PDF 國立彥北護娋壬康大學埃帟壬康研叢咼

國立臺北護理健康大學旅遊健康研究所 National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences Graduate Institute of Tourism and Health Science. 碩士論文 Master Thesis 工作壓力、休閒因應、休閒參與和健康之關係 -以臺北市國小英語教師為例 The Study on the Relationships among Teacher Stress, Leisure Coping, Leisure Participation, and Health for English Teachers in Elementary Schools at Taipei City. 研究生:汪孝玲 撰 Hsiaoling Wang 指導教授：陳建和博士 Chienho Chen Ph.D.. 中華民國一○三年七月三十一日 July, 31, 2014.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many special thanks to my dedicated mentors at National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences, and I was honored to have Dr. Chang, Ya-Fung and Dr. Wu, Shung-Kung as my committee members. My heartfelt thanks go to my good friends I met here, Lucy, Tammy, Nai-Jung, Jenny, Shu-Ping, Erica, Bibi, Li-Lu, and Sophia. Finally, I would like to acknowledge and thank to those English teachers who helped complete my research questionnaires.. i.

工作壓力、休閒因應、休閒參與及身心健康之關係 -以臺北市國小英語教師為例 中文摘要 教師肩負提升國家競爭力及國民素質之重擔，因此，工作壓力相 當沉重。本研究以教師角度觀察現職教師對工作壓力之感受程度，並 探討其工作壓力、休閒因應、休閒參與及健康之現況與相互關係。以 臺北市公立國小現職英語教師為調查對象，透過問卷方式取得 340 份 有效樣本，使用 IBM SPSS 20 及 LISREL 8.80 統計軟體進行描述性 統計及信度分析，並以結構方程式驗證模型。研究結果顯示學生問題 為國小英語教師最大壓力來源，而處理學校人際關係問題最為重要。 教師之休閒因應現況以心理休閒因應為主，而休閒活動則以參與娛樂 型活動為首要選擇。工作壓力越大對教師身心健康越有負面不良的影 響，而透過休閒因應及休閒活動的參與對其身心健康則產生正面助益。 本研究結果與理論及以往類似研究相符，並能助益於未來相關研究， 及能提供教育人員對於工作壓力做有效管理之參考。 關鍵字：教師壓力、休閒因應、休閒參與、身心健康。. ii.

The Study on the Relationships among Teacher Stress, Leisure Coping, Leisure Participation, and Health for English Teachers in Elementary Schools at Taipei City. ABSTRACT As the key roles in upgrading the literacy and competition ability of citizens, teachers suffer severe stress. This study was carried to explore the current status of teacher stress, leisure coping, leisure participation, and health of English teachers in elementary schools at Taipei City, to examine the relationships among stress, coping, and health with the involvement of leisure participation, and to offer suggestions for English teachers to lighten strain. 340 in-service English teachers completed full self-reported questionnaires. Descriptive statistics and structural equation modeling (SEM) were conducted for analysis. The results revealed that students ranked the top stressors for English teachers, and teacher stress made negative influence on mental and physical health. Mental leisure coping offered a short relief and the positive attitude to fight against the stress. Recreational entertainments, especially indoor leisure activities, had the highest participation frequency. Keywords: teacher stress; leisure coping; leisure participation; physical and mental health.. iii.

LIST OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………….…...…. i. CHINESE ABSTRACT……………………………..….. ii. ABSTRACT…………………………………………..…. iii. LIST OF CONTENTS……………………………….…. iv. LIST OF TABLES……………………………………..... vi. LIST OF FIGURES……………………….……….….... vii. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION………….….……..….. 1. Background……………………………………..……. 1. Research purposes…………………………..……….. 3. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEWS………………. 5. Stress…………………………………...….…….….... 5. Coping………………………………….…….…...….. 17. Leisure…………………………….……….……...….. 20. Health………………………………..………...….….. 32. CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY………………..….….. 40. Research framework………………………………….. 40. Hypotheses……………………………………..…….. 41. Sampling and instrumentation………………..….….. 41. CHAPTER 4 RESULTS…………………….…...….….. 45. CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS……………..………….. 61. Conclusions…………………………………….…….. 61. Limitations…………………………………….….….. 63. Suggestions…………………………………….…….. 63. REFERENCES……………………………………..…... 66. iv.

APPENDICES………………………………………….. v. 77.

LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1 A List of Teacher Stressors……………………………... 10. Table 4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (N=340)……………………………………………….….. 45. Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics for Teacher Stress scale …….. 46. Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for Each Items of Teacher Stress Scale……………………………………………….. 47. Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics for Leisure Coping Scale….…. 49. Table 4.5 Descriptive Statistics for Each Item of Leisure Coping Scale……………………………………………... 50. Table 4.6 Descriptive Statistics for Leisure Participation Measurement Scale………………………….……….…. 52. Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for Each Item of Leisure Participation Measurement Scale………………….…. 53. Table 4.8 Descriptive Statistics for the Short Form-12 Health Survey…………………………………………………….. 54. Table 4.9 Descriptive Statistics for Each Component Summary of Short Form-12 Health Survey………….. 55. Table 4.10 Results of Cronbach’s Alpha for Each Scale………... 56. Table 4.11 Results of Goodness of Fit Statistics………………….. 57. vi.

LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.1.. Flow chart of this study…………...……………. 4. Figure 2.1.. The model of teacher stress…………………….. 13. Figure 2.2.. The coping model………………..….………….. 19. Figure 2.3.. The model of leisure and health ……….………. 22. Figure 2.4.. Hierarchical dimensions of leisure stress coping.. 24. Figure 2.5.. Leisure coping models……………………….…. 25. Figure 3.1.. Research framework…………………..………... 40. Figure 4.1.. SEM results………………………………..……. 58. vii.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION. Background Teaching is a high stress profession. When confronting international competitions, technological advance, globalization, structure morphing of the society and families, and rapid changes of labor markets, educational evaluation was one of the main solutions for governments adopted to meet such severe challenges. In Taiwan, Grade 1-9 Curriculums, Academic Attainment Testing, Instructional Assessment, Curriculum Evaluation, and consulting service reformed the traditional education system, but these policies elevated the level of teacher stress concurrently. In 2011, an educational survey made by King Car Education Foundation for elementary and junior high school teachers in Taiwan reported that stress score of school teachers soared up to 72.4 (Chang, 2011). Teacher stress not only leaves harmful impacts on teachers’ physical and mental health, but also affects their professional performance at schools. Although the experience of stress is subjective and diverse, the main stressors of teacher stress are similar worldwide. For example time strain, heavy workload, interrelationships, student misbehaviors (Kyriacou, 2001). Exposure to stress in a long run will make teachers suffer the weariness of burnout and damage their health seriously. Mental problems and psychosomatic diseases keep increasing among teachers, and higher suicide rate of teachers is a thrilling threat still unrevealed. 1.

Stress and burnout were the main causes of teachers’ attrition. In Finland, many teachers resigned their teaching profession just after a few years. In the US, approximately one-third of novice teachers quit their jobs within three years, and a half of them left after five years. Early retirement of senior teachers and frequent replacement of teachers make schools pay huge redundancy on recruiting and training novice teachers. The high turnover rate seriously disrupts pupils’ learning and ruin school personnel management. In 2010 around five percent of teachers in primary schools left their teaching profession in Taiwan (Ministry of Education, 2011). Teaching English in elementary schools is not an easy and pleasant job in Taiwan. Dual-peak phenomenon in students’ English performance makes curriculum planning and teaching strategies more difficult and complex, especially in Taipei City. In addition, numerous activities and competitions torture English teachers every semester. Since teacher stress becomes a part of routines at school, suitable coping strategies and behaviors for teachers play an essential role to buffer stressful events and guard against poor health. In Taiwan, studies on teacher stress were almost for homeroom teachers and administrators, some for principles, but none for English teachers in elementary schools. Therefore, a study to explore job stress, coping strategies, and health of English teachers in primary schools is indeed a rush necessity.. 2.

