David Student Burnout-pemea

8/9/2019 David Student Burnout-pemea

1/22

425

10011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011Construct Validation of the Student

Academic Burnout Scale

Adonis P. David

Office of Student Affairs and Student ServicesPhilippine Normal University-Manila


2/22

5

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Theoretical Background

The proposed scale is anchored on theThe proposed scale is anchored on the

theory of Maslach (2001; 1997) whichtheory of Maslach (2001; 1997) which

views burnout as a workviews burnout as a work--related disorderrelated disorder

defined as a syndrome ofdefined as a syndrome ofemotionalemotional

exhaustion, cynicism or depersonalization,exhaustion, cynicism or depersonalization,

and reduced professional efficacyand reduced professional efficacy..


3/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Rationale

This endeavor aims to develop and validateThis endeavor aims to develop and validate

a measure of burnout among collegea measure of burnout among collegestudents in a school and academicstudents in a school and academic--specificspecific

contextcontext.

School can be considered as a workplaceSchool can be considered as a workplace

where students perform their duties andwhere students perform their duties and

responsibilities to pass and advance to theresponsibilities to pass and advance to the

next educational level.next educational level.


4/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011THE HYPOTHESIZED COMPONENTS

ExhaustionExhaustion physical and emotional fatigue resultingphysical and emotional fatigue resultingfrom the demand of academic work.from the demand of academic work.

CynicismCynicism -- indifferent or a distal attitude towardindifferent or a distal attitude towardacademic work; losing interest in ones work and notacademic work; losing interest in ones work and notseeing academic work as meaningfulseeing academic work as meaningful

Perceived InadequacyPerceived Inadequacy diminished feelings ofdiminished feelings ofcompetence and achievement in ones academic workcompetence and achievement in ones academic work


5/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

SABS Prototype Form

COMPONENTCOMPONENT SAMPLE ITEMSAMPLE ITEM

EXHAUSTION Classroom activities

make me tired.

CYNICISM I have lost interest in

my academic work.

PERCEIVEDINADEQUACY

I feel that I have failedto accomplish

anything significant in

my schoolwork


6/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Part 1:: INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENTA.A. Review of the Literature on Burnout and Survey ofReview of the Literature on Burnout and Survey of

Existing Burnout MeasuresExisting Burnout Measures

B.B. Development of the ABS Prototype Form consisting ofDevelopment of the ABS Prototype Form consisting of30 items.30 items.

C.C. Expert Validation of the ABS Prototype FormExpert Validation of the ABS Prototype Form

D.D.Revision of Prototype Form (27Revision of Prototype Form (27--items)items)

E.E. TryTry--Out and Review of the Revised Prototype FormOut and Review of the Revised Prototype Form(10 college students)(10 college students)

F.F. Preparation of Preliminary FormPreparation of Preliminary Form


7/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011EXPER

T VALIDATIONScale was reduced from 30 to 27 items.Scale was reduced from 30 to 27 items.

Items were revised to improve their relevance to theItems were revised to improve their relevance to thehypothesized components and academic burnout inhypothesized components and academic burnout ingeneral.general.

Items were revised to improve the sentenceItems were revised to improve the sentence

construction and appropriateness for intendedconstruction and appropriateness for intendedrespondents.respondents.


8/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

SABS Preliminary Form

The preliminary form consists of 27 items measuringThe preliminary form consists of 27 items measuring

three components of school academic burnout:three components of school academic burnout: exhaustion fromexhaustion from

academic work (9), cynicism toward academic work (8), andacademic work (9), cynicism toward academic work (8), and

perceived inadequacy in academic work (10).perceived inadequacy in academic work (10). All the items areAll the items arerated on a 7rated on a 7--point Likertpoint Likert--type scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7type scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7

(always).(always).

The scale was administered to 150 secondThe scale was administered to 150 second--year andyear and

thirdthird--year university students (Mean age = 17.94 years; M=38,year university students (Mean age = 17.94 years; M=38,F=112 ).F=112 ).


9/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Preliminary Analysis and EFA

The itemThe item--total correlation of the 27total correlation of the 27--item prelimary formitem prelimary form

ranged from .01 to .76. Cronbachs alpha was .92.ranged from .01 to .76. Cronbachs alpha was .92.

The scree plot suggested three factors.The scree plot suggested three factors.

KaiserKaiser--MeyerMeyer--Olkin measure of sampling adequacy wasOlkin measure of sampling adequacy was

.883..883.

Using principal component analysis with varimaxUsing principal component analysis with varimax

rotation, three factors accounted for 32.96% of the variance.rotation, three factors accounted for 32.96% of the variance.

Factor loadings were considered if an item load in justFactor loadings were considered if an item load in just

one factor (at least .40).one factor (at least .40).


10/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Preliminary Analysis and EFA

FACTORSFACTORS EIGENVALUESEIGENVALUES % OF% OF

VARIANCEVARIANCE

NO. OFNO. OF

ITEMSITEMS

Personal

Inadequacy

8.90 32.96 10

Exhaustion 2.67 11.57 7

Cynicism 1.85 13.42 7


11/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Item Analysis

The itemThe item--total correlation of the 24total correlation of the 24--item scale rangeditem scale ranged

from .29 to .68. Cronbachs alpha was .91.from .29 to .68. Cronbachs alpha was .91.

Items which itemItems which item--total correlation were below .45 weretotal correlation were below .45 wereexcluded resulting in the removal of 9 items.excluded resulting in the removal of 9 items.


from .50 to .74. Cronbachs alpha was .90.from .50 to .74. Cronbachs alpha was .90.


