs, and Poor Relationships, respectively. To check on the validity of the Borg et al. factor solution, the group of 710 teachers was randomly split into two separate samples. Exploratory factor analysis was carried out on the data from Sample 1 (N=335), while Sample 2 (N=375) provided the cross-validational data for a LISREL confirmatory factor analysis. Results supported the proposed dimensionality of the sources of teacher stress (measurement model), along with evidence of an additional teacher stress factor (Workload). Consequently, structural modelling of the 'causal relationships' between the various latent variables and self-reported stress was undertaken on the combined samples (N=710). Although both non-recursive and recursive models incorporating Poor Colleague Relations as a mediating variable were tested for their goodness-of-fit, a simple regression model provided the most parsimonious fit to the empirical data, wherein Workload and Student M(behaviour accounted for most of the variance in predicting teaching stress.en_GB
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd.en_GB
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccessen_GB
dc.subjectTeachers -- Job satisfactionen_GB
dc.subjectTeachers -- Job stressen_GB
dc.titleA structural model of the dimensions of teacher stressen_GB
dc.typearticleen_GB
dc.rights.holderThe copyright of this work belongs to the author(s)/publisher. The rights of this work are as defined by the appropriate Copyright Legislation or as modified by any successive legislation. Users may access this work and can make use of the information contained in accordance with the Copyright Legislation provided that the author must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the prior permission of the copyright holderen_GB
dc.description.reviewedpeer-revieweden_GB
dc.publication.titleBritish Journal of Educational Psychologyen_GB
Appears in Collections:Scholarly Works - FacEduES

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
A_structural_model_of_the_dimensions_of_teacher_stress.pdf
  Restricted Access
2.79 MBAdobe PDFView/Open Request a copy


Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.