Research Purposes. Teachers play a key role in upgrading the literacy of citizens and enhancing competition ability of a country. Therefore, teacher stress, coping skills, and their health are worth for governments to concern. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent of stress which English teachers in elementary schools bear, the leisure coping strategies they used to deal with stressful events, and their health status. This research involved surveying elementary school English teachers at Taipei city. Accordingly, there are three purposes within the proposition of study as follows: 1. To understand the current status of stress, coping and health for English Teachers. 2. To explore the relationship among stress, coping and health with the involvement of leisure participation. 3. To make suggestions for English teachers, school administrators, and education authority in reducing stress.. 3.

Flow chart of this study Nine steps were listed on the flow chart shown in Figure 1.1.. Figure 1.1. Flow chart 4.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. Stress In this modern era, stress is a term used widely with numerous situations. The concept of stress was initially deduced from the Latin "strictus", literal meaning of taut (Hakanen, Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2006), and the short for “destresse” (Merriam-Webster). At the very beginning of science studies, stress was used in physics. Then, it was transferred and appeared extensively in the area of biology, medicine, and psychology. Therefore, stress was then regarded as the physical force acting on one material body, the overburden on a body, or a psychological pressure on an individual from environment demands (Selye, 1974). Medical researchers put stress on the physiological outgrowths of stress, and scholars of organizational field paid more attention on organization-based sources of stress (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1980). However, Bernard, Cannon, and Selye founded important concepts and set rigorous base for the studies of stress afterwards (Goldstein & Kopin, 2007). Stress was first studied in the 1920s. The definition of stress was still not in an agreement, but it was developed and classified into three categories: a stimulus base, a response base, as well as an interaction base between individuals and their related environment. From the viewpoint of physics and engineering, stress was a pressure from peripheral stimuli. On the other hand, stress was a threat to the body’s balance, and it made much 5.

impact not only on memory and cognitive functions, but also on mental and physical well-being when it is enduring. The stimulus-based stress The definition of stress form a stimulus base was adopted by the engineering and physical science. The stress on a material object within the limitation it can stand for would be insensible if it was eliminated in a time, so did the organisms (Whitehead, 2001). Regardless of personal experience, scholars in this area put their concentration on stress and viewed it as an external event to impinge on the individual. So stress was an independent variable. When overwhelming the tolerance level of an individual, stress would cause mental or physical illness. Bernard, a physiologist, defined stress as an adaptive response to balance the disruptive situation, and introduced the idea of the environment bathing cells, “milieu intérieur”, making an organism uninfluenced by external environment. Harvard physiologist Cannon proffered stress as the external factor threatening to “homeostasis”, the term he coined to indicate the maintenance of some physiological variables (Goldstein & Kopin 2007), and the his great idea of “fight-or-flight” response, the emergent survival response, prepared animals to either fight with a predator or escape for the safety (Kasper, 2009). Holmes and Rahe conducted a survey in 1967 to see if stressful life events might cause illness. Their results were published as the Social Readjustment Rating Scale (SRRS), and the total stress scores of "Life Change Units" was an estimate of how stress affected one’s health status. In the Social Readjustment Rating Scale, “Life Events” was roughly 6.

divided into four groups, disasters, special life events, daily trivial, and chronic and harmful environmental factors. Nevertheless, some researcher suggested the need of more concern about the importance of the traits of stressor, social experience, an individual perceiving to the stress, and the evaluation processes (Whitehead, 2001). The interaction-based stress For this definition, stress was considered as generally a unique, dynamic, and continuous interaction between individuals and the external environment, and it not only fatigued but also depleted all the resources an individual available to adapt to the interaction (Whitehead, 2001). Stress occurred if excessive stress over personal resources, and it could lead the psychological or physiological normal functions changes. The cognitive processes and reaction to situations were observed and emphasized especially. Other researchers viewed stress as an intricate process, so they suggested stimulus, response, cognitive measurement, and coping strategies should be considered simultaneously while the importance of cognitive process was emphasized. The “person-environment fit” theory (P-E) considered that stress was from the relation between an individual and environment, not separately from two (Ahmad, 2010). The capabilities and motivation of an individual and work environment were associated with the occurrence of stress and the coming harmful outcome. The efforts of stress reduction would be focused on the individual, not on the environment (Guglielmi & Tatrow, 1998). This model underlined the importance of the match of the abilities of an individual and environmental demand. 7.

The response-based stress Stress was defined as a response to stimuli by researchers in psychological and physiological field, and they mainly put focus on the disorder of the body system. In this category, stress was the dependent variable. Dr. Selye, Father of Stress, made the idea of stress more popular and redefined it in physical field as a force resulting in deformity and strain. His definition of stress as “the non-specific response” of the body to any demands remained great influence on the following views of stress. Without any concerns on the natures of stressors, Selye suggested a set of common components of responses by “non-specific” (Goldstein & Kopin, 2007). He presented the “General Adaptation Syndrome”, stages of coping with the stressor, and emphasized that long-lasting stress, resulting in burnout, lead to mental disorder and physical illness. His stress researches in medical perspectives lead to the differentiation of positive (eustress) and negative (distress) stress (Barnett, 2007). The related problems of stress caught much attention since decades ago, and up to the date stress seemed to be a modern terminology. In 2012, Google global search of key word “stress” yielded about 9,140,000 hits average per month for past twelve months, and 90,500 hits in Taiwan Area. Current researches on stress gradually took a view on stress as a complex process, not simply a response, an interaction, or a stimulus. Stress was gradually viewed as the relation of the environment and an individual. However, individual characteristics, personal experience, and cognition should be counted in as the factors leading to stress. Stress made dramatic impacts on mental and physical health, if it lasted for a long period of 8.

time. Accordingly, the management of stress and coping strategies should be an important topic for people to concern about especially in today’s highly competitive society. Job stress Job stress is the strain from any aspect of an individual’s job. No matters for workers, employees, or professionals, they were all under the influence of job stress (McCormick & Barnett 2011). According to the publication No. 99-101 of National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH, 2012), job stress was regarded as the harmful physical and emotional response, and it conducted to worse health and sometimes job injury. Job stress popped up if the capabilities or the resources available for the employees do not meet the job’s requirements. Teacher stress Teaching was a highly stress-provoking occupation (Kokkino, 2007). The severity level of teacher stress increasingly soared, especially in England, the USA, and Japan (Wu & Lin, 2001). Teacher stress was a term commonly defined as agitation, anger, anxiety, and strain related with teaching profession (Samad et al., 2010). From the survey by National Union of Teachers in 2012, anxiety, twice for all occupations, was the most serious teacher stress. Teacher’s burnout, a term adopted widely, might be regarded as the syndrome of long-lasting teacher stress, chiefly described the enervation of emotion, attitude, and body (Kyriacou, 1987). Teacher stress was mainly considered as a consequence of student misbehavior, a lack of job accomplishments, demands of administrators, and the relationship with administrators, colleagues, students, and parents 9.

