The Study of Relations between Life Satisfaction, Burnout, Work Engagement and Hopelessness of High School Students

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to determine the relations between high school students' life satisfaction, burnout, work engagement and hopelessness scores and examine the contribution of their burnout, work engagement and hopelessness scores in the prediction of their life satisfaction scores. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey (MBI-SS), Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-Student Survey (UWES-SS), Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) and "Personal Information Form", has been applied on a total of 461 students, 225 (%48.8) of them being girl students and 236 (%51.2) of them being male students, who were continuing the 12th grade in varying high school classes during the 2011-2012 school year within the provincial boundaries of the Mersin Municipality and had voluntarily accepted to participate in the research. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), correlation analysis and multiple regression analysis have been used in the analysis of the data. It is observed as a result of the analyses that high school students' life satisfaction scores have a negative relation with exhaustion, cynicism, efficacy and hopelessness scores; on the other hand, these have a positive relation with vigor, dedication and absorption scores. Also it has been observed that life satisfaction scores only predict hopelessness, absorption and efficacy in a meaningful way.

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-Student Forms’ (UWES-SF) Adaptation to Turkish, Validity and Reliability Studies, and the Mediator Role of Work Engagement between Academic Procrastination and Academic Responsibility

“…In addition to this, in the context of the criterion related validity study of the scale, negative directional statistically significant relationships were found between the MBI-SF subscales, adapted by Çapri et al (2013) and the UWES-SF subscales, the values for the long form are between -.31 and -.60; and for the short form between -.27 and -.59. These acquired results can be seen as similar to the results of the study where a significant relationship between UWES-SF and MBI-SF was found in the context of criterion related validity studies (Çapri, et al, 2013;Kutsal, 2009;Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004;Schaufeli, Martinez et al, 2002; and can be said to support the theoretical explanation that work engagement is the positive opposite of burnout. On the other hand, while the vigor and dedication subscales were expressed as the main dimensions of work engagement; exhaustion and cynicism were expressed as the main factors of burnout (Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001;Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004), the efficacy subscale was said to reflect a more personal quality rather than burnout (Cordes & Dougherty, 1993, as cited in Schaufeli & Salanova, 2007), and the absorption subscale was said to be a result of these main factors (Langelaan et al, 2006).…”

“…In the direction of the primary objective of this study, which was to conduct the adaptation, validity and reliability studies of UWES-SF's long (17 items) and short (9 items) forms and 3 factor analyses on the high school students of our country; the findings regarding the adaptation, validity and reliability studies showed that both of the forms had sufficient levels of valid and reliable qualities and that both single factor and three factor structures were confirmed. It can be said that the acquired results are consistent with some local (Çapri et al, 2013;Kutsal, 2009) and international (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004;Schaufeli, Martinez et al, 2002; research findings in the literature.…”

“…In the other study, Çapri, Gündüz, and Akbay (2013) aimed to examine the predictive effect of burnout, work engagement and hopelessness points on life satisfaction points; they used the translation form of UWES adapted by Gündüz et al (2013) to be used on workers. In order to make this translation of UWES applicable to the student population of the study, they made the same adjustment that Schaufeli, Martinez et al (2002) did and replaced "work" with "study" and only analyzed factor structure.…”

“…Yalom (1999) describes a responsible person as someone who respects themselves and others, handles their own work in order not to be an unnecessary burden to anyone, realizes their own self-worth and holds themselves accountable for everything that is related to them. Academic responsibility is defined as; a students' ability to identify their assigned tasks in the academic setting, define themselves in the academic field and their inner motivation to complete their tasks at the appropriate time frame (Akbay, Çapri, & Gündüz, 2013). Almost every individual postpones their activities or tasks and responsibilities that they need to complete to a further date for various reasons, in other words, they procrastinate (Reasinger & Brownlow, 1996;Senecal, Koestner, & Valerand, 1995).…”

Factors Affecting Burnout and School Engagement among High School Students: Study Habits, Self- Efficacy Beliefs, and Academic Success

“…Aypay (2011) studied primary school students. Kutsal (2009); Aypay and Eryılmaz (2011a, 2011b); Sever and Aypay (2011); Aypay (2012); Çapri, Gündüz, and Akbay (2013); and Yedigöz, Sönmez, and Çapri (2013) studied high school students. Çapri, Gündüz, and Gökçakan (2011); Gündüz, Çapri, and Gökçakan (2012); and Çapri (2013) examined university students' burnout.…”