INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4134
www.rsisinternational.org
Burnout Levels and Stress Levels among Teachers: Basis for Faculty
Development Program
Rennia Joy B. Obsiana
Capiz State University college Of Education Graduate School Roxas City, Main Campus
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120800371
Received: 03 October 2025; Accepted: 09 October 2025; Published: 15 October 2025
ABSTRACT
Obsiana, Rennia Joy Baria, Capiz State University – Roxas City Main Campus, May 2024. “Burnout Levels and
Stress Levels Among Techers: Basis for Faculty Development Program"
Teaching is said to be a demanding profession. It is important to discuss how instructors manage their burnout
levels and stress levels and how these impact their productivity. Burnout levels are said to be the results of the
stress levels. For this reason, the researcher initiated on this study to know the burnout levels and stress levels of
teachers. Furthermore, the researcher is motivated to pursue this study for this will be a basis for the faculty
development program in the university.
This study aimed to determine the burnout levels and stress levels among the teachers. Specifically, it sought to
determine the burnout level of teachers in terms of emotional exhaustion, personal dissatisfaction and
depersonalization; and determine the stress level of teachers in terms of work environment and work overload,
use of new technologies, organizational aspect and relationship and role of teachers; and find out if there is
significant relationship between burnout levels and stress levels among the teachers.
The result revealed that in terms of burnout levels, the indicators emotional exhaustion, personal dissatisfaction
and depersonalization is exhibited low extent, very low extent and very low extent in burnout levels respectively.
For the stress level, the indicators: work environment and work overload, use of new technologies, organizational
aspect and relationships and role of instructors have results of average extent, low extent, low extent and low extent
in stress levels respectively. Further, the results revealed a significant relationship between burnout levels and
stress levels. Hence, the study is highly recommended to be used as a basis to conduct a faculty development
program in the institution.
Keywords: Burnout Levels, Stress Levels, Teachers, Faculty, Development Program.
INTRODUCTION
Burnout is the result of working too much and feeling too exhausted or sick, psychologically or physically.
Burnout is a condition of extreme mental, emotional, and physical tiredness brought on by prolonged or severe
stress. It manifests when you feel helpless, overburdened, and unable of handling life's responsibilities.
(McDonald, 2022)
Stress is a pressure or worry brought on by one's workload or personal issues. Stress is the body's reaction to any
demand—whether it be mental, emotional, or physical. When the body senses a threat, hormones like cortisol
and adrenaline are released. Stress can be caused by a wide range of factors. It could be the result of outside
variables like a rigorous work schedule or a challenging home life. In addition, personal issues like anxieties or
phobias may contribute to it. Burnout can occur, though, if stress becomes overwhelming and persistent.
(McDonald, 2022)
For this reason, the researcher wants to conduct this study to know the different factors that affects the burnout
levels and stress levels among teachers. Furthermore, the researcher is motivated to pursue this study for this will
be a basis for the faculty development program in the university.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4135
www.rsisinternational.org
Statement of the Problem
The primary purpose of this study is to determine the burnout levels and stress levels among teachers as a basis
for faculty development program. Specifically, it aimed to answer the following questions:
1. What is the burnout level of teachers in terms of emotional exhaustion, personal dissatisfaction and
depersonalization?
2. What is the stress level of teachers in terms of work environment and work overload, use of new
technologies, organizational aspect and relationship and role of teachers?
3. Is there a significant relationship between burnout and stress level among the teachers?
METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the methods, descriptive research design, correlational research design, quantitative
research design, locale of the study, participants of the study, research instrument, data gathering procedure,
statistical tools, and data analysis.
Research Design
This study entitled “Burnout Levels and Stress Levels Among Teachers: Basis for Faculty Development
Program” adopts the descriptive research design. Sirisilla (2023) defines descriptive research design as a topic
is observed and data is gathered without an attempt to infer cause-and- effect correlations. Descriptive research
design includes surveys, case studies and observational studies.
In this study, correlational research design is used. According to Fleetwood (2024), correlational research is a
type of non-experimental research method in which two variables are measured, and the statistical relationship
between them is understood and evaluated without the impact of any other variable.
Employed in this study is the quantitative research design. Jain (2023) defines quantitative research design as a
research methodology that is applied in multiple fields, such as market research, economics, psychology, and
social sciences. To find answers to research problems and validate ideas, it seeks to gather and evaluate numerical
data.
Data Gathering Procedure
In the quest to understand what makes teachers tick, the researcher started this study. The objective is to gather
data that would unveil the factors shrouded in burnout levels and stress levels. This data would then be the
cornerstone for building a faculty development program, a beacon of support for the university's dedicated
teachers. The journey began with reaching out to the campus administrator and followed by giving letters to every
department head. A number of representative group of faculty across various departments to participated in the
answering of the survey. Participation, of course, would be completely voluntary. There would be no names on
surveys, but rather codes to ensure complete confidentiality. However, some background information would be
helpful, like the instructors' years of experience and their specific departments. This would give the researchers
a broader context to understand the data. The core of the data collection process would be a specially designed
survey. This survey would be like a compass, guiding the researcher towards understanding the teachers'
emotional state. Standardized tools, validated by experts, would be used to measure burnout levels and stress
levels.