(Klassen & Chiu, 2010), as well as the poor working environment (Samad et al., 2010). However, it also linked with lower social recognition, class size, isolation, fear of bully, role ambiguity, weak professional development (Kokkino, 2007), and curriculum-related instructions (Lambert, McCarthy, O’Donnell, & Wang, 2009). In the United States, the top five sources of school-related stress were cumbersome responsibilities, deficient support for needy students, inadequacy of relaxation, less motivation to learn, and constant pressure (Richards, 2011), and those also appeared in Taiwan. Specifically, grade 1-12 curriculum, new recruitment system, basic academic attainment testing (Wu & Lin, 2001), and consulting service (Liu, 2011) made more stress on teachers than ever. From relative researches and interviews with in-service English teachers in Taipei, top stressors were found in this study: organization, time strain, interrelationships, parents, and student learning. These multiple stressors kept overlapping on the following researches. Different teacher stressors shown in foreign and local studies were listed in Table 2.1. Table 2.1 A List of Teacher Stressors Author. Stressors. Borg & Riding. Student misbehaviors, Poor working environment,. (1991). Poor relationship with colleagues, Time strain. Chaplain (1995). Professional development, Student misbehaviors and attitude, Teaching tasks. Montalvo, Bair & Relationships with parents, Students, Administrators, Boor (1995). and colleagues, Working conditions (continued) 10.

Author. Stressors. Kyriacou (2001). Time strain, Heavy workload, Interrelationships, Student misbehaviors, Teaching students with less learning motivation, Role ambiguity, Poor working environment, Challenges of changes, Administration and management, Lower self-esteem and social status. Pervez & Hanif. Time, Disruptive students, Lack of administrative. (2003). support, Lack of administrative support, Lack of social recognition of value of teaching, Lack of resource of teaching. Kokkinos (2007). Interpersonal demands, Lack of professional recognition, Discipline problems in the classroom, diversity of task, Bureaucracy, Lack of support, Time, Workload, Paperwork, Lack of resources provided. Chang (2007). Workload, Interrelationship, Professional knowledge, Support from administrators, Student behaviors. Wu & Lu (2008). Interrelationship, Interference from administrators, Teaching, Personal development, Violation of teaching theory. Chai (2008). Outside environment, Organization factors, Personal factors. Lu & Lu (2009). Student behaviors, Professional knowledge, Workload, Interrelationships. Tsai (2009). Workload, Teaching involvement, Social expectation, Personal development, Consulting Service, Interrelationship, Communication with parents (continued). 11.

Author. Stressors. Jane (2010). Workload, Support from administrators, Interrelationship, Professional knowledge. Yang (2010). Workload, Family, Supervisors, Organization, Interrelationships. Yeh, Yang & Pai. Time strain, Workload, Interrelationships,. (2011). Student behaviors, Support from administrators. Wu & Wu (2011). Student behaviors, Work load, Interrelationships Professional knowledge. Liu (2011). Interrelationships, Teaching and consulting service, Student behavior, Workload, Teaching knowledge, Organization. Chiu & Lee. Work loading, Students, Interrelationships,. (2012). Social expectation, Professional development. Chang, Zhong,. Interrelationships, Professional knowledge,. Lai & Chang. Work loading, Mental conflict. (2013) Note: Organized by this study. Stressful teachers experienced negative emotions, poorer teacher– pupil rapport, and even lower self-efficacy (Klassen & Chiu, 2010). Stress left tremendous harmful impacts on teachers’ physical and mental health (Hakanen et al., 2006). Bauer et al. (2007) noted mental problems among teachers kept increasing in many countries and psychosomatic illness were the main reasons for the retirement. Stress influence was showed in tremendous studies, and was described as physical fatigue, loss of enthusiasm of teaching, doubts about the professional abilities, negative 12.

effects on personal relationships, as well as physical discomforts such as frequent headaches, stomach pains, or high blood pressure (Richards, 2011). In the report of National Union of Teachers (NUT), teacher suicide was a truly horrible risk without faced in deed, 35 teachers in 2008 and 63 teachers in 2009 committed suicide reported by Office for National Statistics in the UK. In 1978, Kyriacou and Sutcliffe established a model for teacher stress and defined stressors in psychological and physical views. After appraisal and coping, some of potential stressors might have chances turning into actual stressors, and finally caused some negative effect on teacher’s wellbeing. The variables, such as recognition, insufficient resources, and time were counted in as potential non-occupational stressors (Lambert et al., 2009). The conceptual model of teacher stress from Kyriacou and Sutcliffe was displayed in Figure 2.1.. 13.

Figure 2.1. The model of teacher stress Note. From, “A model of teacher stress,” by C. Kyriacou and J. Sutcliffe, 1978, Educational Studies, 4, 2.. In 1984, Lazarus and Folkman suggested a transactional model for a better understanding about teacher stress and coping strategies. They introduced that the cognitive process was triggered when perceived demands were over-weighted the capabilities for dealing with demands. In 1989, Richard and Christine proposed another model of teacher stress, and personal characters and career history were considered as stressors. 14.

Measurements Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS), based on the job characteristics Model (JCM), was developed by Hackman and Oldham in 1976 to measure the stress of teachers, financial, and insurance employees. There were five dimensions of core job characteristics, such as skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback from job (Tiegs, 1992). These characteristics perceived would impact psychological states and finally act as a high internal work and motivation. In 1984, Fimian constructed The Teacher Stress Inventory (TSI), a tool for assessing the occupational stress, the stressor and stress levels of teachers. In this model, two measures, stress strength and stress frequency, as well as ten factors comprising teacher stress were defined, for example, personal/professional stressors, professional distress, and physiologicalfatigue manifestations (Samad et al., 2010). The Classroom Appraisal of Resources and Demands (CARD), developed on the base of transactional model of stress, was built to perform cognitive appraisals of teachers for school resources and classroom demands which was hypothesized to result in teacher stress. The study focused primarily on the demands of the teaching environment and available resources for teachers (Lambert et al., 2009). Comparing with other careers, teacher job showed high levels of exhaustion and burnout (Hakanen et al., 2006). Teacher stress was a kind of anxious, wearisome and a strain which influence both physical and mental status, such as mental lack of sympathy, negative attitudes in relationships, and alienation from jobs, as well as in physical frequent 15.

headaches, uncomfortable sore, and lassitude. Teacher stress, a common phenomenon on campus from preschools to graduate schools, was mainly related with students’ problems, over burden, less job accomplishments, demands of administrators, class size, time pressure, heavy workload, personal career development, and the negative relationship. A few studies reported that female teachers underwent more stress than male teachers, particularly on classroom and workload factors (Klassen & Chiu 2010). As the rapid development of new internet technology, the role of teacher had already changed and there was no standard curriculum in the classroom any more. Teachers must be more flexible to facilitate students’ learning. The more complicated the roles teachers played, the more terrific stress they suffered. Significance of this study In the reports of National Union of Teachers, teacher was the most stressful profession in England stated by Health and Safety Executive (HSE) research in 2000, with around 41 percent of teachers self-reporting as very stressed. The skyrocketing stress made more teachers leave, and the cost of teachers’ attrition was uncountable, ranged from disrupted learning of the students to all the resources for recruiting and training of new teachers (Lambert et al., 2009). For accelerating the internationalization, our government addressed the development of the English curriculums in the elementary schools, and some problems appeared in a time and exerted huge stress on English teachers. For example, the qualification of English teachers, school equipment, job rotation, heavy workload, and students’ misbehaviors in 16.

