The Relationship Between Iranian EFL Teachers Burnout and Self-Efficacy Across English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees

The Relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers‟ Burnout and Self-Efficacy across
English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees

[PP: 99-110]
Mina Seifalian
Department of English Language Teaching, Islamic Azad University
Gorgan Branch, Gorgan, Iran
Ali Derakhshan
(Corresponding Author)
Department of English Language and Literature, Golestan University
Gorgan, Iran
ABSTRACT
The concepts of teacher efficacy and burnout have received significant consideration in teaching
contexts recently which per se put premium upon teachers to ‎become the center ‎of attention in
education since they play one of the most prominent roles in educational contexts (Abdollahzadeh &
Rezaeian, 2011). Accordingly, the present study aimed to find out whether there would be any
significant differences and correlations between Iranian EFL teachers‟ self-efficacy and burnout with
English-related and non-English-related academic degrees. To this end, 120 Iranian English language
teachers (100 female and 20 male) from different institutes in Gorgan, Aliabad and Gonbad in Golestan
Province of Iran were selected as the participants of the study. Their ages ‎ranged between 22 to 52
years. ‎Half of them studied English-related majors whereas the other half ‎studied non-English-related
majors. They were selected through convenience sampling. Moreover, Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk
Hoy‟s (2001) self-efficacy‎ and Maslach and Jackson‟s (1981) burnout questionnaires ‎were used as the
instruments of the study. The design of the present study was correlational and ex post facto. Since the
data were normally distributed, the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient and independent
samples t-test were conducted to assess the relationship and difference between variables of two
groups. The results of independent samples t-test revealed that there was no significant difference in the
scores of related and non-English-related majors‟ ‎in self-efficacy and burnout. Moreover, the results of
Pearson correlation indicated that there was a positive and significant correlation between EFL-majored
teachers‟ self-efficacy and burnout. Additionally, there was no significant correlation between non-
EFL-majored teachers‟ self-efficacy ‎and ‎burnout. The findings of the present study throw some light on
broadening our concepts of self-efficacy and burnout which might affect teachers‟ performance in the
classroom.
Keywords: Burnout, EFL-Majored, Non-EFL-Majored, Self-Efficacy, TEFL
ARTICLE The paper received on Reviewed on Accepted after revisions on
INFO 25/02/2018 27/03/2018 19/06/2018
Suggested citation:
Seifalian, M. & Derakhshan, A. (2018). The Relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers‟ Burnout and Self-
Efficacy across English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees. International Journal of English
Language & Translation Studies. 6(2). 99-110.
1. Introduction efficacy, burnout has gained momentum in