Data Analysis Procedure
Once the surveys were collected, the meticulous work of analysis would begin. The researcher weaved a narrative
from the data. The researcher analyzed the different indicators with burnout and stress levels, identifying patterns
across departments. The open-ended responses would be carefully examined, looking for recurring themes that
might reveal deeper issues. This data analysis wouldn't be just about statistics; it would be about understanding
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4136
www.rsisinternational.org
the human experience of burnout and stress levels. Both the mean of burnout and stress levels are tested for
correlation. By combining the data, the researcher gained a comprehensive picture of what ailed the teachers.
This newfound knowledge would be the golden key, unlocking the door to designing a faculty development
program that addressed the specific stressors identified in the study.
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data
Burnout Levels in terms of Emotional Exhaustion
The burnout levels in terms of emotional exhaustion among the teachers is shown in Table 1a. The result indicates
the average mean of 2.20 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The
statement, “I feel emotionally drained from my work”, got the highest mean of 3.04 with the description of
“sometimes” with the verbal interpretation “Average Extent”. Followed by the statement, “Working with people
all day long requires a great deal of effort”, which got a mean of2.98 with the description of “sometimes” and
with the verbal interpretation “Average Extent”. The statement, “I feel I work too hard at my job” got a mean of
2.31 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”; while the statement, “I
feel like my work is breaking me down” got a mean of 2.16 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal
interpretation “Low Extent”. The statement, “It stresses me too much to work in direct contact with people” got
a mean of 1.90 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”; while the
statement, “I feel frustrated by my work” got a mean of 1.67 with the description of “never” and with the verbal
interpretation “Very Low Extent”. Lastly, the statement, “I feel like I’m at the end of my rope” got a mean of
1.34 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”.
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “I feel emotionally drained from my work” may affect the instructors’
burnout, which subsequently entails that having a feeling of uncontrolled emotion at work is an emotional
exhaustion which may result to burnout. The result of this study affirms the findings of Klusman, Aldrup,
Schmidt and Ludtke (2020), which state that work-related uplifts were negatively and work-related hassles were
positively related to emotional exhaustion.
Table 1a Burnout levels among teachers in terms of Emotional Exhaustion.
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
I feel emotionally drained from my work.
3.04
Sometimes
Average Extent
Working with people all day long requires a great deal
of effort.
2.98
Sometimes
Average Extent
I feel I work too hard at my job.
2.31
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel like my work is breaking me down.
2.16
Rarely
Low Extent
It stresses me too much to work in direct contact with
people.
1.90
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel frustrated by my work.
1.67
Never
Very Low Extent
I feel like I’m at the end of my rope.
1.34
Never
Very Low Extent
Total:
2.20
Rarely
Low Extent
Burnout Levels in terms of Personal Dissatisfaction
The burnout levels in terms of personal dissatisfaction among the teachers is shown in Table 1b. The result
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4137
www.rsisinternational.org
indicates the average mean of 1.28 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low
Extent”. The statement, “I unaccomplished many worthwhile things in this job”, got the highest mean of 1.47
with the description of “never” with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”. Followed by the statement, “In
my work, I handle emotional problems frantically”, which got a mean of 1.32 with the description of “never” and
with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”. The statement, “I feel drained when I am close to my
recipients/students at work” got a mean of 1.30 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation
“Very Low Extent”; while the statement, “I easily create an uneasy atmosphere with my recipients/students” got
a mean of 1.28 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”. The
statement, “I feel I lack energy in my job” got a mean of 1.28 with the description of “never” and with the verbal
interpretation “Very Low Extent”; while the statement, “I lookafter my recipients/students problems negatively”
got a mean of 1.27 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”. The
statement, “I easily misunderstand what my recipients/students feel” got a mean of 1.34 with the description of
“never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”; lastly, the statement, “Through my work, I feel
that I have a negative influence on people” got a mean of 1.16 with the description of “never” and with the verbal
interpretation “Very Low Extent”.
Table 1b Burnout levels among teachers in terms of Personal Dissatisfaction
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
I unaccomplished many worthwhile things in this job.
1.47
Never
Very Low Extent
In my work, I handle emotional problems frantically.
1.32
Never
Very Low Extent
I feel drained when I am close to my recipients/students at
work.
1.30
Never
Very Low Extent
I easily create an uneasy atmosphere with my
recipients/students.
1.28
Never
Very Low Extent
I feel I lack energy in my job.
1.28
Never
Very Low Extent
I look after my recipients/students problems negatively.
1.27
Never
Very Low Extent
I easily misunderstand what my recipients/students feel.
1.23
Never
Very Low Extent
Through my work, I feel that I have a negative influence on
people.