the classes. In addition, less preparation for the classes, fewer parents’ instructions at home, and a lack of learning motivation made bad impacts on students’ learning now. Therefore, the need was felt to conduct a research on the job-related stress of English teachers in elementary schools, and hope to assist officers in negotiating future educational polices and teachers in reducing stress.. Coping Stress was a common phenomenon beyond the board of today’s modern society and culture such as gender, race, ability, social level, or sexual orientation (Iwasaki, Mackay, Mactavish, Ristock, & Bartlett, 2006). Manipulating upcoming demands of daily basis drove people stressed (Iwasaki, Mackay, & Mactavish, 2005). Stress surpassed the body energy and finally affected physical health (Seaward, 2000). Therefore, the knowledge to manage stress was not only essential for an individual, but also for the following stress-coping researchers and stress-related policies makers (Folkman & Greer, 2000). Scholars in Psychology searched for the ways to resolve stress effectively and keep people in good health for decades. The CognitivePhenomenological Theory first addressed by Lazarus, Kanner, and Folkman in 1980, illustrated that when choked by stress, people would take action in primary appraisal to evaluate stressors and secondary appraisal to evaluate available resources. Coping played as a mediator between appraisals of stress and the health-related results in the stresscoping process (Edward & Cooper, 1988), and it was influenced by the 17.

prevenient stressful experience and associated personal characteristics. The stages of appraisal and coping were crucial for the consequences of stress adjustment and health status. More generally, coping was defined as the cognitive or behavior constant changes to manage, confront, tolerate, and alleviate internal and/or external demands as well as stress that beyond one’s resources (Folkman and Lazarus, 1980). Lazarus demonstrated that coping was the procedure of evaluating and managing the overburden of an individual (Seaward, 2002), still, an operation of easing the negative motion from harmful experience (Lowe & Bennett, 2003). It was clearly evident that stress and the measures of stress-coping impacted psychosocial and physical health (Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000). Zeidner and Endler (1996) also proposed that stress and coping were main factors of life quality and health (Iwasaki et al., 2005), so coping resources and skills had been found in many social science studies (Iwasaki, Mannell, Smale, & Butcher, 2002). Lazarus (1999) thought the management of stressful demands was coping (Criner, 2006). Coping could be further grouped into problem-focused and emotion-focused types (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980; Parker & Endler, 1996). With problemfocused coping, people challenged to change the disturbing condition. When the stress event was controllable, the emotion-focused coping solutions adopted to change the emotional response with respect to the stressor without seeking any possible solutions of the trouble events, such actions as escape, or change the focus of attention would be the case. Different coping strategies developed various outgrowths. Many people 18.

introduced both coping strategies in a stressful occurrence. The use of different coping strategies relied on personal preference (Iwasaki et al., 2005), type of threat, level of stress events, and its anticipating result. Aldwin (1994) conducted that coping ability was affected by the available resources of an individual, local culture, reactions of others, and the appraisal process (Criner, 2006). In some other studies, coping styles were divided into two types, adaptive coping style (emotion-and problem-focused coping) and maladaptive coping style, and revealed with so called nine copying strategies commonly. Emotion-focus coping favored minimization and distraction, and oppositely problem-focus coping consisted of positive self-instructions, social support, and situation control. Passive avoidance, resignation, aggression, and rumination belonged to maladaptive coping. Several current researches stated that better adjustment was gained from adaptive coping (Hampel & Petermann, 2006). In 1966, Lazarus proposed a classic model of cognitive, appraisal, and coping to interpret the relation of stress, appraisal, coping, and its outgrowth. In the model, primary appraisal comprised of goal relevance, goal congruence, and ego involvement creating emotional response; secondary appraisal was regarded as the process of cognitive and evaluation (Criner, 2006). The coping model of Lazarus was displayed in Figure 2.2.. 19.

Figure 2.2. The coping model Note. From Managing stress (p.173), by B. L. Seaward, 2002, Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.. Leisure Leisure was a self-protective device (Kleiber, Hutchinson, & Williams 2002), and an important strategy in different coping skills 20.

(Iwasaki, 1999). Folkman and Moskowitz (2000) suggested that leisure, a positive and meaningful activity, was a break from stress, a foundation of coping, and a regenerator (Iwasaki et al., 2005). Leisure researchers concluded that among diverse coping strategies and resources, leisure helped cope with strain, keep or improve people’s healthy mood, and proved both theoretically and empirically (Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000). The study of Kleiber et al. (2002) found that leisure, as a buffer, could make a hope and reduce the influence of negative demands (Iwasaki et al., 2005). The knowledge about stress helped find suitable leisure activities to cope with stress (Iwasaki et al., 2006). Therefore, the researches on leisure coping with stress and the health kept increasing recently. Kleiber, Hutchinson, and Williams (2002) concluded four functions of leisure in dealing with stress life events. The first two were selfprotective, while the rest were means of adjustment. Self-protective functions referred to the buffering role of leisure in reducing stress from negative life events by distracting or making a hope for future, whereas adjustment functions were rebuilding one’s energy and self-valuation, and transforming to a new self by realizing and challenging stress event as a growing opportunity (Iwasaki et al., 2005). Stress-coping strategies were regarded as the actions or approaches taken to deal with stress. Therefore, a coping action was a process. In 1998, Iwasaki was the first researcher proposing the idea of leisure coping. In his study, leisure coping strategy was defined as actual situationgrounded behavior or cognition against stress through the engagement of leisure (Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000). However, the using of leisure coping 21.

strategies was mainly determined by the specific situation people encountered. In 2000 Iwasaki and Mannell eventually concluded that leisure coping strategies acted as a mediator against the impact of stress on health status. A model of leisure and health by Coleman and Iso-Ahola in 1993 conceptualized the lasting feeling of social support and self-determination deposition from leisure activities as two main dimensions of leisure coping. Leisure-generated disposition, as a buffer or moderator, brought some beneficial results for health when people were highly stressed. The buffer effect of self-determination deposition was shown in this model (See Figure 2.3.) .. 22.

Dotted line: negative influence. Solid line: positive influence. Figure 2.3. A model of leisure and health Note. From “Leisure and Health: The role of social support and selfdetermination,” by D.Coleman and S. E.Iso-Ahola, 1993, Journal of Leisure Research, 25(2), 436.. Based on the viewpoint of social psychological and leisure stresscoping researches and the idea of the model of Coleman and Iso-Ahola, Iwasaki and Mannell in 2000 proposed the model of Hierarchical Dimensions of Leisure Stress Coping (see Figure 2.4.) to identify methods 23.

in which leisure activity would help people handle with stress, with two chief dimensions and several sub-dimensions of leisure copings distinguished in different levels. On the top level were leisure coping beliefs (LCB) and leisure coping strategies (LCS), representing different major types of coping, dispositional coping styles, and situation-grounded coping strategies (Iwasaki, 2003a). Leisure coping beliefs portrayed the relationship between enduring personal beliefs and stress-coping, and formed psychological dispositions (i.e., social support). Leisure coping strategies were real coping behaviors or cognitive strategies to relieve stress.. Figure 2.4. Hierarchical dimensions of leisure stress coping Note. From “Hierarchical dimensions of leisure stress coping,” by Y. Iwasaki and R. C. Mannell, 2000, Leisure Sciences, 22, 166.. 24.