Issues, related to teacher and teacher the recent scope of teacher education
education, have ignited great controversy research (Einar, Skaalvik, & Skaalvik, 2010;
among EFL/ESL practitioners and Ghorpade, Lackritz, & Singh, 2007;
theoreticians in the last two decades or so. Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001;
For example, the concepts of teacher self- Mukundan & Khandehroo, 2010‎; Ozdemir,
efficacy and burnout have received 2007; Sears, Urizar, & Evans, 2000‎; Wood,
prominent attention in educational contexts. 2002; Zamani Rad & Nasir, 2010).
Bandura (2006) points out in ‎accordance According to Mashhady, Fallah, and Lotfi
with social cognitive theory that teacher Gaskaree (2012), teacher‟s burnout is
self-efficacy may be ‎conceptualized as defined as “feelings of powerlessness in try
individual teachers‟ beliefs in their own to educate students and make school
particular ability to think, ‎plan, monitor, pleasant for students, lack ‎of enthusiasm to
organize, and perform activities that are prepare lessons, difficulty in motivating
needed to achieve certain ‎educational themselves to come to work, loss of ‎energy
objectives‎. In addition to teacher‟s self- and memory and lack of interest in the
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 06 Issue: 02 April-June, 2018
subject” (‎p. 372). ‎ In developing students‟ personality features, including low levels of
achievement, teachers‟ role is an important self-efficacy. Teacher burnout, the
‎factor that cannot be ignored. If it is proven consequence ‎ of chronic and unattended
that high efficient teachers are able to anxiety‎, hits specifically ‎the individuals who
convey ‎knowledge better and, as a result, to do not have the suitable ‎resources given the
enhance students‟ attainment, the next step demands of the profession (Mashhady et al.,
may be finding ‎ways to develop their 2012).
efficacy to have better achievements on the The concept of self-efficacy was
part of the students. In ‎addition, “teachers‟ developed by Bandura (1986). Bandura
degree is their second characteristic which (1995) defines self-‎efficacy as "people‟s
may make a difference in ‎students‟ beliefs about their capabilities to produce
achievement” (Moradkhani, 2009, p. 5). designated levels of ‎performance that
Moreover, when it comes to the English exercise influence over events that affect
teaching ‎profession, academic degree has their lives" (p. 71). Perceived self-‎efficacy,
little influence on employing teachers. i.e., "beliefs in one‟s capabilities to organize
Hence, English language teachers are ‎found and execute the courses of action required
to have both related and non-related degrees. ‎producing given attainment" (Bandura,
Therefore, it might be a good idea to see 1997, p. 3), can be promoted by four main
‎whether teachers who have related English sources of ‎influence. He suggests these
degrees prepare students with better sources of efficacy expectations as: “mastery
attainments. ‎Finding the effect of teacher ‎experience, vicarious experience, ‎social or
self-efficacy and burnout with English- verbal persuasion, and arousal or
related and Non-English-‎related degrees can physiological and emotional states” (p. 3).‎
help teacher educators to plan better teacher Moreover, the concept of burnout was
education programs. ‎Furthermore, posited by Freudenberger (1974). He
administrators and school principals can use describes burnout as “to fail, to wear out, or
the findings as a starting point to ‎implement become exhausted by ‎making ‎excessive
ways to improve teacher efficacy. Even demands on energy, strength, or resources”
teachers themselves can use these results to (p. 159). Based on Maslach (1999), burnout
‎enhance their practices in the classroom. is often ‎accompanied by “physical
Consequently, ‎ the present study aimed to exhaustion, illness or disorders evolving in a
find out whether there would be any psychosomatic mode” ‎(p. 212). Furthermore,
significant difference and correlation teacher‟s self-efficacy is built upon the
between ‎Iranian EFL teachers‟ self-efficacy theoretical foundation of social cognitive
and burnout with English-related and non- theory ‎concentrating on the evolution and
English-related academic degrees. As practice of human agency that individuals
teachers‟ self-efficacy and burnout have can practice some ‎effect over what they
been ‎paid a great amount of attention by the perform (Bandura, 2006a). Bandura believes
researchers in the field, finding the role of that in this idea, ‎individuals are self-
EFL ‎teachers‟ academic degree on their self- efficient, proactive, self-regulating, and self-
efficacy and burnout can function as a sound reflecting. Regarding this, Schunk and
enquiry. Meece (2006) declare that‎ self-‎efficacy
2. Literature Review‎ influences persons‟ aims and treatments and
2.1 Theoretical Framework is affected by one‟s practices and situations
According to Mashhady et al. (2012), ‎in the setting. Bandura adds that Efficacy
researchers commonly classify the ‎teaching ideas set how environmental chances and
profession as a highly stressful occupation.‎ ‎problems are conceived and influence
‎However, one may discuss ‎the issue as to selection of performances, how much
why some teachers succeed in surmounting ‎attempt is developed on an activity, and how
high levels of occupational stress, in long individuals will maintain when
continuously improving students‟ encountering ‎problems. In addition, based
accomplishments.‎ One reason may lie in on social cognitive theory teacher self-
teacher‟s self-efficacy as a belief in one‟s efficacy may be featured as personal
ability. Bandura (1997) believes that people ‎teachers‟ beliefs in their own capability to
with high efficacy beliefs persisted with the design, organize, and conduct performances
task in the face of problem and gained that are ‎needed to gain given pedagogical
higher outcomes with lower levels of stress. aims.
On the other hand, teacher‟s burnout is Considering what teachers feel as
indicated by a number of negative burnout seems to be a very significant
Cite this article as: Seifalian, M. & Derakhshan, A. (2018). The Relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers‟
Burnout and Self-Efficacy across English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees. International
Journal of English Language & Translation Studies. 6(2). 99-110.
Page | 100
The Relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers‟ Burnout and Self-Efficacy … Mina Seifalian & Ali Derakhshan
problem which influences teaching-learning indicated significant differences in teachers‟