1.16
Never
Very Low Extent
Total:
1.28
Never
Very Low Extent
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “I unaccomplished many worthwhile things in this job” may affect
the instructors’ burnout, which subsequently entails that satisfaction or dissatisfaction is an affective response to
past actions; self-confidence expectations are judgments about one's future capabilities to attain one's goal. The
result of this study affirms the findings of Khamisa, Peltzer, Ilic and Odernburg (2017), which state that personal
stress is a better predictor of burnout and general health than personal dissatisfaction, which is better predicted by
work stress.
Burnout Levels in terms of Depersonalization
The burnout levels in terms of depersonalization among the teachers is shown in Table 1c. The result indicates
the average mean of 1.79 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”.
The statement, “I feel tired when I get up in the morning and have to face another day at work”, got the highest
mean of 2.34 with the description of “rarely” with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. Followed by the
statement, “I have the impression that my recipients/students make me responsible to some of their problems”,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4138
www.rsisinternational.org
which got a mean of 2.11 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The
statement, “I am at the end of my patience at the end of my work day” got a mean of 1.97 with the description
of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”; while the statement, “I feel I treat some
recipients/students as if they are objects” got a mean of 1.83 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal
interpretation “Low Extent”. The statement, “I have become more insensitive to people since I’ve been working”
got a mean of 1.52 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”; while
the statement, “I really don’t care about what happens to some of my recipients/students” got a mean of 1.40 with
the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”. Lastly, the statement, “I’m
afraid that this job is making me uncaring” got a mean of 1.37 with the description of “never” and with the verbal
interpretation “Very Low Extent”.
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “I feel tired when I get up in the morning and have to face another
day at work” may affect the instructors’ burnout, which subsequently entails that instructors, at times, may feel
tired to face another work day. The result of this study negates the findings of Abuaddous, Bataineh and Alabood
(2018), which state that no significant relation was captured at any level between depersonalization and control
risk assessment indicating that this factor does not affect auditors’ judgement decision making.
Table 1c Burnout levels among teachers in terms of Depersonalization
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
I feel tired when I get up in the morning and have to face
another day at work.
2.34
Rarely
Low Extent
I have the impression that my recipients/students make me
responsible to some of their problems.
2.11
Rarely
Low Extent
I am at the end of my patience at the end of my work day.
1.97
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel I treat some recipients/students as if they are objects.
1.83
Rarely
Low Extent
I have become more insensitive to people since I’ve been
working.
1.52
Never
Very Low Extent
I really don’t care about what happens to some of my
recipients/students.
1.40
Never
Very Low Extent
I’m afraid that this job is making me uncaring.
1.37
Never
Very Low Extent
Total:
1.79
Never
Very Low Extent
Stress Levels in terms of Work Environment and Work Overload
The stress levels in terms of work environment and work overload among teachers is shown in Table 2a. The
result indicates the average mean of 2.79 with the description of “sometimes” and with the verbal interpretation
“Average Extent”. The statement, “I have to take work home to complete it”, got the highest mean of 3.07 with
the description of “sometimes” with the verbal interpretation “Average Extent”. Followed by the statement, “I
do my work overtime or on weekends”, which got a mean of 3.00
with
the
description of “sometimes”
and
with
the
verbal interpretation “Average Extent”. The statement, “I have too much to do and do not have
enough time to do it” got a mean of 2.81 with the description of “sometimes” and with the verbal interpretation
“Average Extent”; while the statement, “I have difficulty organizing my time to complete tasks” got a mean of
2.61 with the description of “sometimes” and with the verbal interpretation “Average Extent”. Lastly, the
statement, “I am unable to keep up with correcting papers and other school works” got a mean of 2.48 with the
description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”.
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “I have to take work home to complete it” may sometimes affect the
instructors’ stress levels, which subsequently entails that instructors unfinished work at school are sometimes
taken home which can give additional stress to them. The result of this study affirms the findings of Jain (2021),
which state that the participant teachers’ perceived stress ranged from moderate to high levels due to high
workload, multiple sources of stress, the emotional demands of the role and the frustration and constraints they
face in role performance.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4139
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 2a Stress levels among teachers in terms of Work Environment and Work Overload
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
I have to take work home to complete it.
3.07
Sometimes
Average Extent
I do my work overtime or on weekends.
3.00
Sometimes
Average Extent
I have too much to do and do not have
enough time to do it.
2.81
Sometimes
Average Extent
I have difficulty organizing my time to
complete tasks.
2.61
Sometimes
Average Extent
I am unable to keep up with correcting
papers and other
school works.
2.48
Rarely
Low Extent
Total:
2.7
Sometimes
Average Extent
Stress Levels in terms of Use of New Technologies
The stress levels in terms of use of new technologies among teachers is shown in Table 2b. The result indicates
the average mean of 2.42 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The
statement, “New technologies make it too easy for other individuals to send me additional work”, got the highest
mean of 3.05 with the description of “sometimes” with the verbal interpretation “Average Extent”. Followed by
the statement, “I feel overwhelmed by the amount of new technologies that I need to learn and use”, which got a
mean of 2.54 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The statement,
“There is a constant surge of work-related information coming in through new technologies that I just cannot
keep up with” got a mean of 2.37 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”;
while the statement, “It would take me too long to completely figure out how to use new technologies that are
available for me at work” got a mean of 2.29 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation
“Low Extent”. Lastly, the statement, “I feel that new technologies have disrupted my workflow or made it more
difficult to complete tasks” got a mean of 1.89 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation
“Low Extent”.