There were two types of leisure coping beliefs, leisure friendship and leisure autonomy (Level 2). Leisure friendship was referred to as the belief that friendship and enjoyments could be reward through leisure participation providing social support, and personal autonomy helped manage the stressful. events. Leisure-generated. self-determination. disposition was the belief that leisure activities was freely chosen without under other’s supervision, and leisure empowerment enabled people to develop resources for dealing with stress better and positively as their own growth (Iwasaki et al., 2002). Leisure coping strategies contained three sub-groups: leisure companionship, leisure palliative coping (offering people chances to refresh and regain energy by a short escape or a break, such as tea time), and leisure mood enhancement (reduce negative mood or increase positive mood through leisure). Leisure friendship could help cope with stress by providing emotional support, and esteem support, tangible aid, and/or informational support. Linking with the life stress paradigm of Ensel and Lin’s (1991), Iwasaki in 2003 built eight rival models of leisure coping, shown in Figure 2.5. The different roles of leisure coping beliefs (LCB) and leisure coping strategies (LCS) in the relationship between stressors and adaptive outcomes were described in these models. In the independent models, stressors had negative impact on health, and leisure contributed positively and directly to adaptive outcomes and health. The researches on police and emergency (2002) were examples to examine the role of leisure in stress-coping and enhance good health with independent model, and found 25.

that stressors and leisure coping independently influenced adjustment outcomes. The directions of the relationship, texture of model, and sequences were dissimilar in these models, so each of them had different significance.. Figure 2.5. Leisure coping models by Iwasaki, 2003 Note. From “Examining rival models of leisure coping mechanisms,” by Y. Iwasaki, 2003, Leisure Sciences, 25, 193. (continued). 26.

(continued) 27.

Figure 2.5. Leisure coping models Note. From “Examining rival models of leisure coping mechanisms,” by Y. Iwasaki, 2003, Leisure Sciences, 25, 193.. In the independent models, stressors negatively impacted immediate adaptation outcomes and health, while leisure coping beliefs and strategies had a positive influence on immediate adaptation outcomes and finally on health. Stressors and leisure coping were proposed to affect immediate adaptation outcomes independently, so there was no direct relationship between stressors and leisure coping. Because of enduring personality dispositions, leisure coping beliefs had an effect on immediate coping outcomes in the independent Model-A, but not in the independent Model-B. Nevertheless, leisure coping beliefs might affect indirectly 28.

adaptation outcomes through leisure coping strategies. Leisure coping strategies had a direct and positive influence on immediate adaptation outcomes. In the stress-suppressing models, leisure coping beliefs and strategies would diminish the chances of experiencing high stress, so they influenced negatively to stressors. Leisure coping strategies affected positively adaptation outcomes. Leisure coping beliefs had a direct effect on immediate coping outcomes in the stress-suppressing Model-A, but not in the stress-suppressing Model-B. In the deterioration models, the past experience of stress impacted negatively on the adoptions of leisure coping beliefs and strategies, and later left negative influence on adaptation outcomes. In contrast, in the counteractive models, stressors would prompt the use of leisure coping beliefs and strategies and thus had positive adaptation outcomes. Leisure coping beliefs affected directly on immediate adaptation outcomes on both the Deterioration Model-A and Counteractive Model-A, but this effect of leisure coping beliefs had not specified on the Deterioration Model-B and Counteractive Model-B. Measurements Numerous coping scales were developed to demonstrate the dimensions of coping. Folkman and Lazarus (1985) published the scale of Ways of Coping Checklist (WCC), which was a pioneer in coping scale, but it was difficult to complete for its long list. The Coping Orientation for Problem Experiences (COPE) inventory was established on a model with four general coping dimensions: (a) problem-focused coping, (b) 29.

emotion-focused coping and social support, (c) agreement, self-control, and positive reframing, (d) disengagement coping. However, these dimensions had no direct association with leisure (Iwasaki et al, 2002). The Leisure Coping Strategy Scale (LCSS) built by Iwasaki and Mannell in 2000 was constructed to assess leisure involvements for stress coping in life. In this scale, leisure companionship, leisure palliative coping, and leisure mood enhancement were included with 18 questions totally. In addition, The Leisure Coping Belief Scale (LCBS) was built to assess the beliefs about leisure. Their coping scale consisting of 44 questions in total had been applied broadly to verify the degree of coping with stress and leisure made contribution to managing stress (Iwasaki et al., 2002). The measurement of immediate adaptive outcomes consisted of coping effectiveness, coping satisfaction, and stress reduction (Iwasaki, 2003a). The Leisure Coping Scale (LCS) with three dimensions of physical, psychological, and social leisure coping and five sub-dimensions was built by Chen (2011). Based on the scale of Iwasaki, this new scale was developed totally with 20 items and empirically tested with the population of university students in Taiwan. Related researches Ensel and Lin (1991) suggested six causal models of life stress process, based on the views of coping and deterring theories, two of deterring models, and the rest of coping models. They found that health would be independently influenced by stressors and resources. Iso-Ahola and Park (1996) studied closely on the role of leisure in the stress-coping relationship among the Taekwondo groups. For mental 30.

health, leisure companionship gentled the stress from life events, and leisure friendship duplicated such a buffer job on physical health (Iwasaki et al., 2002). In 1999, Bedini and Phoenix developed the leisure wellness program model to discuss the importance and operation of leisure and the leisure needs of caregivers of senior citizens. In 2001, Iwasaki found in his model that leisure coping had greater effects in the management of daily stress than general coping strategies in the group of university students, and lasting leisure coping beliefs made an important contribution to instant coping results, such as satisfaction and effects of coping (Iwasaki et al., 2002). In addition, leisure coping beliefs and leisure coping strategies were regarded as an important predictor of positive adaptive outcomes (Iwasaki, 2003a). With the purpose of understanding the relationship between gender and stress-coping, Iwasaki collected data from female and male managers in 2005. The research results revealed that female and male managers dealt stress with a wide range of coping ways, and there were several specific themes of coping for each gender. The life situation and stressors at work were associated with the gender-based variations in stress-coping. To examine the role of leisure in the relation between stress and coping, Iwasaki in 2006 made a multi-year qualitative study with citizens of western Canadian city. He found that active leisure was more meaningful than physical activities, and those leisure activities of less physical type should get more attention (Iwasaki et al., 2002).. 31.

Health The indication of health of an individual was difficult to clearly describe because many factors were involved in its complex nature. In the West Mythology, the Greek goddess Hygeia suggested that as long as living rational life, humans could keep good health (Saylor, 2004). Hippocrates defined health as a blend of four humors (blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile) in the body (Larson, 1998). Four humors would differ, and only when humors reached a balance, an individual was healthy. Merriam-Webster defined health as a state without any illness or pains, and a solid condition in body and mind (Merriam-Webster, 2012). According to the American Journal of Health Promotion (2012), optimal health is a dynamic balance of physical, emotional, social, spiritual, and intellectual health. In Roy Adaptation Model (RAM), health was defined as a “state and process of being and becoming an integrated and whole person” (Dobratz, 2008), and health was a continuous process from high level wellness, good health, normal health, poor health, extreme poor health, to end with the death (Shen, Tseng, & Wu, 2008). Health was defined diversely in different culture. In Oriental, especially in Chinese medicine principles, health was regarded as a harmony of yin and yang, or the balance of the flow of chi in a body (Saylor, 2004). In Japan, long life meant health. Health had a linkage with medicine, spirit, economics, social sciences, and other aspects (Larson, 1998). Vella-Brodrick & Allen (1995) proposed the topmost dimensions of health were mind, body, and spirit, 32.