processes. A teacher experiencing burnout is self-efficacy and burnout with respect to
one who has physical, mental and behavioral marital status. Moreover, Einar et al. (2010)
tiredness, this state moreover, explained as a in their study investigated teacher self-
process happening at the end of suitable and efficacy and teacher burnout. According to
unsuitable reactions that are given to the the findings, they concluded that teacher
stressful conditions directly influencing on self-‎efficacy, collective efficacy and two
teacher‟s physical, academic and social dimensions of burnout were ‎differently
performance (Sears et al., 2000). Teachers related both ‎to school context variables and
that experience burnout attempted to clarify to teacher job satisfaction.‎
it as personal or situational variables Additionally, Savas et al. (2014)
(Ozdemir, 2007). Some factors like examined the relationship between teacher
demographic features (Baysal, 1995), term self-efficacy and burnout. In order to collect
of service, way of coping with stress, focus the related data, “Maslach Burnout
of control, and motivational factors are Inventory” and “Teacher Sense of Efficacy
considered and named as personal factors Scale” were used. The findings of the data
(Brissie, Hoover-Dempsey, & Bassler, analysis put forward that there was
1988). significant, medium and negative correlation
On the other hand, misbehavior between teacher self-efficacy and burnout
observed in students, tension in school levels of the participants. Hierarchical
atmosphere, and inadequate support and multiple regression analysis results, which
respect for work, lack of material support to were run to evaluate the relationship
perform their profession, social support, lack between the two variables better,
of administration‟s support and workload are demonstrated that teacher self-efficacy
known as situational factors. Teachers predicted burnout negatively.
experiencing burnout seem to be more By the same token, Tabatabaee Yazdi
neglectful about absentees, lack of desire et al.‟s (2013) study has been conducted as a
toward teaching learning process and qualitative dominant mixed research design
decrease in expectations about students, lack to explore the correlation between self-
of interest, compassion and idealism for efficacy of Iranian English as a foreign
students, administration, parents and language (EFL) teachers and their reports of
generally for the job, and also they develop burnout comparing two big provinces of
negative feelings against the people they Tehran and Khorasan Razavi. The findings
give services (Schwab, Jackson, & Schuler, revealed that the participants‟ self-efficacy
1986). has a reverse relationship with their burnout.
2.2 Empirical Studies Moreover, a significant relationship was
‎ According to the many studies done observed between teachers' age, gender,
on teacher‟s self-efficacy and burnout‎, many years of experiences and reports of burnout.
‎researchers believe that self-efficacy and Furthermore, Ghonsoolya and Ghanizadeh
burnout have meaningful effects on the (2013) examined the relationship between
performance of teacher and student‟s EFL teachers‟ sense of self-efficacy and
learning (Akbari & Moradkhani, 2010; their self-regulation. It also explores the
‎Akbari & Tavassoli, 2011; Einar et al., relationships between self-regulation on the
2010; Ghazalbash & Afghari, 2016; one hand and length of teaching experience,
Gholami, 2015; Ghonsoolya & Ghanizadeh, age and gender respectively. The findings
2013; Mashhady et al., 2012; Moradkhani, indicated a significant relationship between
2009; Savas, Bozgeyik, & Eser, 2014; teachers‟ self-regulation and self-efficacy
Tabatabaee Yazdi et al., 2013‎).‎ beliefs; additionally, among the components
‎Mashhady et al. (2012) investigated comprising self-regulation, goal-setting and
the relationship between burnout and self- mastery goal-orientation had the highest
efficacy among EFL teachers. In addition, correlations with the teachers‟ sense of self-
differences in teachers‟ burnout and self- efficacy. Moreover, significant correlations
efficacy were examined with respect to were found between teachers‟ self-
demographics. The results revealed that self- regulation, their teaching experience and
efficacy was negatively correlated with their age. There were, however, no
burnout, and it could be a potent predictor of significant correlations with gender.
burnout among EFL teachers. It was also In the relevant study, Moradkhani
shown that age and teaching experience (2009) investigated the effect of novice
were significantly correlated with self- English language teachers‟ self-efficacy and
efficacy and burnout. Moreover, the findings academic degree on students‟ achievement.

Page | 101
The results of the data analysis showed that the variations among teachers‟ performances
there was no significant difference between in the classroom and the problems any
the self-efficacy of teachers with different teacher with certain characteristics may
academic degrees. In contrast, the have. Besides all, Gholami (2015)
interaction between teachers‟ self-efficacy investigated the relationship between the
and their academic degree were found to self-efficacy of Iranian teachers of English
have a significant relationship with language and their reports of burnout. The findings
learners‟ development. It seems that as MA revealed that participants‟ self-efficacy has a
teachers‟ sense of efficacy increases, their reverse relationship with their burnout.
students‟ achievement enhances In brief, the previous review of the
consequently. Hence, it might be suggest related literature has obviously indicated that
that self-efficacy is a psychological ‎researchers and educators have attempted to
construct that gains prominence as teachers investigate the relationship between EFL
get higher degrees in English related majors. teacher‟s self-efficacy and burnout, and
Similarly, Ghazalbash and Afghari (2016) these studies have not dealt with academic
investigated the relationship between teacher majors as one of the variables of the present
burnout, and reflective teaching among study, so a dearth of research is felt in the
Iranian EFL teachers. The findings of the context of Iran on burnout and teacher‟s
study showed that there was a weak negative self-efficacy; therefore, the present study
relationship between reflective teaching and aimed to investigate the relationship
burnout for male and female teachers and for between Iranian EFL teachers‟ burnout and
both groups considered as a composite self-efficacy across ‎English-‎related vs. non-
group of language teachers. English-related academic degrees.‎
Alternatively, Akbari and Moradkhani The following research questions guided the
(2010) probed into the possible relationships outcomes of the study-
between experience/academic degree and 1. Is there any significant difference
teachers‟ self-efficacy among EFL teachers. between EFL teachers majoring in
The results of data analysis revealed that English-related and non-English-related
experienced teachers (with more than three majors regarding teachers‟ self-efficacy
years of teaching experience) had a and teachers‟ burnout?
significantly higher level of global efficacy, 2. Is there any significant relationship
efficacy for student engagement, efficacy for between EFL-majored and non-EFL-
classroom management, and efficacy for majored teachers‟ self-efficacy and
instructional techniques compared to their burnout?
novice counterparts. In contrast, teachers 3. Methodology
who had English-related academic degrees 3.1 Participants
did not enjoy significantly higher levels of The participants of the present study
efficacy except in the subcomponent of were 120 Iranian English language teachers
student engagement. In addition, Akbari and (100 female and 20 male) from different
Tavassoli (2011) explored possible institutes in Gorgan, Aliabad, and Gonbad in
relationships among English language Golestan Province of Iran. Their age ranged
teachers‟ sense of efficacy, burnout, from 22 to 52 years and their teaching
teaching style, and emotional intelligence on experience was 1 to 23 years. ‎Half of them
the one hand, and to document probable studied English-related majors (English
differences among them with respect to Language Teaching, English Translation,
teachers‟ gender, degree, and experience on English Literature) and the rest studied non-
the other hand. The participants were English-related majors (Biology, Computer
heterogeneous in terms of their gender, engineering, Civil engineering,
degree, and teaching experience. The Mathematics, Statistics, etc.) ‎who were
findings showed significant even though not selected through convenience sampling.
high correlations among some of the ‎Table 1 represents the detailed information
components of teacher efficacy, burnout, about the participants.
teaching style, and emotional intelligence, as Table 1: Details of the Participants
well as significant differences among some
the components of these variables with
respect to teachers‟ gender, degree, and
experience. The results of this study can
help teacher educators in dealing with
different teachers since they will know about
Page | 102
3.2 Instruments 3.3 Reliability of the Instruments