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “New technologies make it too easy for other individuals to send me
additional work” may affect the instructors’ stress levels, which subsequently entails that new technologies are
being used to easily send more work to instructors which in turn gives them stress. The result of this study affirms
the findings of Batanero, Gravan, Rebollo and Rueda (2021), which state that teachers present high levels of
anxiety or stress due to their use of educational technology in the classroom.
Table 2b Stress levels among teachers in terms of Use of New Technologies
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
New technologies make it too easy for other individuals to
send me additional work.
3.05
Sometimes
Average Extent
I feel overwhelmed by the amount of new technologies that I
need to learn and use.
2.54
Rarely
Low Extent
There is a constant surge of work-related information coming
in through new technologies that I just cannot keep up with.
2.37
Rarely
Low Extent
It would take me too long to completely figure out how to use
new technologies that are available for me at work.
2.29
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel that new technologies have disrupted my workflow or
made it more difficult to complete tasks.
1.89
Rarely
Low Extent
Total:
2.42
Rarely
Low Extent
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4140
www.rsisinternational.org
Stress Levels in terms of Organizational Aspect
The stress levels in terms of organizational aspect among teachers is shown in Table 2c. The result indicates the
average mean of 2.04 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The
statement, “I feel that I don’t have enough support and resources available to manage my work”, got the highest
mean of 2.19 with the description of “rarely” with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. Followed by the
statement, “My administrator/supervisor makes demands that I cannot meet”, which got a mean of 2.14 with the
description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The statement, “I feel that I cannot be
myself when I am interacting with my administrator/supervisor” got a mean
of
2.04
with
the
description
of
“rarely”
and
with
the
verbal interpretation “Low Extent”; while the statement, “I feel my
administrator/supervisor does not approve of the job I do” got a mean of 1.95 with the description of “rarely” and
with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. Lastly, the statement, “I have difficulty in my working relationship
with my administrator/supervisor” got a mean of 1.88 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal
interpretation “Low Extent”.
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “I feel that I don’t have enough support and resources available to
manage my work” may affect the instructors’ stress, which subsequently entails that having little support from
the people around, co-worker and administration can give stress to the instructors. The result of this study affirms
the findings of Beausaert, Froehlich, Devos, and Riley (2016), which state that social support predicts decreased
stress and in turn burnout in school principals, however differences were found according to the type of social
support.
Table 2c Stress levels among teachers in terms of Organizational Aspect
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
I feel that I don’t have enough support and resources
available to manage my work.
2.19
Rarely
Low Extent
My administrator/supervisor makes demands that I
cannot meet.
2.14
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel that I cannot be myself when I am interacting
with my administrator/supervisor.
2.04
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel my administrator/supervisor does not approve
of the job I do.
1.95
Rarely
Low Extent
I have difficulty in my working relationship with my
administrator/supervisor.
1.88
Rarely
Low Extent
Total:
2.04
Rarely
Low Extent
Stress Levels in terms of Relationships and Role of Teachers
The stress levels of teachers in terms of relationships and role of teachers is shown in Table 2d. The result indicates
the average mean of 1.89 with the description of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The
statement, “I become impatient/angry when my students do not do what I ask them to do”, got the highest mean
of 2.30 with the description of “rarely” with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. Followed by the statement,
“My students make my job stressful”, which got a mean of 2.00 with the description of “rarely” and with the
verbal interpretation “Low Extent”. The statement, “I get too little support from the instructors I work with. (e.i.
peers, supervisors, division chairman, program coordinators and deans)” got a mean of 1.81 with the description
of “rarely” and with the verbal interpretation “Low Extent”; while the statement, “I feel my fellow instructors think
I am not doing a good job” got a mean of 1.69 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation
“Very Low Extent”. Lastly, the statement, “Disagreements with my fellow instructors are a problem to me” got
a mean of 1.67 with the description of “never” and with the verbal interpretation “Very Low Extent”.
Thus, the result implies that the statement, “I become impatient/angry when my students do not do what I ask
them to do” may affect the instructors’ stress level, which subsequently entails that students behavior towards
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4141
www.rsisinternational.org
their work and instructor can give stress to their instructor. The result of this study affirms the findings of
Ramberg, Låftman, Åkerstedt, and Modin, (2020), which state that negative associations between school- level
teacher stress, fatigue, and depressed mood and students’ school satisfaction and perceived teacher caring, even
when controlling for student- and school-level sociodemographic characteristics.
Table 2d Stress levels among teachers in terms of Relationships and Role of Instructor
Indicator
Mean
Description
Verbal Interpretation
I become impatient/angry when my students
do not do what I ask them to do.
2.30
Rarely
Low Extent
My students make my job stressful.