but social, cultural, and environmental should take into account (VellaBrodrick, & Allen, 1995). Stanhope and Lancaster in 2000 suggested an idea that health was related with habits of living, physical exercises, food, and environment (Saylor, 2004). According to the Health Impact Assessment (HIA) of WHO, three main determinants of health on the list were social and economic environment, the physical environment, and the person's individual characteristics and behaviors. Still, some significant factors influencing people’s health were shown, such as social support, education, gender, health care service, culture, and coping skills (WHO, 2012). However, in Bangkok Charter of Health Promotion, WHO, some important factors were addressed: inequalities within and between countries, new consumption and communication ways, commercialization, global environmental change and urbanization. Because the definition of health was so wide and complex, the following health-related researchers found specific focuses and measures on different population (Dobratz, 2008). The concept of disease prevention, health promotion, and health improvement, was an important issue for current conceptualization of health. Health promotion was the activities or behaviors with purpose of maintaining or improving health of an individual or a group. Pender et al. in 2002 conducted that health promotion enriched an individual’s wellbeing and elevated the level of self-actualization (Saylor, 2004). According to WHO, health promotion can help people control over and advance their health and it involves personal, social and environmental activities (WHO, 2012). The focuses of health promotion are multifaceted, 33.

such as health-related policies and legislation, health educations at schools or. in. communities,. the. prevention. of. communicable. and. noncommunicable diseases, and mental health promotion. Models Among health models, the WHO definition was the most popular definition in the world. In 1947, the Constitution of the World Health Organization stated that “health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Social health of an individual was the relationships with others (Larson, 1998). The medical model was adopted broadly in health-related studies, and it made a great contribution to the advance of medical sciences. An individual without any diseases and weakness both in body and mind aspect was regarded as on healthy status in medical model, so the efforts were on the roots, prevention, and treatment of disease and disability. In addition, disease and illness were well defined in this model. Disease was a malfunction of body, and illness was the awareness of people’s struggle for disease. Death prevention, health maintain, life prolongation, and disease treatment were the tasks of medicine. Health. was. hard. to. give. an. absolute. definition. for. its. multidimensional concepts. Simply, health is away from any diseases and has soundness in body, mind, and spirit. Health would be influenced by different factors, such as social, economic, environment, personalities, life styles, or health care services.. 34.

Stress and health The proposition of “Stress is wear and tear on the body” (Seaward, 2000) made stress seem to took away the pleasure of life. Even living in well-managed life, people had no way out of the shadow of stress in this hurry-up world. Selye’s General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS) indicated that general syndromes of stress influenced the entire body. In 1936, he first reported the stress-related physiological responses in the body, including heart rate increasing, blood pressure elevating, rapid breathing, the rate of metabolism changing, and muscle tension (Abel, Abel, & Smith, 2012). Life stress had positive relationship with mental and physical illness, but negative with perceived health (Iso-Ahola & Park, 1996). Although stress was a highly subjective experience of an individual, the exposure to stress for a long period had relation with emotional, cognitive, physiological, and somatic symptoms (Hynynen, Konttinen, Kinnunen, Kyröläinen, & Rusko, 2011). In contrast, the American Institute of Stress (AIS) stated that eustress, such as graduation, and promotion, involved positive meanings, regeneration, or growth in personal life. Stress was always revealed by summative changes and syndromes, but not by a little change simply. According to the handbook of self-care published by Department of Health, R. O. C., negative thinking, hesitation, wrong decision making, less concentration, and worse memory were the psychological indicators of excess stress, and some poor health behaviors were associated with stress, such as insomnia, relationship retraction, less sexual desire, severe alcohol use, and smoking. Daily stressors caused lots 35.

of physical problems, such as flu, sore throat, backaches, and headaches (DeLongis, Folkman, & Lazarus, 1988). Burnout, result of enduring work stress, had positive association with ill health, such as metabolic syndromes, malfunction of sympathetic nervous system, systemic inflammation, weakened immunity, and increased risk of cardiovascularrelated diseases (Melamed, Shirom, Toker, Berliner, & Shapira, 2006). Measurements Since the advance in medical science contributed to the extension of normal human life, chronic diseases still took the predominate place in diseases. The statistic numbers of longevity and mortality could not represent the quality of life and health of general population, so many measure instruments of health were developed (Yao, 2002). Developed by Sir David Goldberg and Paul Williams in 1970, the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) assessed well-being of an individual and evaluated the risk of developing psychiatric disorders, targeting the inability to operate normal functions and the appearance of stress. The full GHQ-60 (60-items) and short form GHQ-28 (28-items) consisted of four dimensions: somatic symptoms, anxiety and insomnia, social dysfunction and severe depression (Goldberg & Hillier, 1979), and they all showed that the increase in stress led to a decrease in quality of life. MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) was built by Ware et al. in USA to measure a wide range of health condition, consisting of 36 items with eight health concepts: Physical Functioning (PF), Role Limitations due to Physical Health (Role-Physical, RP), Bodily Pain (BP), General Health Perceptions (GH), Vitality (VT), Social Functioning (SF), 36.

Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems (Role-Emotional, RE), and General Mental Health (MH) , and one item of Health Transition (HT) (Ren, Amick, Zhou, & Gandek, 1998). It followed the key concepts of self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) survey which was effective in identifying functional impairment and predicting mortality in the aging population. SF-36 survey had been translated and applied widely in more than 40 countries in general population, and the Taiwan version of the SF-36 was translated by Dr. Lu. The total scores meant health status (Lam, Gandek, Ren, & Chan, 1998). The brief version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument (WHOQOL-BREF) was a self-administered questionnaire proposed by WHO in 1995, including four dimensions with 26 standard items, two general items for overall quality of life and general health, and the rest 24 items grouped into four dimensions: physical, psychological, social relationships, and environment. Higher scores in total represent better quality of life. However, Taiwan Chinese and Taiwanese versions of WHOQOL-BREF had 28 items, two extra items only for Taiwanese version: “Do you feel respected by others? and “Are you usually able to get the things you like to eat?” (Chien, Wang, Yao, Hsueh, & Hsieh, 2009). The Taiwanese version of WHOQOL-BREF was the first QOL instrument for Taiwanese-speaking seniors. SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF had been widely used in many countries among different populations with good reliability and validity. However, SF -36 and WHOQOL-BREF aimed at different directions: SF-36 measured health-related QOL, and on the other hand, WHOQOL-BREF 37.

evaluated the global QOL (Huang, Wu, & Frangakis, 2006). Eventually, the SF-12 would be used to examine teachers’ QOL in this study. Related Researches A study designed by DeLongis, Folkman, and Lazarus in 1988 examining somatic and psychological effects of daily hassle among 75 married couples during a 6-month period found an important relationship between daily stress and the occurrence of health problems. However, the relationship of daily stress to mood disruption was compound, and individual differences were involved in the association with health and mood across time. Individuals with low self-esteem and weak supportive social relationships suffered higher risk of somatic and psychological problems than individuals in high self-esteem and social support did. Saylor (2004) proposed a conceptual model based on an extended definition of health for holistic health strategies. In this model, health was defined as a wide range of positive and joy health behaviors. Balance, energy, and combination of body and mind were included in the concept of health. The circle of health model suggested health behaviors and strategies, such as taking a nap, gardening, exercising, and restricting unhealthy food. In 2004, Millar’s study examined the perceived stress on responses to the messages about health promotion and disease detection behaviors. This research indicated that individuals with higher perceived stress spent less time in reading health-related notes and recalled less healthy behaviors. Health promotion behaviors contributed to health directly, but disease detecting behaviors did not affect health directly, because disease 38.

detecting behaviors brought more anxiety and upset. A research made by Buddeberg-fischer, Klaghofer, Stamm, Siegrist, and Buddeberg (2008) investigated perceived work stress, the influence of health, and their satisfaction with life in young physicians. All factors of perceived work stress had correlation with the amount of working hours, and effort showing the highest correlation. Chinese Health Questionnaire (CHQ) was established by Cheng and Williams in 1986 with a sample of 386 patients in Taiwan for a 3-day comprehensive general health screening, and 11% of these patients had psychiatric disorders. CHQ-12 was more efficient than CHQ-30, and it could improve physicians’ identification of minor psychiatric disorders in patients (Chong & Wilkinson, 1989). 39.

