INTRODUCTION:

Stress is natural phenomenon in an individual’s daily life. Stress is a term commonly used to describe feelings of tensions or exhaustion usually associated with work overload or overly demanding work.² Teachers are conscious of their conduct and adherence to human value. The teacher plays an important role in shaping the behavior of student especially in the beginning year. They are considered as a core stone of successful education system Since college teachers are engaged in dual roles, i.e., as lecturers, professors and assistant professors, emphasis should be given to management of social and family stressors and job stress so that they can maintain their quality of life and adjust with family members and workmates. The dual responsibilities of home and work, call for multiple roles, which put greater strain on college teachers. Teaching has often been attributed to be a physically wearing and psychologically stressful occupation.⁴

There are two types of Occupational stress factors: exogenous (outside the individual) including the demand of the job, and changes in the work load or environment; and endogenous (within the individual) including the employee’s abilities both physical and mental, and coping mechanism.⁵ In a teacher, stress can be caused by a number of factors, both external and internal. External causes may include institutional conditions such as large, mixed-ability classes, lack of student discipline and motivation, lack of resources, overwork or uneven distribution of workload, poor communication, unclear expectations and inadequate rewards and recognition. Problematic relationships with colleagues can generate other stressors, such as personality conflicts, lack of community spirit, feelings of isolation, lack of support, and limited academic and social interaction with other teachers. Internal causes may include an aggressive, impatient, competitive ‘Type A’ personality; workaholic; negative attitude toward students; and in particular, unrealistic self-expectations.³

The factors like environmental, organizational, and individual causes chronic stress at workplace and these factors are correlated with each other. Thus it influences stress levels among teachers in educational institution. The environmental factors which cause the stress are economic uncertainty and technological changes. Observes that in current economic slowdown and fluctuations in demand for the programmes, a few institutions are fighting for survival and that had caused survival problems for teachers within organization.¹

Technology is enabling multi-modal teaching, changing curricula and spawning rich forms of online research and collaboration. The purpose of higher education is not static; rather it is adaptive and changes according to the systems of provision and the vision of institution. Teachers must adapt their skills suitably to the technological changes, otherwise they have to face stressful situation. b) Task demands, role demands and interpersonal demand are the Organizational Factors that cause stress at workplace.⁵

Task Demand is related to individual's job. Jobs are becoming more complicated and demanding rigorous work from teacher's side as a result of layoff during the middle of the academic year, his work assignment is shifted to other faculty members who continue their job in the same place. Thus, it creates stressful situation for teachers. Role demands are related to pressures placed on a person as a function of the particular role he or she plays in the organization. Role overload is experienced when the teacher is expected to work more than time permits. They have pressure to fulfill expectations of top management, thus entangle them in the trap of stress. Interpersonal Demand is a pressure created by other employees. Specially, when teachers have high need for affiliation and team work and do not get support from colleagues. In that case poor interpersonal relations can cause stress at workplace. Job insecurity in difficult time creates conflict between colleagues and leads to stress in relations. C) Individual Factors like lay off, inadequate salary, lack of promotion are creating financial problems for teachers. Also due to workload, teachers need to work long hours and till late evening. Thus they are facing work life balance issues and increase stress burden.⁶

The major causes of occupational stress among college lecturers are:

· Excessive working hours, Workplace bullying

· Excessive workload and Rising class sizes

· Changes in curriculum and courses

· Changes to assessment and testing requirements

· Poor management and Pupil misbehavior

· Lack of support with bureaucracy, form filling and routine tasks

· Lack of job security due to redundancy and fixed term contracts

· Lack of control over the job.⁷

Many mental health problems especially occupational stress and emotional stress triggers chemical changes in our brain. Coping skills are skills are methods a person uses to deal stressful situations, the ultimate use of coping strategies is prevention or reduce stress and restore normal chemical process in the brain. Some of the positive coping strategies are meditation and relaxation techniques, time for self, physical activity, reading books, pets, sleeping, and spirituality etc. Obtaining and maintaining of positive coping strategies does take practice. There are negative coping strategies which can hinder progress in dealing more positively with stress. Actions that are harmful to both mental and physical health include substance abuse (drugs, alcohol, smocking), excessive working, ignoring, self-mutilation etc. avoiding problems However utilizing these coping strategies becomes easier over time. Most importantly, positive coping strategies makes for good quality of life and as well as mental health wellness.