2.00
Rarely
Low Extent
I get too little support from the instructors I
work with. (e.i. peers, supervisors, division
chairman, program coordinators and deans)
1.81
Rarely
Low Extent
I feel my fellow instructors think I am not
doing a good job.
1.69
Never
Very Low Extent
Disagreements with my fellow instructors
are a problem to me.
1.67
Never
Very Low Extent
Total:
1.89
Rarely
Low Extent
Relationship between Burnout and Job Demands
Table 4 displayed the correlation between burnout and stress levels. The results showed a significant relationship
between burnout and stress levels since the obtained p-value (0.000) is less than 0.05 level of significance.
The result of this study conforms the findings of Gautheur, Ginoux, Gerber and Sarrazin (2019) which states that
stress was associated with higher levels of job burnout; (b) that under a high stress condition, PA was negatively
linked to cognitive weariness; and (c) that intrinsic motivation for PA reinforced the positive moderating effect of
PA on the stress–burnout relationship, especially when stress is high.
Table 4 Relationship between burnout and stress levels among teachers
Variable
n
P-value
Remarks
Burnout to Stress Levels
107
.000
Significant
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:
1. For burnout level in terms of emotional exhaustion exhibits a low result. Hence, the statement, “I feel
emotionally drained from my work” has an average extent in burnout.
2. For burnout level in terms of personal dissatisfaction exhibits a very low result. Hence, the statement, “I
unaccomplished many worthwhile things in this job” has a very low extent in burnout.
3. For burnout level in terms of depersonalization exhibits a very low result. Hence, the statement, “I feel tired
when I get up in the morning and have to face another day at work” has a low extent in burnout.
4. For stress levels in terms of work environment and work overload, exhibits an average result. Hence, the
statement, “I have to take work home to complete it” has an average extent in stress levels.
5. For stress levels in terms of the use of new technologies, exhibits a low result. Hence, the statement, “New
technologies make it too easy for other individuals to send me additional work” has an average extent in stress
levels.
6. For stress levels in terms of the organizational aspect exhibits a low result. Hence, the statement, “I feel that
I don’t have enough support and resources available to manage my work” has a low extent in stress levels.
7. For stress levels in terms of relationships and role of instructors exhibits a low result. Hence, the statement, “I
become impatient/angry when my students do not do what I ask them to do” has a low extent in stress levels.
The null hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship between burnout and stress levels among
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4142
www.rsisinternational.org
teachers is therefore rejected.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings and conclusions drawn, the following are the recommendations:
As to the study's results, the burnout level and stress levels may be used as basis to conduct a faculty development
program in the institution. This man not be limited to the faculty but also to the staff.
For further development of the study on burnout level and stress levels, other school may be subject for this study,
such as schools in Iloilo not included in this study.
Studies and observation are recommended to discover more approaches suited to advanced studies conducted in
quantitative and qualitative research.
REFERENCES
1. Abramson, A. (2022). Burnout and Stress are Everywhere. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/
monitor/202m.2/01/special-burnout-stress
2. Alastuey, M.C.B., (2009). WebCT Design and Users' Perceptions in English for Agriculture. Retrieved from
https://www.igi- global.com/dictionary/new-technologies/20300
3. Anderson, B. (2020). Developing Organizational and Managerial Wisdom – 2
nd
edition. Retrieved from
https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/developingwisdom/chapter/filler/
4. Batanero, J.M., Graván, P., Rebollo, M.M., and Rueda, M. (2021). Impact of Educational Technology on
Teacher Stress and Anxiety: A Literature Review. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
articles/PMC7827099/
5. Beausaert, S., Froehlich, D. E., Devos, C., & Riley, P. (2016). Effects of support on stress and burnout in school
principals. Educational Research, 58(4), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2016.1220810
6. Begum, J. (2024). Burnout: Symptoms and Signs. Retrieved from https://www.webmd.com/mental-
health/burnout-symptoms-signsBhanot, A. and Francis, R. (2014). Stress Management in Educational
Institutions: Questionnaire-Based Study. Retrieved from https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/stress-
management-in- educational-institutions/39177
7. Bottiani, J.H., Duran, C. A. K., Pas, E. T., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2019). Teacher stress and burnout in urban
middle schools: Associations with job demands resources, and effective classroom practices. Journal of
School Psychology ,77. 36-51.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.002
8. Cammayo, P.M., Aquino, C., and Gomez, M.G. (2022). Factors Predicting Stress and Burnout of Filipino
Teachers Engaged in Remote Learning. Retrieved from https://journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/pjlir/article/
view/9397#:~:text=Specifically%2C%20results%20showed%20that%20on,depersonali
zation%2C%20and%20moderate%20personal%20accomplishment.
