Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-04T11:30:45.260Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development and Validation of a Measuring Instrument for Burnout Syndrome in Teachers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Jesús Miguel Rodríguez Mantilla  and
Mª José Fernández Díaz
Jesús Miguel Rodríguez Mantilla*
Affiliation:
Universidad Camilo José Cela (Spain)
Mª José Fernández Díaz
Affiliation:
Universidad Complutense (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jesus Miguel Rodríguez Mantilla. Universidad Camilo José Cela. Dpto. de Educación. C/Pericles 28, 5° Dcha. 28011 Madrid (Spain). E-mail: jmrodriguez@ucjc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is part of a research done on Burnout Syndrome, and its objective is to develop and validate an instrument for measuring the syndrome in Secondary School teachers, taking as a principal starting point Maslach, Schaufeli, and Leiter's theory (2001). After developing and testing the instrument on a sample of 794 teachers in the Community of Madrid (Spain), we analyzed the reliability, content and construct validity (the latter by means of Structural Equations Models implemented with Software AMOS 7.0). The reliability analysis (α = .911 for the total instrument; .849, .899 and .674 for the dimensions of Exhaustion, Reduced Personal Accomplishment and Depersonalization respectively) and the Confirmatory Factorial Analysis (CMIN/DF = 4.163, CFI = .904, RMSEA = .60, PRATIO = .874) showed highly satisfactory results. The discrimination coefficient scores for items in the final instrument ranged between .22 and .74. Thus, the instrument presented combines the necessary technical characteristics for it to be considered a valid and reliable tool for measuring the syndrome.

El presente estudio forma parte de una investigación sobre el síndrome de Burnout y su objetivo, en este caso, es elaborar y validar un instrumento de medida del síndrome en profesores de Secundaria partiendo, principalmente, de la teoría de Maslach, Schaufeli, y Leiter (2001). Tras la elaboración y aplicación del instrumento a una muestra de 794 docentes de la Comunidad de Madrid, se analizó la fiabilidad, la validez de contenido y de constructo (ésta última a través de Modelos de Ecuaciones Estructurales con la aplicación informática AMOS 7.0). Los resultados obtenidos en el análisis de fiabilidad (α = .911 para la totalidad del instrumento, .849, .899 y .674 para las dimensiones de Agotamiento, Baja Realización y Despersonalización respectivamente) y en el Análisis Factorial Confirmatorio fueron altamente satisfactorios (CMIN/DF = 4.163, CFI = .904, RMSEA = .06, PRATIO = .874). Los valores del coeficiente de discriminación de los ítems del instrumento final oscilaron entre .22 y .74. Por todo ello, el instrumento presentado reúne las características técnicas exigidas para ser considerada una herramienta válida y fiable para medir el síndrome.