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY. Research framework The model of this study evolved from the independent model-A built by Iwasaki in 2003, the leisure coping model (Cheng, 2010), and Leisure Participation Measurement Scale (Yeh, 2010). In the model, stress and leisure coping are regarded independent, teacher stress will impact directly and negatively on health, and both leisure coping and leisure participation will have positive effect on health. Teacher stress will influence leisure participation. The model of this study was displayed in Figure 3.1.. Figure 3.1. Research framework 40.

Hypotheses Based on the framework above-mentioned, the hypotheses were: H1.. Teacher stress will affect health negatively.. H2.. Leisure coping will affect leisure participation positively.. H3.. Leisure participation will affect health positively.. Sampling and instrumentation Five experts, including one senior principle and one senior director of primary schools, reviewed the content for the validity of the teacher stress scale developed in this study. 27 in-service English teachers participated in the pilot study, and formal questionnaires were distributed to 428 English teachers from 126 public primary schools at Taipei city. Return mail envelopes were provided and all of respondents were assured of the anonymity. Totally, 340 teachers responded and completed full survey forms, and response rate was 79.4%. The sample comprised 90% females; 48.9% of teachers were over 40 years of age; 52.1% were senior teachers with over 10 years of teaching experience; 27.3% serviced at small-sized and medium-sized schools; 55.9% were married or living as married. There are five parts in this full survey, including demographic information and four measurement scales: Teacher Stress Scale, Leisure Coping Measurement Scale (Cheng, 2010), Leisure Participation Measurement Scale (Yeh, 2010), and MOS 12-item Short-Form Health 41.

Survey (SF-12). The first part was about demographic details: gender, age, marriage status, school size, and seniority. Age will be divided into four groups, age of under 30, 31-40, 41-50, and above 50. According to the category rules for public elementary schools of Ministry of Education, elementary schools have three types: large-sized schools (more than 25 classes in total ), medium-sized schools (24 -13 classes), and small-sized schools (less than 13 classes). Teachers with more than ten years in teaching experience are senior teachers, defined by the seniority rules for teachers of Ministry of Education. Based on the interviews with in-service English teachers and reviews of similar teacher stress scales for homeroom teachers, a 20-item teacher stress scale was developed in this study, consisting of five dimensions about stressors: organization, time, interrelationships, parents, and students. Participants were asked about the stressors by responding on a five-point Likert rating scale, in a series of “Extremely disagree”, “Disagree”, “Moderately”, “Agree”, “Extremely agree”. The internal reliability of this scale with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.80. Leisure Coping Measurement Scale (Cheng, 2010) contains three major dimensions: physical leisure coping (6 items), mental leisure coping (8 items), and social leisure coping (6 items) and five sub-dimensions: leisure refresh, leisure palliative coping, leisure autonomy, leisure friendships, and leisure support. Example items are “I fell more energetic when participating leisure activity.”, “I can choose my leisure activities of my free will.” (mental leisure coping), and “I participate leisure activities with trusty friends” (social leisure coping). All items were scored on a 42.

five-point Likert rating scale, in a series of “Extremely disagree”, “Disagree”,. “Moderately”,. “Agree”,. “Extremely. agree”.. Internal. reliabilities, using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, were respectively: 0.88, 0.94, and 0.91. Leisure Participation Measurement Scale (Yeh, 2010) measures the types and participation frequency of leisure activities. Participants reported how often they joined to leisure activities in a month on a fivepoint scale, ranging from 1- never or only once per month to 5- every day or more. There are five types of leisure activities: social activities (3 items), recreational activities (4 items), sports (3 items), skill learning activities (2 items), and culture-based activities (3 items). Example items are: “3C entertainments: playing Wii, Internet games” (recreational activities), and “Social services: volunteers, social services, and religious services” (culture-based activities). High score means high frequency of leisure activity participation. The Short Form-12 Health Survey measures generic health concepts, containing two main scores: physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). It is a sound, comprehensive, and efficient scale to measure health status for different populations in many countries. SF-12 is scored by a unique rating instrument and a high score represents a better health. In this survey, it was used to explore the current health status of English teachers for its easy to complete in a short period without any help. The internal consistencies of this measurement are good, and the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.82.. 43.

Analysis IBM SPSS Statistics 20 for Windows and LISREL 8.80 were the statistic tools to understand the relationships within demographic details and teacher stress, leisure coping, leisure participation, and health. Cronbach’s α was to check the reliability of scales. Three hypotheses were examined by structural equation modeling (SEM). Goodness of fit statistics was introduced in three groups: absolute fit measures, incremental fit measures, and parsimonious fit measure.. 44.

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS According to the educational statistics from Department of Education of Taipei City Government, the fact that female teachers are the majority in primary schools is similar to the demographic result about gender in this study. Most participants were females (90%) found from returned survey forms. The level of p＜.05 was adopted for all tests of statistical significance, and two-tailed test was used for t tests. The demographic results in this study reported that seniority had a statistical significance on teacher stress (F=3.94, p = .02< .05), and teachers with 11-20 years of teaching experience underwent greatest stress than other two groups of teachers did. Marriage statuses displayed a statistical significant impact (t=2.11, p = .03< .05) on teacher stress, and single teachers suffered less strain than married teachers and those who living as married. As shown in this study, teachers over 51 years old were the most stressed group at school, and teachers aged 41-50 years old ranked at second place. However, teachers under 31 years old felt the least pressure. As for the gender and teacher stress, female teachers were getting stressed out about teaching more than male teachers were. For teacher stress and school sizes, teachers of large-sized schools topped all teachers in elementary schools. Demographic characteristics are presented in Table 4.1.. 45.