9. Chetty, M.N. and Plessis, M.D. (2021). Job Demands and Job Resources of Academics in Higher Education.
Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631171 /full
10. Fleetwood, D. (2024). Correlational Research: What it is with Examples. Retrieved from
https://www.questionpro.com/blog/correlational- research/#:~:text=of%20correlational%20research-
11. Greater Good in Education. (2024). Positive Staff Relationships. Retrieved from
https://ggie.berkeley.edu/school-relationships/positive-staff- relationships/
12. Hlado, P. and Harvankova, K. (2024). Teachers’ perceived work ability: a qualitative exploration using the
Job Demands-Resources model. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-024-02811- 1
13. International Journal of Nursing Studies. (2017). Job Demands. Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/job- demand
14. Jain, N. (2023). What is Quantitative Research Design? Definition, Types, Methods and Best Practices.
Retrieved from https://ideascale.com/blog/quantitative-research-design/#:~:text=Quantitative%20 research%20
design%20is%20defined,research%20questions%20and%20test%20hypotheses.
15. Jain, S. (2021). A study of work stress and coping among primary school teachers in New Zealand. Retrieved
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1320127.pdf
16. Khamisa, N., Peltzer, K., Ilic, D., and Oldenburg, B. (2017). Effect of personal and work stress on burnout, job
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4143
www.rsisinternational.org
satisfaction and general health of hospital nurses in South Africa. Retrieved from https://www.s
ciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S102598481630 0412
17. Klusmann, U., Aldrup, K., Schmidt, J., and Lüdtkea, O. (2020). Is emotional exhaustion only the result of
work experiences? A diary study on daily hassles and uplifts in different life domains. Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10615806.2020.1845 430
18. Murad Abuaddous, M., Bataineh, H., and Alabood, E. (2018). Burnout and Auditors Judgment Decision
Making: an Experimental Investigation Into Control Risk Assessment. Retrieved from
https://www.abacademies.org/articles/burnout-and-auditors-/judgment-decision-making-an-experimental-
investigation-into- control-risk-assessment-7422.html
19. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2024). Learning, Remembering, Believing:
Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226
/2303.
20. Nursing Clinics of North America. (2022). Emotional Exhaustion. Retrieved from https://www.science
direct.com/ topics/nursing-and-health-professions/emotional-exhaustionPsychology Glossary. (2024).
Dissatisfaction. Retrieved from https://www.psychologylexicon.com/cms/glossary/37-glossary-d/22970-
dissatisfaction.html
21. Odongo, O.N., and Koskei, J. (2024). Impact of Classroom Resources on Academic Performance in Public
Primary Schools: Case study of Belgut Sub County DOI: 10.37284/eajes.7.1.1734
22. Ramberg, J., Brolin Låftman, S., Åkerstedt, T., & Modin, B. (2020). Teacher Stress and Students’ School
Well-being: the Case of Upper Secondary Schools in Stockholm. Scandinavian Journal of Educational
Research, 64(6), 816–830. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1623308
23. Russel, M., Attoh, P., and Chase, T. (2020). Examining Burnout and the Relationships Between Job
Characteristics, Engagement, and Turnover Intention Among U.S. Educators. DOI:
10.1177/2158244020972361
24. Scispace. (2024). What is the theory of burnout by Maslach? Retrieved from https://typeset.io/questions/what-
is-the-theory-of-burnout-by- maslach-rkh5qv7m5v
25. Sirisilla, S. (2023). Bridging the Gap: Overcome these 7 flaws in descriptive research design. Retrieved from
https://www.enago.com/academy/descriptive-research-design/
26. Spiegel, D. (2023). Depersonalization/Derealization Disorder. Retrieved from https://www.msdmanuals
.com/home/mental-health-disorders/dissociative-disorders/depersonalization-derealization- disorder
27. Springer Link. (2008). Work Overload . In: Kirch, W. (eds) Encyclopedia of Public Health. Springer,
Dordrecht. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-4020-5614-73775#
citeas
28. Vandiya, V., and Hidayat, A.E. (2019). The Relation of Job Demands to Teacher and Staff Stress: Impact of
a Job Crafting Intervention. DOI10.2991/iciap-18.2019.80
29. What%20is%20Correlational%20research%3F,influence%20from%20 any%20extraneous%20variable.
30. Wong, K., Chan, A., and Ngan, S.C. (2019). The Effect of Long Working Hours and Overtime on Occupational
Health: A Meta-Analysis of Evidence from 1998 to 2018 doi: 10.3390/ijerph16122102
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4146
www.rsisinternational.org
APPENDIX C
Certificate Of Validation
This is to certify that I have checked and advised necessary changes to the questionnaire to be used by the
researcher namely, Rennia Joy B. Obsiana for her research entitled “Factors Influencing Instructors’ Burnout and
Stress Levels in Iloilo Science and Technology University, Miagao Campus: Basis for Faculty Development
Program.”
I fully certify that I am an authority in the subject presented before me in this study. As an expert in this
subject/topic, I have reviewed and validated the contents of the questionnaire. I made sure that the elements are
appropriate and accurate to answer the research query based on the statement of the problem.