To collect the data, two instruments In order to check the reliability of self-
were used. These instruments include: efficacy and burnout questionnaires the
Teachers' Sense of Efficacy Scale (2001)‎ Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient was used. As
and Maslach and Jackson‟s Burnout can be shown in Table 2 and 3, the
Inventory (1981). Each of these instruments calculated alpha value points out an ideal
is explained as follows:‎ range of .92 for self-efficacy and .73 for
3.2.1 Teachers‟ Sense of Efficacy Scale burnout which demonstrates that the
We utilized the Teachers‟ Sense of questionnaires items were completely
Efficacy Scale designed by Tschannen- suitable for the present study.
Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001), due to its Table 2: Reliability Statistics of Self-efficacy
comprehensiveness, integrity, and ease of Cronbach‟s Alpha N of Items
administration. The Teachers‟ Sense of .92 24
Efficacy Scale, also called the Ohio State Table 3: Reliability Statistics of Burnout
Teacher Efficacy Scale (OSTES), Cronbach‟s Alpha N of Items
encompasses two versions: long form .73 22
(including 24 items) and short form 3.4 Data Collection Procedures
(including 12 items). The long form was In order to conduct the research and to
utilized in the present study, comprises three test the research hypotheses, the following
subscales: efficacy in student engagement steps were ‎followed: First, the participants
(F1); efficacy in instructional strategies (F2); were divided into two groups of teachers
and efficacy in classroom management (F3). who studied English-related majors and non-
Each subscale loads equally on eight items, English-related majors. Then, to collect the
and every item is measured on a 9-point data, two questionnaires of ‎teacher‟s self-
scale anchored with the notations: “nothing, efficacy and burnout were administered. ‎The
very little, some influence, quite a bit, a teachers filled out the questionnaire with the
great deal.” This scale seeks to capture the researcher's guide via e-mail, social network
multi-faceted nature of teachers‟ efficacy or in paper. The design of the study was
beliefs in a concise manner, without correlational and ex post facto.
becoming too specific or too general. The 3.5 Data Analysis
cronbach‟s alpha coefficient for the The collected data were submitted to
reliability of the instrument was examined the computer software and Statistical
by Akbari and Tavassoli (2011) which was Package of Social Sciences (SPSS) version
.89. 24 and an independent samples t-test was
3.2.2 Maslach and Jackson‟s Burnout run to find out any possible differences
Inventory between the scores of teacher‟s self-efficacy
In order to determine participants‟ of two groups and another independent
level of burnout, a Persian adaptation of samples t-test was run to find out any
MBI (Maslach & Jackson, 1981) was possible differences between the scores of
utilized. The Persian adaptation of MBI was teacher‟s burnout of the two groups.
developed over three decades ago and shows Moreover, based on the normality of the
accurate indexes of reliability and validity data, Pearson product-moment correlation
(Badri Gargari, 1995). The reliability of the coefficient was utilized to find the
instrument varied from .74 to .84 and the relationship between EFL-majored teachers‟
factorial structure was compatible with the self-efficacy and burnout also, the
original version. The 22-item questionnaire relationship between non-EFL-majored
is composed of three subscales: Emotional teachers‟ self-efficacy and burnout.
exhaustion, Depersonalization and Personal 4. Results
accomplishment. The items are rated in two 4.1 Assessing the Normality of the Data
different ways. Firstly items are scored on a Normality of the data was confirmed
7-point frequency scale ranging from (0) by running Kolmogorov-Smirnov and
„never‟ to (6) „everyday‟. Secondly items are Shapiro-Wilk tests. As presented in Table 4,
scored on an 8-point scale ranging from (0) the significant value for self-efficacy is p=.2
„none‟ to (7) „very much‟. The higher the and for burnout p=.16 (above .05) which can
scores in both frequency and intensity, the be concluded that the data are distributed
more the participants experience the feeling normally, and therefore, parametric tests can
of burnout. The reliability of the instrument be employed for the analysis of the data.
was examined by Masoudi Miyanrostaghi, Moreover, as can be seen in Table 4, the
Mazandarani, and Seyyedrezaei (2016) significant value of Shapiro-Wilk test for
which was .75.‎

