4.1 Article

The association of academic burnout with self-efficacy and quality of learning experience among Iranian students

期刊

SPRINGERPLUS
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-677

关键词

Academic burnout; Self-efficacy; Quality of learning experience

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study examines the relationship between academic burnout and quality of learning experience and self-efficacy among undergraduate students. The sample consisted of 233 undergraduate students (106 men and 127 women) who were selected by stratified random sampling method. The participants completed the Quality of Learning Experience Scale, Academic Burnout scale, and General Self-Efficacy scale. This study is particularly interesting in the context of Iran, known for its equality-striving and high-quality educational system. Iranian youth, compared with youth in many other countries, have a lower level of well-being. The antecedents of academic burnout are divided into two categories: internal and external variables. In most studies regarding to the issue, one category is used to predict the dependent variable. However, in this study we utilized both ones; self-efficacy was considered as internal and quality of learning experience was used as an external predictor. Correlation coefficients indicated that all relationships between academic burnout and its components with self-efficacy were statistically significant. Furthermore, academic burnout and all of its components had significant correlations with quality of learning experience. Also, the relationship between resources with emotional exhaustion and professor-student relationship with academic inefficacy were not significant. On the basis of the results, through our research, we will expand academic burnout literature by focusing on its external and internal antecedents. In addition, we conclude with theoretical and practical implications and propose a clear horizon for future researches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据