Certification Issued By:
APPENDIX D
Statistical Analysis Result
Descriptives Variables=Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 /Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
[DataSet1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q1
107
3.0467
Q2
107
2.9813
Q3
107
2.1682
Q4
107
1.6729
Q5
107
2.3178
Q6
107
1.9065
Q7
107
1.3458
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15/Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
[DataSet1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q8
107
1.4766
Q9
107
1.2897
Q10
107
1.2336
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4147
www.rsisinternational.org
Q11
107
1.2710
Q12
107
1.3271
Q13
107
1.1682
Q14
107
1.2804
Q15
107
1.3084
Valid N (listwise)
107
DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22/STATISTICS=MEAN.Descriptives
[DataSet1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q16
107
1.8318
Q17
107
2.3458
Q18
107
2.1121
Q19
107
1.9720
Q20
107
1.4019
Q21
107
1.5234
Q22
107
1.3738
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27/Statistics=Mean.
Work Environment And Work Overload
Descriptives
[Dataset1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\Quantitative Research.Sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q23
107
2.4860
Q24
107
3.0748
Q25
107
2.8131
Q26
107
2.6168
Q27
107
3.0093
Work Environment And Work Overload
107
2.8000
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Use Of New Technologies/Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4148
www.rsisinternational.org
[Dataset1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\Quantitative Research.Sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q28
107
1.8972
Q29
107
2.5421
Q30
107
2.3738
Q31
107
3.0561
Q32
107
2.2991
Use Of New Technologies
107
2.4336
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Organizationalaspect /Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
[Dataset1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.Sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q33
107
2.1402
Q34
107
1.9533
Q35
107
2.0467
Q36
107
1.8879
Q37
107
2.1963
Organizational Aspect
107
2.0449
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q38 Q39 Q40 Q41 Q42 Relationship And Role Of Instructors/Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
[DataSet1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q38
107
2.0000
Q39
107
2.3084
Q40
107
1.6916
Q41
107
1.6729
Q42
107
1.8131
Relationship And Role Of Instructors
107
1.8972
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47institutional Demands And Resources/Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4149
www.rsisinternational.org
[Dataset1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\Quantitative Research.Sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q43
107
2.0280
Q44
107
2.2150
Q45
107
1.9346
Q46
107
2.0654
Q47
107
2.2523
Institutional Demands And Resources
107
2.0991
Valid N (listwise)
107
Descriptives Variables=Q48 Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Classroom Demands And Resources/Statistics=Mean.
Descriptives
[DataSet1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q48
107
2.4019
Q49
107
2.0467
Q50
107
2.0841
Q51
107
2.0187
Q52
107
2.8692
Classroom Demands And Resources
107
2.2841
Valid N (listwise)
107
DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Personal Demands And Resources/STATISTICS
=MEAN.
Descriptives
[DataSet1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.sav
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Q53
107
2.1308
Q54
107
2.4299
Q55
107
2.1682
Q56
107
2.0000
Q57
107
2.0935
Personal Demands And Resources
107
2.1645
Valid N (listwise)
107
Correlation
Correlations/Variables=Burnout Job Demands/Print=Twotail Nosig /Missing=Pairwise.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4150
www.rsisinternational.org
[Dataset1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\Quantitative Research.Sav
Correlations
Burnout
Job Demands
Pearson Correlation
1
.547
**
Burnout
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
107
107
Pearson Correlation
.547
**
1
Job Demands
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
107
107
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
GET FILE='C:\Users\Client\Documents\QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.Sav'.DATASET NAME Dataset1
WINDOW=FRONT. CORRELATIONS/VARIABLES=Stresslevels Jobdemands/PRINT=TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.
[Dataset1] C:\Users\Client\Documents\Quantitative Research.Sav
Correlations
Stress Levels
Job Demands
Pearson Correlation
1
.581
**
Stress Levels
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
107
107
Pearson Correlation
.581
**
1
Job Demands
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
107
107
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Appendix E
Survey Questionnaire
Research Questionnaire
Factors Influencing Instructors’ Burnout and Stress Levels in Iloilo Science and Technology University, Miagao
Campus: Basis for Faculty Development Program
Part I: Respondent’s Profile
Kindly fill in the information on the blanks provided. Please do not leave any items unanswered.
Name:
Age:
Academic Rank:
Gender:
Department/Council:
Number of years in teaching:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4151
www.rsisinternational.org
Direction: For each statement, indicate the score that corresponds to your response by putting a check in the box.
Your answers and identity will be strictly confidential.
Part II: Questionnaire for Burnout
Statement
Never
A few times
per year
Once a month
Once a week
Every day
Factor 1: Emotional Exhaustion
1
2
3
4
5
1. I feel emotionally drained from
my work.
2. Working with people all day long
requires a great deal of effort.
3.
I feel like my work is breaking me
down.
4. I feel frustrated by my work.
5. I feel I work too hard at my job.
6. It stresses me too much to work in
direct contact with people.
7.
I feel like I’m at the end of my
rope.
Total Score:
Statement
Never
A few times per
year
Once a month
Once a
week
Every
day
Factor 2: Personal Dissatisfaction
1
2
3
4
5
1. I unaccomplished many
worthwhile things in this job.
2. I feel I lack energy in my job.
3. I easily understand what my
recipients/students feel.
4. I look after my recipients/students
problems negatively.
5. In my work, I handle emotional
problems frantically.
