4.6 Article

Teaching during the Pandemic: A Comparison in Psychological Wellbeing among Smart Working Professions

Journal

SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 13, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su13094850

Keywords

coronavirus; psychological factor; remote working; coping strategies; stress; job shift; COVID-19

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined the differences in psychological variables related to smart working among four groups of professional categories in Italy, with teachers being the most affected group. The results showed statistically significant differences in the perception of psychological well-being and management of smart working mode among the groups.
Background: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, since March 2020, the Italian population was forced into lockdown to prevent the spread of the virus. The restrictive measures imposed forced many organizations and workers to work through online platforms and no longer in-person. Smart working, enjoyed by some workers for its flexibility, affected several professional categories. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there are differences in the psychological variables related to four groups of professional categories (practitioners, managers, executive employees, teachers), particularly the teachers group. Methods: A total sample of 628 individuals was recruited through a random probability sample across Italy. Due to the lockdown, an online questionnaire was developed; several validated scales were chosen, and some ad hoc constructed items related to the smart working experience were included. Results: The results showed statistically significant differences between the four groups of examined smart workers. Conclusions: All workers have had to readjust to this new way of working, but our results show that teachers were the most affected, both in the perception of their psychological well-being and in the management of the smart working mode.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available