Keywords

burnoutteacherssecondary educationmeasuring instrumentburnoutprofesoradoeducación secundariainstrumento de medida
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 1456 - 1465
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arís, N. (2005). El síndrome de burnout en los docentes de educación infantil y primaria en la zona del Valles Occidental [Burnout's syndrome in the teachers of infantile and primary education in the zone of Western Valles]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Universidad Internacional de Catalunya, Spain.Google Scholar
Boer, E. B., Bakker, A. B., Syroit, S., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2002). Unfairness at work as a predictor of absenteeism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, R. J., & Greenglass, E. (1995). A longitudinal examination of the Cherniss model of psychological burnout. Social Science Medicine, 40, 1357–1363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2F0277-9536%2894%2900267-WCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buunk, B. P., & Schaufeli, W.B. (1999). Reciprocity in interpersonal relationships: An evolutionary perspective on its importance for health and well-being. In Stroebe, W. & Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology, 10, 259–291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080%2F14792779943000080Google Scholar
Byrne, B. (2001). Structural equation modelling with AMOS. London, England: Erlbaunm Asoc.Google Scholar
Consejería de Educación de la Comunidad de Madrid (2009). Bases de datos del Instituto de Estadística de la Comunidad de Madrid [Databases of the Institute of Statistics of Comunidad de Madrid]. Madrid, Spain: Consejería de Educación de la Comunidad de MadridGoogle Scholar
Cortada de Kohan, N. (1999). Teorías psicométricas y construcción de tests [Psychometrical theories and construction of Tests]. Buenos Aires, Argentine: Editorial Lugar.Google Scholar
Doménech, B. (1995). Introducción al síndrome “Burnout” en profesores y maestros y su abordaje terapéutico [Introduction to the syndrome “Burnout” in teachers and teachers and his therapeutic boarding]. Psicología Educativa, 1, 63–78.Google Scholar
Farber, B. A. (1991). Crisis in education: Stress and Burn out in the American teacher. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Gil-Monte, P., & Peiró, J. M. (1997). Desgaste psíquico en el trabajo: El síndrome de quemarse [Psychic wear in the work: the syndrome of burning]. Madrid, Spain: Síntesis.Google Scholar
Gil-Monte, P. (2005). El síndrome de quemarse por el trabajo (“burnout”). Una enfermedad laboral en la sociedad del bienestar [The syndrome of burnout for the work. An occupational disease in the company of the well-being]. Madrid, Spain: Pirámide.Google Scholar
Gold, Y., & Grant, R. A. (1993). Teachers managing stress and preventing burnout: The professional health solution. Londres, England: Falmer.Google Scholar
Golembiewski, R. T., Boudreau, R., Goto, K., & Murati, T. (1993). Transnational perspectives on job burnout: Replication of phase model results among Japanese respondents. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 1, 7–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108%2Feb028781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grau, R. M. Salanova, M., & Martínez, I. M. (2005). Demandas laborales y conductas de afrontamiento: El rol modulador de la autoeficacia profesional [Labor demands and conducts of confrontation: The modulating role of the professional autoefficiency]. Psicothema, 17, 390–395.Google Scholar
Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tathan, R., & Black, W. (2004). Análisis multivariante [Multivariant analysis] Madrid, Spain: Edit. Pearson.Google Scholar
Informe Cisneros IX (2006). Libro Blanco. Los riesgos psicosociales en el profesorado de la enseñanza pública en la Comunidad de Madrid [White book. The risks psicosociales in the professorship of the state education in the Community of Madrid] Madrid, Spain: Sindicato ANPE.Google Scholar
Kahill, S. (1988). Symptoms of professional burnout. A review of the empirical evidence. Canadian Psychology, 29, 284–297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0079772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, R. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C. (1988). The impact of interpersonal environment on burnout and organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 9, 297–308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002%2Fjob.4030090402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1986). Maslach Burnout Inventory. Manual research Edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.Google Scholar
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W., & Leiter, M. (2001). Job Burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moriana, E., & Herruzo, C. (2004). Estrés y burnout en profesores. [Stress and burnout in teachers]. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 3, 597–621.Google Scholar
Ortiz, V. M. (1995). Los riesgos de enseñar: La ansiedad de los profesores [The risks of teaching: The anxiety of the teachers]. Salamanca, Spain: Amarú.Google Scholar
Pines, A., & Guendelman, S. (1995). Exploring the relevance of burnout to Mexican blue collar women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47, 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006%2Fjvbe.1995.1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardsen, A., & Martinussen, M. (2004). The Maslach Burnout Inventory: Factorial validity and consistency across occupational groups in Norway. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 77, 377–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348%2F0963179041752691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez, J. M., & Fernández, M. J. (2010). La Realización profesional y personal de los docentes de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria y su relación con las variables personales y del trabajo [The professional and personal accomplishment of the teachers of Secondary Obligatory Education and his relation with the personal variables and of the work]. EduPsykhé, 1, 101–118.Google Scholar
Sarros, J. (1988). Administrator burnout: Findings and future directions. The Journal of Educational Administration, 26, 184–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108%2Feb009948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidman, S. A., & Zager, J. (1986). The Teacher Burnout Scale. Educational Research Quarterly, 11, 26–33.Google Scholar
Tejero, C. (2006). Burnout y dirección escolar: Análisis de la influencia que sobre el síndrome ejercen las variables perfil demográfico-profesional, estrés, satisfacción e indefensión [Burnout and school direction: analysis of the influence that on the syndrome the variables exercise demographic -professional profile, stress, satisfaction and defenselessness]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Universidad Complutense, Spain.Google Scholar
Tejero, C., Fernández, M. J., & Carbajo, R. (2010). Medición y prevalencia del síndrome de quemarse por el trabajo en la dirección escolar [Measurement and prevalencia of the syndrome of burnout for the work in the school direction]. Education Magazine 351, 361–383.Google Scholar
Unterbrink, T. (2008). Parameters influencing health variables in a sample of 949 German teachers. International Archives of Occupational Health 82, 117–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00420-008-0336-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weng, G., Sturmlinger, R., Wirsching, M., & Schaarschmidt, U. (2005). Correlation between burnout syndrome and psychological and psychosomatic symptoms among teachers. International Archieves of Occupational Health 79, 199–204.Google Scholar
Xiao-Ming, F., & Dong-Mei-Li, L. (2005). The relationship between intention to quit and burnout of teachers in elementary and middle schools. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 19, 615–617.Google Scholar