6.
Through my work, I feel that I
have a negative influence on people.
7. I easily create an uneasy
atmosphere with my
recipients/students.
8. I feel drained when I am close
to my recipients/students at work.
Total Score:
Statement
Never
A few timesper
year
Once a month
Once a
week
Every day
Factor 3: Depersonalization
1
2
3
4
5
1. I feel I treat some recipients/students
as if they are objects.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4152
www.rsisinternational.org
2.
I feel tired when I get up in the
morning and have to face another day
at work.
3. I have the impression that my
recipients/students make me
responsible to some of their problems.
4. I am at the end of my patience at the
end of my work day.
5. I really don’t care about what happens
to some of my recipients/students.
6. I have become more insensitive to
people since I’ve been working.
7. I’m afraid that this job is making me
uncaring.
Total Score:
Part III: Questionnaire for Stress Levels
Direction: For each statement, indicate the score that corresponds to your response by putting a check in the box.
Your answers and identity will be strictly confidential.
Statement
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very often
Factor 1: Work Environment and
Work Overload
1
2
3
4
5
1. I am unable to keep up with
correcting papers and other school
works.
2.
I have to take work home to complete
it.
3. I have too much to do and do not have
enough time to do it.
4. I have difficulty organizing my time
to complete tasks.
5.
I do my work overtime or on
weekends.
Total Score:
Statement
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very often
Factor 2: Use of New Technologies
1
2
3
4
5
1. I feel that new technologies have
disrupted my workflow or made it
more difficult to complete tasks.
2. I feel overwhelmed by the amount
of new technologies that I need to
learn and use.
3.
There is a constant surge of work-
related information coming in
through new technologies that I just
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4153
www.rsisinternational.org
cannot keep up with.
4. New technologies make it too easy
for other individuals to send me
additional work.
5.
It would take me too long to
completely figure out how to use
new technologies that are available
for me at work.
Total Score:
Statement
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very often
Factor 3: Organizational Aspect
1
2
3
4
5
1. My administrator/supervisor makes
demands that I cannot meet.
2. I feel myadministrator/supervisor
does not approve of the job I do.
3. I feel that I cannot be myself when I
am interacting with my administrator
/supervisor.
4. I have difficulty in my working
relationship with my
administrator/supervisor.
5.
I feel that I don’t have enough
support and resources available to
manage my work.
Total Score:
Statement
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Very
often
Factor 4: Relationships and Role of
Instructors
1
2
3
4
5
1. My students make my job stressful.
2. I become impatient/angry when my
students do not do what I ask them
to do.
3. I feel my fellow instructors think I
am not doing a good job.
4. Disagreements with my fellow
instructors are a problem to me.
5. I get too little support from the
instructors I work with. (e.i. peers,
supervisors, division chairman,
program coordinators and deans)
Total Score:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4154
www.rsisinternational.org
Part IV. Questionnaire for Job Demands
Direction: For each statement, indicate the score that corresponds to your response by putting a check in the box.
Your answers and identity will be strictly confidential.
Statement
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Factor 1: Institutional demands and
resources
1
2
3
4
5
1. I feel that the institution’s
expectations and demands of me
are unrealistic orun reasonable.
2. I feel that the institution's
decision-making and
communication procedures are
exclusive and unapparent.
3.
I feel that my work as an
instructor is not valued or
supported by the school
administration.
4. The institution does not provide
enough possibilities for peer
assistance and collaboration with
other instructors to help enhance
instruction and deal with
institutional expectations.
5. I feel that my schedule and
workload are too much for me to
handle and don't allow for a good
work-life balance.
Total Score:
Statement
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Factor 2: Classroom demands and
resources
1
2
3
4
5
1. I feel that I don’t have adequate
materials, technology, and
instructional materials to teach
students effectively.
2. I find it difficult to manage
students’ behaviors and
engagement in my classroom.
3. I feel that the responsibilities in my
classroom, like lesson planning,
grading, and student management,
are interfering with mywell-being.
4. I am worried that I cannot use
technology like the internet,
multimedia and artificial
intelligence tools efficiently in
teaching.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025
Page 4155
www.rsisinternational.org
5. I feel that my classroom does not
have proper ventilation, lightings,
multimedia projectors and other
teaching resources.
Total Score:
Statement
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Factor 3: Personal demands and resources
1
2
3
4
5
1. I feel that my interests, talents, and qualities
are not acknowledged and put to use.
2. I feel that my personal well-being and health
are affected by my work.
3. I experience conflicts about my employment
as an instructor with my friends, partners,
family, peers, supervisor, division chairman,
program coordinator and dean.
4. I feel that my obligations and personal life are
interfering with my teaching duties.
5. I feel that the expectations and culture of the
institution do not correspond with my
personal views, values, or ambitions.
Total Score:
Respondent’s Signature
Thank you for your responses to this survey. The information that we’ve gathered through this survey is a big
help in my research study. Rest assured that all your responses will be treated with the utmost discretion. Thank
you and God bless you!
Appendix F
Pictures During Survey