Page | 103
self-efficacy is p=.3 and for burnout p=.16 Figure 1: The schematic representation of the
(above .05) which can be reasoned that the related and non-English-related mean scores in
data are distributed normally. self-‎efficacy scale
Table 4: Tests of the Normality of the Data Figure 2 below represents the
schematic representation of the related and
non-English-related ‎majors‟ mean scores for
burnout. It is clear that the mean score of the
non-English-related ‎ is ‎more than that of
English-related.‎
4.2 Answer to the First Research Question

The first research question was to
examine the difference between EFL
teachers majoring in English-related and
‎non-English-related majors regarding
teachers‟ self-efficacy‎and teachers‟ burnout.
Table 5 summarizes the descriptive statistics
for each group. As can be shown in Table 5,
English-related self-efficacy enjoyed a mean Figure 2: The schematic representation of the
of 168.4 and standard deviation of 20.09. related and non-English-related mean scores for
The mean score for non-English-related was burnout
‎166.18 and the standard deviation was However, in order to make sure that the
25.15. As to‎ burnout‎ non-English-related difference is statistically significant, an
enjoyed a mean and standard deviation of independent samples t-test was run. Table 6
62.4 and 7.59 respectively, For English- illustrates that (t(118)= .53, p = .59) for self-
related the mean score was ‎61.57 and the efficacy. It can be concluded that there was
standard deviation was 7.08.‎‎ not a significant difference in the scores of
Table 5: Group Statistics for Related and non- related and non-English-related majors
English-related Majors in Self-efficacy and regarding teachers‟ self-efficacy because the
burnout Scale p value (.59) is not below the significant
level (α= .05). Moreover, Table 6
demonstrates that (t (118)= ‎-.62‎, p = .53) for
burnout. It can be concluded that there was
not a significant difference in the scores of
related and non-English-related majors
regarding teachers‟ burnout because the p
value (.53) is not below the significant level
(α= .05).‎
Table 6: Independent Samples T-test for Related
Figure 1 below represents the schematic and non-English-related Majors in Self-efficacy
representation of the related and non- and burnout
English-related majors‟ mean scores for self-
efficacy. It is clear that the mean score of the
English-related ‎ is more than that of non-
English-related.
4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics in Self-efficacy

Scale
The Teachers‟ Sense of Efficacy Scale
comprises three ‎subscales: efficacy in
student engagement (F1); efficacy in
Page | 104
instructional strategies (F2); and ‎efficacy in

classroom management (F3). Each subscale
loads equally on eight items, and every ‎item
is measured on a 9-point scale anchored with
the notations: “nothing, very little, some
‎influence, quite a bit, a great deal.” This
scale seeks to capture the multi-faceted
nature of ‎teachers‟ efficacy beliefs in a
concise manner, without becoming too
specific or too general. Tables 7 and 8
represent descriptive statistics of self-
efficacy scale for related and non-English-
related majors respectively.
Table 7: Descriptive Statistics in Self-efficacy
Scale for Related Major
‎ As can be seen in Table 8, from non-

English-related teachers‟ perspective about
self-efficacy‟s questioner, items 6, ‎13, and
24 (How much can you do to get students to
believe they can do well in school work?‎)
(M=7.38), (How much can you do to get
children to follow classroom rules?‎)
(M=7.40), and (How well can you provide
appropriate challenges for very capable
students?‎) (M=7.28) have the highest mean
scores among the other items. However,
items 1, 2, and 19 (How much ‎can you do to
get through to the most difficult students?‎)
(M=6.48 ), (How much can you do to ‎help
your students think critically?) (M=6.30),
and ‎(How well can you keep a few problem
students form ruining an entire ‎lesson?‎‎)
As indicated in Table 7, from related (M=6.47) gained the lowest mean scores.‎
teachers‟ perspective on self-efficacy 4.2.2 Descriptive Statistics in Burnout Scale
questioner, items 13, 17, and 20 (How much The 22-item burnout questionnaire is
can you do to get children to follow composed of three subscales: Emotional
classroom rules?‎) (M= 7.55), (How much exhaustion, Depersonalization and Personal
can you do to adjust your lessons to the accomplishment. The items are rated in two
proper level for individual students?‎) (M= different ways. Firstly items are scored on a
7.51), and (To what extent can you provide 7-point frequency scale ranging from (0)
an alternative explanation for example when „never‟ to (6) „everyday‟. Secondly items are
students are ‎confused?‎) (M= 7.84) have the scored on an 8-point scale ranging from (0)
highest mean scores. However, items 1, 2, „none‟ to (7) „very much‟. The higher the
and 12 (How much can you do to get scores in both frequency and intensity, the
through to the most difficult students?‎) more the participants experience the feeling
(M=6.43 ), (How much can you do to help of burnout. Tables 9 and 10 represents
your students think critically?) (M=6.23), descriptive statistics of burnout scale for
and ‎(How much can you do to foster student related and non-English-related majors
creativity?‎) (M=6.56) gained the lowest respectively.
mean scores. Table 9: Descriptive Statistics in Burnout Scale
Table 8: Descriptive Statistics in Self-efficacy for Related Major
Scale for non-English-Related Major

