STRESS AND SATISFACTION: STUDENTS AT THE IPOH TEACHERS TRAINING INSTITUTE Dr Kamaruddin B. Ilias & Mubin B.

Md Nor, Ipoh Teachers Training Institute, Malaysia Email: kama.ilias@ yahoo.com Cite this Paper: Ilias, K. B. & Nor, M. B. (2013). Stress and Satisfaction: Students at the Ipoh Teachers Training Institute. European Social Sciences Research Journal, 1(2), 169175. ABSTRACT This study aims to describe the well-being of the institute throughout their stress levels and satisfaction. Not only that, the study is aimed to observe whether there is a relationship between stress and satisfaction among students at Ipoh Teachers Training Institute. This study involving the 59 students who are taking History Subject (Human Civilization) in their pre-degree. Stress valuation using Year 11 Questionnaire About Stress by Kyriacou and Butcher (1993) and Owen-Yeates (2005), which contains 26 items. Furthermore, student satisfaction survey is evaluate by using The Satistfaction with Life Scale by Diener (1996), which consists of 5 items. Alpha Cronbach reliability for student pressure is 0.93 and student satisfaction was 0.74. The overall results showed that student stress are at a moderate level while the overall satisfaction level is high. The findings also show that there is no relationship between the pressure and student satisfaction. This shows that the well-being of the students of the Ipoh Teachers Traning Institute is in a good condition, due to the high levels of student satisfaction and moderate stress levels. Keywords: Stress, Satisfaction and Well-Being INTRODUCTION Satisfaction, according to (Wilkening & Mc Granahan, 1978: Ryff & Kayes, 1995), is a simple measure of well-being. Laily & Nurizan (2004) state that a well-being is certified with financial security, self-esteem, health and variables, which are important in influencing the satisfaction and joy. Pressure, according to Holmes & Rahes (1967) that form the social scale of the Readjustment Rating Scales, are as a pressing situation, disrupt and influence the psychological well-being of individuals. Pressure also refers to a sense of extreme anxiety, nightmares, low selfesteem, phobias, grief and feelings of uncertainty that a variable will cause a sudden change in behavior. Problem Statement The symptoms of mental disorders (such as suicide attempts, sadness, despair, alcohol and marijuana addiction) are associated with the negative effects of stress (Chassin et al., 2003: Compas, Orosan & Grant, 1993: Little & Garber, 2004: Schmeelk-Cone & Zimmerman, 2003). Belley study from Kelly et al., (1991) on teenagers in Sweden between the ages of 13 to 18 years, found that 85% of them were healthy but at the same time experiencing headaches, stomach aches, allergies or intent to kill themselves. If the problem cannot be resolved, then the teenagers will experience both mentally and physically risk as same as
__________________________________________________________________________________

adults (Loeber & Farrington, 2000). In the long term, severe stimulation of the stress response system has resulted in decreased life satisfaction (Evans, Bullinger & Hygge, 1998). Thus, stress and satisfaction of students will impact the well-being of students. Objectives The objective of this study is: 1. Describe the level of satisfaction and stress among the students of Ipoh Teachers Training Institute. 2. Determine whether there is a correlation with stress and satisfaction among students in Ipoh Teachers Training Institute. Hypothesis of this study is: HO1 There is no significant relationship between satisfaction and stress in students. LITERATURE REVIEW Workload is a major cause of stress. This is reflected in the study by Peach (1991) of 240 students in Tennessee, which found that 65% of girls and 56% of boys experiencing academic stress caused by work load. It is equivalent to the study of Arthur & Hiebert (1994) in 24 student at an institution in the South Alberta, found that the cause of stress due to academic workload. Work load also associated in tasks within time constraints. This can also be seen through Samsiah (2005) study of 155 students, which found that 91% of Matriculation students do not have enough time to do their revision is a major cause of stress and 65.2% of the students do not have enough time to complete their task. Besides, examination also causes the stress among the students. Study by Hall et al.(2004) and Connor (2001) found that student were depressed with classroom activities, which gave more focusing only regarding examination. The study was supported by West & Wood (1970), which showed that students tend to stress on their expectations in academic achievements. This includes expectation in performance and examination results. Furthermore, this study showed that 65% out of 331 high school students in American suffered from stress due to exams, by just thinking, before actually facing the examination. In addition, 59% of the students with low achievement in exams will experience high stress. Supported by Gallagher & Millar (1996), examination stress refers to school works and preparing for Assessment Standard Task (SATS) as possible. This means that the exam is a major contributor to pressure. According to Fariza (2005), for the category of academic factors, namely items failed to portray good academic achievement and followed by an item, which set too high expectations among the parents in the study, and led to a very depressing feeling among the adolescents. Further study on stem of pressure is caused by the task load, examination and maintenance period. Studies by Kyriacou & Butcher (1993) displayed that 78 students among 11 schools in North England show the main stem pressure among students is related to academic, examination and final dateline to submit the course work. Not only that, a study by OwenYeates (2005) on 181 students using 11 gauge of 11 Year Questionnaire About Stress by Kyriacao & Butchers (1993), shows that the main emphasis of student is on academic assignment, re-examine the lessons, course work and homework. Ida Hartina (2006) study showed that stem pressure among students is due to the ineffectiveness of maintenance
__________________________________________________________________________________