Quality of life is the general wellbeing of individual and society. quality of life has wide range of contexts, including the international development, health care, politics and employment. Quality of life has great importance in all the individual life which should be interrelated with standard living which is based on primarily on monthly income. This quality of life mainly affected by the occupational pressure and correct or fluctuate by the coping strategies at the time of individuals stress situation.⁸

METHODOLOGY:

The present study was used a comparative descriptive research design was selected to conduct this study to assess the level of occupational stress, coping strategies and quality of life among of both Government intermediate College and private intermediate college lecturers. In this study the sample size was 60 intermediate college lecturers, Government college students consists of 30 lecturers and 30 private college lecturers at Guntur were selected and the simple random technique in which lottery method was used to select the samples. Data was collected by using structured questionnaire which contains various scales such as Suicidal ideation Stress rating scale, Rating scale to measure coping strategies. The tool consists of four sections Section A: Demographic variables Section B: Tool to assess occupational stress - Holmes-Rahe stress scale. It is modified Holmes-Rahe stress scale which consists of 25 questions. Section C: Tool to assess the coping strategies-commitment to college- Rochester Coping strategies scale or TEI-questionnaire. Section D: Tool to assess the quality of life - 5-point Likert-type scale. It is modified 5-point Likert-type scale which consists of 20 questions By the above mentioned questionnaires can occupational stress, coping strategies and quality of life has measured for the study.

ETHICAL CLEARANCE:

Ethical clearance was obtained from the ethical committee members and principal in SIMS College of nursing, permission to conduct study was obtained by principals and their ethical committee of concern colleges, Guntur. No materials were used during the study. Source of funding not applicable.

FINDINGS:

Socio-demographic characteristics:

Out of 30 lecturers of intermediate college lecturers in government college, majority 15(50%) were in the age group of 36-45 years, 5(17%) were in the age group of 25-35 years, 10(33%) were in the age group of above 45 years. Where as in the private college out of 30 lecturer’s, majority 20(67%) were in the age group of 25-35 years, 9(30%) were in the age group of 35-45 years, only 1(3%) were in the age group of above 45 years.

With regard to gender, in government college 10(33%) were males and 20(67%) were females, and in private college 10(33%) were females and 20(67%) were males.

Regarding religion, 15(50%) were Hindu, 5(17%) were Muslims, 10(33%) were Christians in Government College. Whereas 5(17%) were Hindu, 10( 33%) were Muslims and 15(50%) were Christians in private college.

Level of occupational stress, coping strategies and quality of life:

· In government college, majority of the lecturers 12(40%) had little occupational stress, 8(24%) of the sample had mild occupational stress, a few lecturers 6(18%) had moderate occupational stress and a very few 4 (12%) had severe occupational stress and none of them had no occupational stress. Majority of the participants 22(74%) had severe occupational stress, 5(17%) of the sample had moderate occupational stress, 2(6%) had mild occupational stress and less number of 1(3%) had little occupational stress in private college.

Fig. 1: Percentage distrubution of level of occupational stress among intermediate colleg. Lecturers

· In government college, more than two third of the participants 18(60%) had good coping strategies, and less number of the sample 5(17%) had medium coping strategies and few of the sample 7(23%) had little bit of coping strategies and none of them had poor coping strategies. In private college, majority of the respondent 18(60%) had little bit of coping strategies, 4(12%) had medium coping strategies and 8(28%) of the sample had good coping strategies, no one had poor coping strategies.

Fig. 2: Percentage distrubution of level of coping strategies among intermediate college lecturers.

· In government college, half of the lecturers 15(50%) had happy life, 7(23%) had moderate quality of life and less number of the sample 5(17%) had mild quality of life, very a few of the sample 3(10%) had low quality of life and none of them had no poor quality of life. In private college the majority of the participants 15(50%) had mild quality of life, 7(23%) had moderate quality of life and less number of sample 4(15%) had low quality of life, 2(6%) had good and 2(6%) had poor quality of life.

Fig. 3: Percentage distrubution of level of quality of life among intermediate college lecturers.

Section-D

Table 1: Association between the levels of occupational stress and the selected demographic variable among intermediate college lecturers of Government College. n=30+30