12/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Part 2: Revised-SABS

The revisedThe revised--SABS was administered to 200 universitySABS was administered to 200 university

students (Mean age=18.03; M=42, F=158).students (Mean age=18.03; M=42, F=158).

CFA using SEM was conducted to confirm the factorCFA using SEM was conducted to confirm the factor

loading and determine model fit of the 15loading and determine model fit of the 15--item SABS.item SABS.

The itemThe item--total correlation of the revised scale ranged fromtotal correlation of the revised scale ranged from.03 to .68. Cronbachs alpha was .89..03 to .68. Cronbachs alpha was .89.

Three models were tested (oneThree models were tested (one--factor, twofactor, two--factor, andfactor, and

threethree--factor modelfactor model))


13/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

CFA GOODNESS OF FIT SUMMARY

MODEL One-factor Two-factor Three-Factor

Chi-Square 621.781 387.693 378.467

p .00 .00 .00

CFI .63 .79 .80

TLI .56 .75 .75

RMSEA .17 .13 .13

AIC 681.781 449.693 444.467


14/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

MODEL MODIFICATION

Model was modified by deleting items with:

a. poor discriminant ability ( 4 items)

b. low standardized regression weights (3 items)

The deleted items were no longer used in subsequent

analyses.

The 3-factor, 8-item scale was tested using CFA.


15/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

THREE-FACTOR MODEL

(9 ITEMS)

CFI = .96

TLI = .93

RMSEA = .08

AIC = 83.317

INADEQUACY

item2 e11

1

item5 e21

item10 e31

EXHAUSTION

item8 e411

item12 e5

item14 e6

CYNICISM

item3 e71

item6 e9

1

1

1

1


16/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

ONE-FACTOR MODEL

(9 ITEMS)

CFI = .77

TLI = .68

RMSEA = .19

AIC = 197.283

BURNOUT

item2 e1

1

item3 e3

1

item5 e5

1

item6 e6

1

item8 e8

1

item10 e10

1

item12e12

1

item14 e14

1

1


17/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

TWO-FACTOR MODEL

(9 ITEMS)

CFI = .92

TLI = .89

RMSEA = .11

AIC = 101.384EXHAUSTION

item14e14

item12e12

item8e8

INDIFFERENCE

item3 e311

item2 e2

item5 e5

1

item6 e6

1

item10 e10

1

1

1

1

1

1


18/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

SECOND-ORDER THREE-FACTOR MODEL

(9 ITEMS)

CFI = .96

TLI = .93

RMSEA = .08

AIC = 77.732

INADEQUACY

item2 e11

1

item5 e21

item10 e31

EXHAUSTION

item8 e41

1

item12 e5

item14 e6

CYNICISM

item3 e71

item6 e9

1

1

1

1

BURNOUT

e10

1

e11

e12

1

1


19/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Item Analysis

Removal of any item does not result in an increase inRemoval of any item does not result in an increase in

alpha level (for both total scale or any subalpha level (for both total scale or any sub--domain).domain).

All the nine (9) items were retained as part of the finalAll the nine (9) items were retained as part of the final

form of SABS.form of SABS.


from .43 to .66.from .43 to .66.

The Cronbachs alpha for the scale was .83 (inadequacyThe Cronbachs alpha for the scale was .83 (inadequacy=.78; exhaustion = .75; cynicism = .63).=.78; exhaustion = .75; cynicism = .63).


20/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Convergent Validity

The MaslachThe Maslach--Burnout InventoryBurnout Inventory--Student Scale (MBIStudent Scale (MBI--

SS) is a 15SS) is a 15--item instrument developed by Schaufeli, et al.item instrument developed by Schaufeli, et al.

(2002) that measures school(2002) that measures school--related burnout among studentsrelated burnout among students

across three dimensions: personal efficacy (the opposite ofacross three dimensions: personal efficacy (the opposite of

inadequacy), exhaustion, and cynicism.inadequacy), exhaustion, and cynicism.

The MBIThe MBI--SS was administered to 120 students from theSS was administered to 120 students from the

total sample of 200 students in Part 2 of the study. Thetotal sample of 200 students in Part 2 of the study. The

convergence of the burnout scores of 115 students in both theconvergence of the burnout scores of 115 students in both the

MBIMBI--SS and the 9SS and the 9--item SABS was determined usingitem SABS was determined using

correlation.correlation.


21/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011Convergent ValidityPERSONAL

EFFICACY

EXHAUSTION CYNICISM

Inadequacy -.677 .349 .344

Exhaustion -.410 .632 .428

Cynicism -.630 .475 .538


22/22

425

1

0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011

Conclusions and Recommendations

1. The SABS is a valid and reliable instrument for1. The SABS is a valid and reliable instrument for

measuring academic burnout in college students.measuring academic burnout in college students.

2. The SABS is best considered as a short measure of2. The SABS is best considered as a short measure of

academic or school burnout.academic or school burnout.

3. There is a need to confirm the factorial and3. There is a need to confirm the factorial and

convergent validity of SABS in other samples, as well as toconvergent validity of SABS in other samples, as well as to

establish the convergent, divergent, and predictive validity ofestablish the convergent, divergent, and predictive validity of

SABS with other measures of similar and related constructs.SABS with other measures of similar and related constructs.

4. It may be important to develop a longer, more4. It may be important to develop a longer, more

extensive version of SABS.extensive version of SABS.

David Student Burnout-pemea

Documents

Transcript of David Student Burnout-pemea