period, the academic workload and academic achievement expectations. Finally, the study by Gallagher & Millar (1996) identified that the main pressure is caused by examinations, followed by a final due date for assignments and revisions of the lessons. METHODOLOGY Design of the Study This study was design in a sliced cross (a cross-sectional survey). Cross slices (crosssectional survey) are design that collects information from a sample in a predetermined way. Data were collected at a particular point in time (Creswell, 2002; Fraenkel & Wallen, 1990; Lim, 2007; Noraini, 2010). This means that all groups that involved in the survey must be at approximately the same time point. Advantage of the design is that it able to present the current of the variable, which is the focus of the study (Lim, 2007). Sample of the study Study population involves third semester students of Unit L Preparatory Programme Bachelor in Teaching (PPISMP), who take the History subject (Human Civilization) at Ipoh Teachers Training Institute. The total sample is 59 students. The sample selection is chosen randomly. Instruments of the Research Questionnaire in this study consists of three parts, part A is regarding the information and understanding among themselves, part B focuses on the pressure and the part C scope in the student satisfaction. Part A contains the respondents gender, ethnicity and unit, while in section B contains pressure measuring instrument and section C contains student satisfaction survey tool. Pressure measuring instrument of 11 Year Questionnaire About Stress by Kyriacou and Butcher (1993) and Owen-Yeates (2005), are containing 26 items. Student satisfaction survey tool from Satistfaction with Life Scale by Diener (1996), are consists of 5 items. Table 1: Gauge Pressure Students and Student Satisfaction Measuring Instrument 1 2 Student stress level Student satisfaction level Total Item Item 27 5 32 Item no 1 - 27 1 -5

According to Table 1, student pressure measuring devices contains 27 items tool while satisfaction survey consists of 5 items. In determining the level of stress, the mean score was 2.00 at low stress levels, mean scores ranging from 2.00 to 4.00 is moderate and mean scores range from 4.00 to 6.00 is high. Furthermore, in determining the level of student satisfaction, the midpoint of the scale scores (mean) will be obtained. Score (mean) located above the midpoint will show high student satisfaction, while score below the midpoint will indicate low student satisfaction. Mean level of student satisfaction (midpoint value) is specified at 3.0. If the mean obtained is higher than the mean determined (3.0), then high level of student satisfaction is identified. If the mean is
__________________________________________________________________________________

lower (3.0) than the mean determined, low level of student satisfaction is identified is identified (Khaleque & Rahman, 1987 in Hamza Said, 1994). Reliability study Table 2: The reliability on Student Satisfaction Survey Tool No 1 2 FINDINGS Describe the level of student satisfaction and stress among the students in Ipoh TeachersTraining Institute Table 3: Distribution of Mean Stress No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Item Examination Dateline to submit assignments Study revisions Things to do after graduation Financial problems Unable to accomplish the tasks given Lecturer treats the students like little kids Unfavourable surroundings Let down parents hope Health problems Weight problems Difficult home works Too much home works Self appearence Family problems Strict lecturers Nicknames Mode of transport to the lecture Lecturer laughed at those who submitted bad assignments Bully Relationship with the lecturers Relationship with friends Too friendly lecturer Dress codes Hectic situation in the class Mobility inside the campus area Total mean Mean 3.80 3.52 3.14 2.90 3.23 2.95 2.85 2.90 2.95 2.66 2.23 2.71 3.33 2.71 2.90 2.95 2.04 2.47 2.80 2.38 2.71 2.66 2.38 2.71 2.47 2.66 2.80 Survey Tool Student stress level Student satisfaction level Alpha Cronbach reliability 0.93 0.74

__________________________________________________________________________________

Table 3 shows the mean total stress is 2.80, which is at a moderate level. Items that showed the highest mean is item No. 1, which is the examination (M = 3.80) and item no. 2, which is the deadline to submit the assignment (M = 3:52) and item no. 13 which is too much homework (M = 3:33). Table 4: Distribution of Student Satisfaction Mean no Item 1 My life is almost perfect in every aspect 2 I am having a successful life 3 I am satisfied with this life Penampilan 4 I had achieved my targeted goals in my life so far 5 If this life can be repeated again, I dont want to change anything about it. Overall mean Mean 4.19 4.19 4.38 4.19 3.66 4.12

Table 4 shows the overall mean was 4.12 , and the student satisfaction is at a high level. Items that showed the highest mean is item no. 3 which is I am satisfied with this life (M = 4.38). Student Stress Relationship with Student Satisfaction HO1 There is no significant relationship between satisfaction and student stress Table 5: Student Stress Relationship with Student Satisfaction Student Satisfaction Student stress 0.040 p 0.754