S. no

Demographic variables

Little occupational

stress

Mild occupational stress

Moderate occupational stress

Severe occupational stress

Chi square

Age in years

a) 25-35 years

b) 36-45 years

c) Above 45 years

X²= 6.275

p= 0.393

df= 6 NS

Gender

a) Male

b) Female

X²⁼0.582

p= 0.74 df= 2 NS

Religion

a) Hindu

b) Muslim

c) Christian

d) Others

X²= 0.425

p= 0.8

df= 2

Marital status

a) Un married

b) Married

c) divorced

d) Widow/ Widower

X²= 10.775

p= 0.02

df=4

Qualification

a) B. Edwih graduation

b) B. Ed with post graduation

c) M. Ed with post graduation

d) Other degrees

X²=0.521

p= 0.77

df= 2

MonthlyIncome

a) < 10,000/-

b) 10001-20,000/-

c) 20,0001-30,000

d) >30,0001

X²= 2.702

p= 0.08

df= 6

Type of employment

a) Full time

b) Part time

c) Guest lecturer

0 0

X²= 2.030

p= 0.33

df= 4 NS

Years of teaching experience

a) 0-3 Years

b) 4-6 Years

c) 7-9 Years

d) More than 10 years

X²= 0.603

p= 0.74

df= 2 NS

Number of special classes

a) No classes

b) 1 class

c) 2 classes

d) 3 classes

X²= 1.860

p= 0.76

df= 4

Are you involved in admissions

a) Admission of the students

b) Administration

c) a and b

d) None of the

X²= 5.625

p= 0.05

df= 2

Family history of mental illness or suicides

a) Yes

b) No

X²= 4.451

p= 0.1

df= 2 NS

Note: Significant at the level of P< 0.05, NS- Not Significant at the level of P> 0.05.

DISCUSSION:

The study was conducted to assess the level of occupational stress, coping strategies and quality of life among intermediate lecturers of government and private colleges, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. The conceptual framework used for this study was modified Sister Callister Roy’s Adaptation model. Quantitative approach and Non experimental comparative research design was adopted. WOMENS College, Andhra Christian College, NRI Junior college and Gayatri Junior college were selected as the setting for study. Sample size was 60, Government college 30 and private college students 30. The level of occupational stress, coping strategies and quality of life was assessed by using the scales modified rahee stress scale (Thomas Holmes andRichard Rahe), modified 5-point likert type quality life scale (Rensislikert), modified Rochester coping strategies scale (Rochester) respectively. Data was collected and analysed. The study result revealed that the level of occupational stress, poor quality of life was markedly increased in private college lecturers than Government college lecturers. The calculated “t” test value of stress was 2.094 which is statistically significant at the level of 0.05. The estimated independent “t” test value of quality of life was 0.044 which is statistically not significant at 0.05 levels. The obtained independent “t” test value of coping strategies was 2.59 which is statistically significant the level of 0.05. The results reveal that there is significant difference in level of occupational stress and coping strategies of intermediate college lecturers of both government and private college lecturers. The study concludes that occupational stress and poor quality of life are more in private college lecturers when compare to Government college lecturers. There is no difference in coping strategies with Government and private college lecturers.

CONCLUSION:

In Government college, majority of the lecturers 12(40%) had mild occupational stress, 8(27%) of the sample had little bit occupational stress, a few lecturers 6(12%) had moderate stress and some of them 4(12) had severe stress where as private college, the majority of the participants 22(76%) had severe stress, 2(6%) of the sample had little stress, 5(17%) had moderate stress and less number of 1(3%) had mild stress.

Most of the private college lecturers expressed that main reasons which create occupational stress are:

· Workload regarding admissions and administrative work in the college.

· Number of extra classes taken per day

· Job insecurity

· Unsatisfied salaries

· Restricted approach of management.

In coping strategies, more than two third of the participants 18(60%) had good coping strategies, and less number of the sample 5(17%) had medium coping strategies and none of them had poor coping strategies and 7 (25%) had little bit coping strategies among government college lecturers. Majority of the respondent 18(76%) had little bit coping strategies, 5(17%) had medium coping strategies and 8(27%) of the sample had little bit coping strategies no one had poor coping strategies in private college lecturers due to un supported peer groups and management, lack of experiencing in teaching profession.

In quality of life, among government college, more than half of the lecturers 22(82%) had happy life, 6(22%) had medium quality life and less number of the sample 2(6%) had low quality of life and none of them had no poor quality of life but private colleges the majority of the participants 20(75%) had medium quality of life, 6(22%) had poor quality of life and less number of sample 4(12%) had happy life because of unsatisfied salaries and Economic conditions, Less scope for job and standards their profession in upcoming generations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

I would like to acknowledge all the government and private college managements for giving me this opportunity to conduct study, I will also extend my gratitude towards Sims College of Nursing for constant support and for all the participants for their cooperation and genuine answers.

REFERENCES:

1. K.P. Neeraja. Essentials of mental health and Psychiatric Nursing, 1st edition, Jaypee Publications, New Delhi. 2008; 477-479.

2. R. Sreevani. A guide to mental health and Psychiatric Nursing. 3rd edition, Jaypee medical publishers, New Delhi. 2010; 157-160.

3. S. M. Raju. Psychiatry and Mental Health Nursing. 1st edition, Jaypee Medical Publishers, New Delhi. 2010

4. B.T. Basavanthappa. Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 1st edition, Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; New Delhi. 2007

5. Abdullah. Research Methods in Education, 6th edition: London British Publishers. 2006; 225-257.

6. www.pubmed.com

7. www.betterhealth.vic.gov.com

8. https://www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov.com

Received on 20.06.2023 Modified on 12.01.2024

A and V Pub Int. J. of Nursing and Medical Res. 2024; 3(2):55-60.

DOI: 10.52711/ijnmr.2024.11