Page | 105
‎ As shown in Table 10, from non-

English-related teachers‟ perspective about
burnout questioner, items 12, ‎18, and 19 (I
feel I am full of power and energy‫‏‬‎)
(M=5.68), (after working with my
colleagues, I feel joy and happiness‫‏‬‎)
(M=5.50), and (my job has had important
and valuable achievements for me)
(M=5.55) gained the highest mean scores
among the other items. However, items 11,
13, and 20 (I worry that this job make me
cruel to others‫( )‏‬M=1.11), (my job made me
to feel futility ‫( )‏‬M=1.10), and ‎(‫ ‏‬I feel I
arrived at the end of my life‫( )‏‬M=1.18) have
the lowest mean scores.‎
4.3 Answer to the Second Research
Question
The second research question was to
examine the relationship between EFL-
majored and non-EFL-majored teachers‟
As indicated in Table 9, from related self-efficacy and burnout. Table 11
teachers‟ perspective on burnout questioner, summarizes the descriptive statistics for
items 12, 18, and 19 (I feel I am full of each of the instrument‎. As can be shown in
power and energy‫‏‬‎) (M= 5.76), (after the ‎Table 11, for EFL-majored self-efficacy
working with my colleagues, I feel joy and enjoyed a mean of ‎168.4 and standard
happiness‎) (M= 5.60), and (my job has had deviation of 20.09. For burnout the mean
important and valuable achievements for score was ‎61.57 and the standard deviation
me) (M= 5.93) have the highest mean was 7.08.‎ Moreover, ‎ as can be seen in the
scores. However, items 10, 11, and 20 (from ‎Table 11, for non-EFL-majored self-efficacy
when I chose this job, I am indifferent to had a mean of 166.18‎and standard deviation
others‫‏‬‎) (M=1.16 ), (I worried that this job of 25.15. For burnout the mean score was
make me cruel to others‫( )‏‬M=1.18), and ‎(‫ ‏‬I ‎62.4 and the standard deviation was 7.59.‎‎
feel that I arrived at the end of my life‫)‏‬ Table 11: Descriptive Statistics for EFL-majored
(M=1.25) have the lowest mean scores. and non-EFL-majored Teachers’ Self-efficacy and
Burnout
Table 10: Descriptive Statistics in Burnout Scale
for non-English-Related Major
A Pearson product-moment correlation

coefficient was computed to assess the
relationship between EFL-majored and non-
EFL-majored teachers‟ self-efficacy and
burnout. The results, as demonstrated in
Table 12, indicated that for EFL-majored
there was a positive correlation between the
two variables [r = .288, p = .026]. Overall,
there was a significant correlation between
burnout because the p value is below the
significant level (α= .05). In addition, for
non-EFL-majored there was a positive
correlation between the two variables [r =
Page | 106
.140, p = .287]. ‎Moreover, there was not a

significant correlation between non-EFL-
majored teachers‟ self-efficacy and ‎burnout
because the p value is greater than the
significant level (α= .05).‎
Ta le : The Correlations Between EFL-
majored Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Burnout
Figure 4: The correlation between non-EFL-

majored teachers‟ self-efficacy and burnout
As mentioned before, the aim of the
present research was to investigate the
relationship between Iranian EFL teachers‟
burnout and self-‎efficacy across ‎English-
‎related vs. non-English-related academic
degrees.‎To answer the research questions
the following null hypotheses were probed:
‎H1: There is no significant difference
between teachers who majored in English-
related and ‎the ones who majored in non-
To see a more tangible view of the
English-related regarding teachers‟ self-
data, see Figures 3 and 4 which are the
efficacy and burnout.‎
graphic representation of the data for the
‎H2: There is no significant
correlation between EFL-majored and non-
relationship between EFL-majored and non-
burnout.
‎burnout.‎
Based on the results obtained from the
statistical data analysis presented in Tables 6
and 12, it is concluded that the null
hypothesis 1 was accepted which presents
the fact that there is no significant difference
between teachers who majored in English-
related and ‎the ones ‎who majored in non-
English-related regarding teachers‟ self-
efficacy and burnout.‎ and null hypothesis 2
for EFL-majored was rejected which means
that there is a significant relationship
between EFL-majored teachers‟ self-
efficacy and ‎burnout. However, for non-
EFL-majored the null hypothesis was ‎
dside‎ eht h‎ hd cp‎ ih i‎ ihd d‎ tp‎ cc‎
Figure 3: The correlation between EFL-majored ‎ ptactft cirelationship between non-EFL-
teachers‟ self-efficacy and burnout majored teachers‟ self-efficacy and ‎burnout.‎
5. Discussion and Conclusion
The results of the present study are in
line with Akbari and Tavassoli‟s (2011)
study which explored possible relationships
among English ‎language teachers‟ sense of
efficacy, burnout, teaching style, and
emotional intelligence, and to document
probable differences among them with
respect to teachers‟ gender, ‎degree, and
experience. Their findings demonstrated
significant even though not high correlations
among ‎some of the components of teacher