Based on Table 5, the relationship between stress students with student satisfaction indicates that the value of p, which is 0.754, is greater than the value of , which is 0.04, which means there is a significant relationship between student stress with student satisfaction. CONCLUSION The overall findings of the study showed that overall student stress is at a moderate level while the overall level of satisfaction is high. This means that the well-being of the students of the Ipoh Teachers Training Institute is in good condition. In addition, the study also showed that there is relationship between the pressure and student satisfaction. This means that students are influenced by stress student satisfaction. In general, this study has large benefits to the country's education system as parallel with the National Education Philosophy. Malaysia seeks to achieve self well-being or self qualities namely to have a sane mind and attitude, quiet soul and patience in facing strong challenges, problems and obstacles of life and seek to establish good relations with others (Yusof & Khayati, 2003).
__________________________________________________________________________________

REFERENCES Arthur, H., & Hiebert, B. (1994). Investigating gender differences on coping. Paper presented at the annual meeting and the exhibition of the American Research Association. (CD-ROM). No. ED 373848. Chassin, L., Ritter, J., Trim, R.S., & King, K.M. (2003). Adolescent substance use disorders. Dalam Mash, E.J., & Barkley, R.A. (2003). Child psychopathology. New York: Guilford Press. Compas, B.E., Orosan, P.G., & Grant, K.E. (1993). Adolescent stress and coping: Implications for psychopathology during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 16, 331-349. Connor, M.J. (2001). Pupil stress and standard assessment test (SATS). Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 8, 103-111. Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational Research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. Evans, G.W., Bullinger, M., & Hygge, S. (1998). Chronic noise exposure and physiological response: A prospective study of children living under environmental stress. Psychological Science, 9(1), 75-77. Retrieved from EBSCOHOST. (Accession No.195018) Fariza Md Sham (2005). Tekanan emosi remaja Islam. ISLAMIYYAT, 27(1), 3- 24. Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (1990). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. Gallagher, M., & Millar, R. (1996). A survey of adolescent worry in Northern Ireland. Pastoral Care in Education, 14, 26-32. Hall, K., Collins, C., Benjamin, S.S., Nind, M., & Sheehy, K. (2004). SATurated models of pupildom: Assessment and inclusion/ exclusion. British Educational Research Journal, 30 (6), 801-818. doi.10.1080/0141192042000279512 Hamzah Said (1994). Kepuasan kerja guru dan pensyarah Sains Pertanian di sekolah menengah dan Institut Pertanian di Semenanjung Malaysia. Tesis Master Sains yang tidak diterbitkan. Fakulti Pengajian Pendidikan, Universiti Pertanian, Serdang. Holmes, T.H., & Rahes, R.S. (1967). Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 11, 213-220. Ida Hartina Ahmad Tharbe (2006). Coping with stress: Are our students proactive?. Masalah Pendidikan, 29, 57-66. Kyriacou, C., & Butcher,C. (1993). Stress in year 11 school children. Pastoral Care in Education, 11, 19-21. Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W. (1970). Determining sample size for research. Educational and Psychological Measurements, 30, 607-610. Laily Piam & Nurizan Yahaya (2004). Kesejahteraan isirumah Johor Darul Takzim. Serdang: Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia Little, S., & Garber, J. (2004). Interpersonal and achievement orientations and specific stressors predict depressive and aggressive symptoms. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 63-84. Lim Chong Hin (2007). Penyelidikan pendidikan: Pendekatan kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Kuala Lumpur: Mc Graw Hill Education. Loeber, R.,& Farrington, D.P. (2000). Young children who commit crime: Epidemiology, developmental origins, risk factors, early interventions, and policy implications. Development and Psychopathology, 12,737-762. Noraini Idris (2010). Penyelidikan dalam pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw- Hill
__________________________________________________________________________________

(Malaysia) Sdn Bhd. Owen-Yeates, A. (2005). Stress in year 11 students. Pastoral Care, 42-51. Peach, L. (1991). A study concerning stess among high school students in selected rural schools. The Annual Education Conference. Cookeville, TN, 12 August, (CDROM). ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 336253. Ryff, C.D., & Keyes, C.L.M. (1995). The structure of well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719-727.doi:10.1037/00223514.69.4.719. Samsiah Jayos (2005). Tekanan di kalangan pelajar Matrikulasi di sebuah Pusat Pengajian Tinggi. (Kertas Projek Sarjana Kaunseling yang tidak diterbitkan). Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur. Schmeelk-Cone, K.H., & Zimmerman, M.A. (2003). A longitudinal analysis of stress in African American youth: Predictors and outcomes of stress trajectories. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32 (6),419-430. Retrieved from Quest Document (ID: 532800031) Suh, E., Diener, E. & Fujita, F. (1996). Events and subjective well being: Only recent events matter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1091-1102. West,C.K.., & Wood, E.S. (1970). Academic pressure on public school students. Educational Leadership, 3(4), 585-587. Wilkening, E.A., & Mc Granahan, D. (1978). Correlates of subjective well-being in Northern Wisconsin. Social Indicators Research, 5, 211-234. Yusof Ismail & Khayati Ibrahim (2003). Dasar-dasar kerajaan Malaysia-Tinjauan menyeluruh. Kuala Lumpur:A.S. NOORDEEN.

__________________________________________________________________________________