Table 4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (N=340) Demographic Variables Gender. Age. Frequency. Male. 32. 9.4. Female. 306. 90.0. Missing. 2. 0.6. 48. 14.1. 31 to 40. 125. 36.8. 41 to 50. 135. 39.7. 31. 9.1. 1. 0.3. 190. 55.9. 149. 43.8. 1. 0.3. ＜13 classes. 14. 4.1. 13 to 24 classes. 79. 23.2. ＞25 classes. 247. 72.6. ＜10 years. 163. 47.9. 11-20 years. 160. 47.1. 17. 5.0. ＜30. 50+ Missing Marital Status. Percentage (%). Married and living as married Single Missing. School size. Seniority. 20+ years. Descriptive statistics was practiced for examining teacher stress, leisure coping, leisure participation, and health status. In Teacher Stress Scale, the higher score of mean indicated the severer level of stress which teachers felt all the time or most of time in teaching. Table 4.2 showed the 46.

score means and standard deviations of teacher stressors.. Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics for Teacher Stress Scale Dimensions. Items. Mean. Standard. Rank. Deviation Organization. 4. 3.40. 0.72. 3. Time pressure. 4. 3.86. 0.62. 2. Interrelationships. 4. 3.17. 0.64. 5. Parents. 4. 3.22. 0.75. 4. Students. 4. 4.03. 0.61. 1. Based on score means, student problems, including pupil misbehaves, lack of learning motivation, and individual difference of learning, ranked the top stressor for English teachers with a mean score of 4.03 and standard deviation of 0.61. Time pressure was the second highest stressor, with a mean of 3.86 and standard deviation of 0.62. Extra duties in rest breaks, weekends, or vacations for more instructions, diverse competitions, or talent shows bothered English teachers the most. Furthermore, English teachers had to take time for many irrelevant activities (e.g. math workshop). Meanwhile, inconsistent and capricious education policies made teaching more and more complicated. The stress experience differed distinctly if the score of standard deviation was more than 1 or very close to 1. As shown in Table 4.3, serious conflicts among teachers were made by the unfair job rotation for ignoring the teachers’ professional development. Some teachers bothered about parents’ unrealistic fancy toward English teaching in elementary schools. 47.

Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for Each Item of Teacher Stress Scale Questions. Mean Standard Deviation. Organization 1. Inconsistent and capricious education policies. 4.33. 0.69. 3. Job rotation without considering professional. 3.31. 0.97. 3.09. 0.73. 2.88. 0.51. 4.19. 0.62. 4.09. 0.81. 4.02. 0.65. 3.15. 0.41. 3.91. 0.62. 3.54. 0.65. qualification 2. Less communication among principle and teachers. 4. Lack of trust and support among principle and teachers. Time Pressure 8. Extra duty for diverse activities (e.g. drama, speech competition). 7. Extra student instruction ( e.g. during lunch break hours, in 10 minute rest breaks ). 6. Involving in many irrelevant activities (e.g. math workshop). 5. Extra duty for the remedial instructions after school hours. Interrelationships 9. Be agreeable to homeroom teachers. 10 Unfair allocation of teaching resource. (continued) 48.

Questions. Mean Standard Deviation. 11 Unfriendly relationships with colleagues. 2.89. 0.71. 12 Little support and advice from colleagues. 2.33. 0.56. 3.77. 1.03. 3.51. 0.78. 14 Relationships between parents and teachers. 3.05. 0.64. 13 Lack of respect to teachers’ class management or. 2.54. 0.53. 20 Students’ misbehaviors in the classes. 4.38. 0.64. 19 Lack of learning motivation. 4.17. 0.53. 17 Great difference in English learning. 4.02. 0.56. 18 Dual-peak phenomenon in English learning. 3.55. 0.71. Parents 16 Unrealistic fancy toward English teaching from parents 15 Core issues of student problems misunderstood by parents. teaching philosophy Students. performance Leisure Coping Scale was to identify effects of leisure coping. In this scale, higher scores in means and standard deviations specified the better buffer of leisure coping. As shown in Table 4.4, leisure coping brought the greatest buffer effects on mental side (M=4.20 ± 0.53). The second higher buffer of leisure coping was on physical part, with a mean of 4.13 and a standard deviation of 0.56. 49.

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics for Leisure Coping Scale Dimensions. Items. Mean. Standard. Rank. deviation Physical leisure coping. 6. 4.13. 0.56. 2. Mental leisure coping. 8. 4.20. 0.53. 1. Social leisure coping. 6. 3.89. 0.62. 3. Table. 4.5 indicated that leisure coping played a role as a buffer or a moderator when teachers were stressed, and the leisure participation was adhered to the individual determination. The body relaxation for a short escape from the stress was the best physical influence of leisure coping (leisure refreshment), and the top beneficial mental effect was more positive thoughts that leisure brought (leisure palliative). Earning positive encouragement from leisure activities was the most helpful social feedback of leisure coping. Table. 4.5 Descriptive Statistics for Each Item of Leisure Coping Scale Questions. Mean. Standard Deviation. Physical leisure coping 1. Offer a short escape from the stress by body. 4.38. 0.59. 4.16. 0.68. relaxation 5. Fight stress by the invigoration gained from leisure. (continued). 50.

Questions. 4. Mean. Get away from stressors by joining the leisure. Standard Deviation. 4.11. 0.51. 4.07. 0.45. Consume body energy to ease the stress. 4.05. 0.37. 10 Gain more body power from leisure activities. 4.02. 0.75. activities 15 Stop the stressful thoughts when joining the leisure activities 9. Mental leisure coping 2. Get positive ideas from leisure activities. 4.36. 0.42. 6. Have a brief break when joining leisure. 4.29. 0.51. activities 7. Join leisure activities by individual free wills. 4.26. 0.56. 3. Free to choose the participation of leisure. 4.23. 0.52. 4.23. 0.57. 12 Stay relaxed and cozy in the leisure activities. 4.13. 0.54. 16 Lighten up stress by joining the leisure. 4.10. 0.69. 4.02. 0.41. activities 11 Forget the stressful events when joining leisure activities. activities 17 Arrange freely leisure activities by following individual schedule Social leisure coping (continued). 51.

Questions. Mean. 13 Gain encouragement from the leisure. Standard Deviation. 4.14. 0.61. 18 Enjoy the leisure with trusty friends. 3.97. 0.55. 19 Relieve loneliness when joining the leisure. 3.94. 0.64. 3.86. 0.66. 14 Catch useful information from leisure partners. 3.83. 0.58. 20 Get a help from leisure partners. 3.61. 0.65. participation. activities 8. Form friendships when joining the leisure activities. Leisure Participation Measurement Scale explored the types of leisure activities and participation frequency, and higher scores stated the more participation of leisure activities. As Table 4.6 showed, recreational activities had the highest participation frequency (M=2.22 ± 0.70), and sports had the second highest frequency. Table 4.6 Descriptive Statistics for Leisure Participation Measurement Scale Dimensions. Items. Mean. Standard. Rank. Deviation Social activities. 3. 1.68. 0.54. 3. Recreational activities. 4. 2.22. 0.70. 1. Sports. 3. 1.81. 0.66. 2. Skill learning activities. 2. 1.45. 0.61. 5. Culture-based activities. 3. 1.80. 0.60. 4. 52.

As shown in Table 4.7, interior entertainments were the most regular activities, with a mean of 2.44 and a standard deviation of 0.62. Speeches attending and book clubs participating of the culture-based activities were the second favorites to join (M=2.39 ± 0.56). Audio/video entertainments (M=2.32 ± 0.65) were the third popular pastimes. However, aerobic exercises (e.g. jogging, bike-riding, and mountain climbing) ranked the top in sports (M=2.30 ± 1.12). Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for Each Item of Leisure Participation Measurement Scale Questions. Mean. Standard Deviation. Social activities 1. Family / friends gathering and chatting. 2.27. 0.54. 2. Educational activities (e.g. play Sudoku or. 1.42. 0.59. 1.36. 0.48. chess) 3. Static activities (e.g. play bridge, appreciate wine). Recreational activities 5. Indoor entertainments (e.g. watch ball games). 2.44. 0.62. 7. Audio/ video entertainments (e.g. see movies,. 2.32. 0.65. 2.26. 0.73. sing karaoke) 6. Outdoor entertainments (e.g. walk the dog, go shopping). (continued) 53.