Page | 107
efficacy, burnout, teaching style, and correlation between teacher self-efficacy and
emotional intelligence, ‎as well as significant burnout levels of the participants which is
differences among some of the components not in line with the findings of the present
of these variables with respect to ‎teachers‟ study. By the same token, the results of
gender, degree, and experience which are Tabatabaee Yazdi et al.‟s (2013) study
consistent with the findings of present which explored the correlation between self-
research. efficacy of ‎Iranian English as a foreign
In a like manner, the findings of this language (EFL) teachers and their reports of
study support what was offered by Barari et burnout are in contrast with the findings of
al. (2014) who investigated the effect of this research. They concluded that the
self-efficacy on job burnout ‎among primary participants‟ self-efficacy has a reverse
school teachers. They found that self- relationship with ‎their burnout which is not
‎efficacy and burnout components are in line with this research results. Moreover,
mutually correlated with each other. a significant relationship was observed
In line with the findings of the present between teachers' age, gender, ‎years of
study, Akbari and Moradkhani (2010) experiences and reports of burnout.‎
investigated possible relationships between Moradkhani (2009) believes that self-
‎experience/academic degree and teachers‟ efficacy is a psychological construct that
self-efficacy among EFL teachers. The achieves prominence as teachers get higher
results of data ‎analysis showed that degrees in English related majors. In his
experienced teachers (with more than three study, he concluded that there was no
years of teaching experience) ‎had a significant difference between the self-
significantly higher level of global efficacy, efficacy of teachers with different academic
efficacy for student engagement, efficacy for degrees. Additionally, in line with the results
‎classroom management, and efficacy for of the present study Eghtesadi Roudi (2011)
instructional techniques compared to their declares that “low proficiency, lack of
novice ‎counterparts. Also, teachers who had support from administrators, student
English-related academic degrees did not misbehavior and nature of the L2 were
enjoy ‎significantly higher levels of efficacy among the major reasons of burnout among
except in the subcomponent of student Iranian EFL teachers” (p.1).
engagement which is in line with the results To efficiently handle teacher burnout,
of this research. In contrast, the findings of according to the results of the present
the present study are not consistent with research, EFL teachers, should improve
Gholami‟s (2015) study investigating the skills in observing their stress levels. As
relationship between the self-efficacy of mentioned by Cockburn (1996), the first step
‎Iranian teachers of English and their reports for teachers in decreasing stress is to
of burnout. He found that self-efficacy had a enhance their awareness of stress levels.
reverse relationship with burnout‫‏‬which is in Additionally, teachers and language institute
contrast with this research. administrators should cooperate to discuss
The findings of the present study are in the sources and results of teacher burnout as
contrast with Mashhady et al.‟s (2012) study well as ways to reduce teacher burnout.
which investigated the relationship between Furthermore, it is suggested that
burnout and self-efficacy ‎among EFL school administers and teachers do more to
teachers. They found that self-efficacy was improve and strengthen the organizational
negatively correlated with ‎burnout, and it aspect of educating‎, that is, the ability ‎to
could be a potent predictor of burnout work as an employee accepting
among EFL teachers. It was also shown ‎that administrations, cooperate and support from
age and teaching experience were others (e.g., colleagues, supervisors, and
significantly correlated with self-efficacy associates‎). A positive and supportive school
and burnout. ‎Moreover, the findings atmosphere also helps teachers in becoming
indicated significant differences in teachers‟ more successful and confident.
self-efficacy and burnout ‎with respect to References
marital status. Akbari, R., & Moradkhani, S. (2010). Iranian
Moreover, Savas et al.‟s (2014) findings English teachers' self-efficacy: Do
which examined the relationship between academic degree and experience make a
teacher self-efficacy ‎and burnout are in difference. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-ye
contrast with the results of this research. The Khareji, 56(1), 25-47.
Akbari, R., & Tavassoli, K. (2011). Teacher
findings of their data analysis revealed that efficacy, burnout, teaching style, and
there was significant, medium ‎and negative emotional intelligence: Possible
Page | 108
relationships and differences. Iranian Gholami, L. (2015). Teacher self-efficacy and

Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 31- teacher burnout: A study of relations.
61. International Letters of Social and
Badri Gargari, R. (1995). Psychological Humanistic Sciences Online, 60(1), 83-86.
syndromes in teacher burnout and coping Ghonsooly, B., & Ghanizadeh, A. (2013). Self-
mechanisms (Unpublished M.A. thesis). efficacy and self-regulation and their
Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. relationship: a study of Iranian EFL
Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of cognitive teachers. The Language Learning Journal,
processes through perceived self-efficacy. 41(1), 68-84.
Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 729- Mashhady, H., Fallah, N., & LotfiGaskaree, B.
738. (2012). The role of foreign language
Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing teachers‟ self-efficacy in their burnout.
societies. Cambridge: Cambridge British Journal of Education, Society &
University Press. Behavioral Science, 2(4), 369-388.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise Maslach, C. (1999). Progress in understanding
of control. New York: Freeman and teacher burnout. Understanding and
Company. preventing teacher burnout: A sourcebook
Bandura, A. (2006a). Adolescent development of international research and practice.
from an agentic perspective. In F. Pajares Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.‎
& T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). MBI :
adolescents (pp. 1-43). Greenwich, Maslatch burnout inventory. Palto Alto,
Connecticut: Information Age Publishing. CA: Consulting psychological Press.
Bandura, A. (2006b). Guide for constructing Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P.
self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review Of
Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of Psychology, 52(1), 397-422.
adolescents (pp. 307-337). Greenwich, Masoudi Miyanrostagh, A., Mazandarani, O., &
Connecticut: Information Age Publishing. Seyyedrezaei, S. H. (2016). A study into
Baysal, A. (1995). Lise ve dengi okul EFL teachers' attitudes towards job stress
oğretmenlerinde tukenmişliğe etki eden and burnout in high schools. Journal of
faktorler (Unpublished doctoral Language Sciences & Linguistics. 4(2),
dissertation), Dokuz Eylul Universitesi, 72-76.
İzmir. Moradkhani, S. (2009). The effect of novice
Brissie, J. S., Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & English teachers’ self-efficacy and
Bassler, O. C. (1988). Individual and academic degree on students’
situational contributors to teacher burnout. achievement (Unpublished M.A. thesis).
Journal of Educational Research, 82(2), Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
106-112. Mukundan, J., & Khandehroo, K. (2010).
Cockburn, A. D. (1996). Primary teachers‟ Burnout among English language teachers
knowledge and acquisition of stress in Malaysia. Contemporary Issues in
relieving strategies. British Journal of Education Research, 3(1), 71–76.
Educational Psychology, 66(3), 399-410. Ozdemir, Y. (2007). The role of classroom
Eghtesadi Roudi, A. (2011). Burnout among management efficacy in predicting teacher
Iranian EFL teachers: Underlying burnout. International Journal of Social
reasons, influential factors, and effective Sciences, 2(4), 257-263.
coping strategies (Unpublished doctoral Savas, A. C., Bozgeyik, Y., & Eser, İ. (2014). A
dissertation). Tarbiat Modares University, study on the relationship between teacher
Tehran, Iran. self-efficacy and burnout. European
Einar, A., Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. Journal of Educational Research, 3(4),
(2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher 159-166.
burnout: A study of relations. Teaching Schunk, D. H., & Meece, J. L. (2006). Self-
and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059- efficacy development in adolescence. In
1069. F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy
Freudenberger, H. J. (1974). Staff burnout. beliefs of adolescents (pp. 71-96).
Journal of Social Issues, 30, 159–165. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age
Ghorpade, J., Lackritz, J., & Singh, G. Publishing.
(2007). Burnout and personality: Evidence Schwab, R. L., Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S.
from academia. Journal of Career (1986). Educator burnout: Sources and
Assessment, 15(2), 240-256. consequences. Educational Research
Ghazalbash, N., & Afghari, A. (2016). Quarterly, 10(3), 14-29.
Relationship between burnout and Sears, S. F., Urizar, G. G., & Evans, G. D.
reflective teaching among EFL teachers. (2000). Examining a stress-coping model
International Journal of Foreign of burnout and depression in extension
Language Teaching and Research, 3(12), agents. Journal of Occupational Health
41-51. Psychology, 5(1), 56-62.

Page | 109
Tabatabaei Yazdi, T., Motallebzadeh, M., &

Ashraf, H. (2013). Iranian EFL teachers'
self-efficacy and teachers' burnout: A case
of comparison. International Journal of
Language Learning and Applied
Linguistics World, 4(2), 59-73.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W.
K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning
and measure. Review of Educational
Research, 68(2), 202-248.
Wood, T. C. (2002). Understanding teacher
burnout. Retrieved in June 2016 from:
http://www.vtaide.com/png/ERIC/Teacher
-Burnout.htm.
Zamani Rad, A., & Nasir, R. (2010). Burnout
and career self-concept among teachers in
Mashhad, Iran, Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 7, 464-469.
Page | 110

The Relationship Between Iranian EFL Teachers Burnout and Self-Efficacy Across English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Relationship Between Iranian EFL Teachers Burnout and Self-Efficacy Across English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Relationship between Iranian EFL Teachers‟ Burnout and Self-Efficacy across

English-Related vs. Non-English-Related Academic Degrees

1. Introduction efficacy, burnout has gained momentum in

problem which influences teaching-learning indicated significant differences in teachers‟

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460

3.2 Instruments 3.3 Reliability of the Instruments

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460

4.2 Answer to the First Research Question

4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics in Self-efficacy

instructional strategies (F2); and ‎efficacy in

‎ As can be seen in Table 8, from non-

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460

‎ As shown in Table 10, from non-

A Pearson product-moment correlation

.140, p = .287]. ‎Moreover, there was not a

Figure 4: The correlation between non-EFL-

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460

relationships and differences. Iranian Gholami, L. (2015). Teacher self-efficacy and

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460

Tabatabaei Yazdi, T., Motallebzadeh, M., &

Anda mungkin juga menyukai