Stress Levels and Perceived Self-Efficacy of Teachers Handling Inclusive Education
Open accessAbstract
This study pursued to assess the stress levels and perceived self-efficacy of teachers handling inclusive education. It utilized a descriptive comparative method and it was limited to 40 teachers-respondents. Standardized and researcher-made instruments and appropriate statistical tools were utilized to determine their level of stress and perceived self-efficacy. The respondents were classified according to the following profiles: Age, Sex, Civil Status, Educational Attainment, Job Rank, Work Shift, Number of Seminars and Trainings Attended, Length of Service and Number of Learners with Special Educational Needs, from which the researcher measured the related levels of stress and perceived self-efficacy. Of the 40 respondents, 16 or 40% are from the 26-30 years old age bracket, 11 or 27% are between 36 to 40 years old, 8 or 20% are 20-25 years old, 4 or 10% are 31-35 years old, and 1 or 3% is between 41-45 years old. Majority of the participants are female, with a number of 25 or 62.5% compared to the male respondents, which accounts for the remaining 15 or 37.5%. 22 or 55% of the participants are married, while 18 or 45% are single. Meanwhile, 25 respondents, or 62.5% have earned MA/MS units, 12 or 30% have BA/BS degrees, 2 or 5% have earned their MA degrees and 1 or 2.5% have PhD/EdD units. Rank-wise, 32 respondents or 80% are Teacher 1, 5 or 12.5% are Teacher 2 and 3 or 7.5% are Teacher 3. 30 or 75% belong to the AM shift, while 10 or 25% are from the PM shift. Majority of the respondents have not attended any training; 23 or 57.5% did not have any supplemental training to date, while the remaining 17 or 42.5% have attended at least 1-3 trainings. In terms of length of service, 18 or 45% are relatively new, 14 or 35% have served for 6-10 years, 6 or 15% have been working for 11-15 years and 2 or 5% are with the school for 16-20 years. Lastly, 38 or 95% have 1-5 learners with special educational needs and 2 or 5% have 6-10 learners with similar requirements. From these data, the absolute value of the Pearson r value was computed and determined to be equivalent to 0.493, greater than or equal to 0.4 and less than or equal to 0.6; This indicated that stress level and perceived self-efficacy has moderately strong negative correlation. Although the respondents are likely to experience stress, the study revealed that the male participants are more likely to be stressed as compared to their female counterparts. Also, those with lower educational attainment and higher job rank are just as likely to be stressed. The study also revealed that the older participants appear to have lower self-efficacy. The researcher proposes an alternative program be adapted in the school to manage stress and help promote self-efficacy. Also, additional studies may be conducted to refine findings gathered.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Teachers with stronger self-efficacy beliefs tend to experience lower levels of emotional exhaustion and stress.
“They have found that teachers with stronger self-efficacy beliefs tend to experience lower levels of emotional exhaustion and stress.”
From Teacher Self-Efficacy and Stress in Special Education: Evidence from Rural Schools in CAR, Philippines (2025) · cites this paper as Fernandez-Bernabe & Fabella, 2020
Many studies have concluded that higher self-efficacy is associated with a lower level of stress.
“many studies have concluded that higher self-efficacy is associated with a lower level of stress (Lam et al., 2022c; Weißenfels, 2021b; Fernandez-Bernabe & Fabella, 2020; Love et al., 2019; Yu et al., 2015; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017).”
From Teacher Self-Efficacy and Stress in Special Education: Evidence from Rural Schools in CAR, Philippines (2025) · cites this paper as Fernandez-Bernabe & Fabella, 2020
High self-efficacy serves as a psychological protective factor that mitigates stress responses in demanding work environments.
“They also established that high self-efficacy serves as a psychological protective factor that mitigates stress responses in demanding work environments.”
From Teacher Self-Efficacy and Stress in Special Education: Evidence from Rural Schools in CAR, Philippines (2025) · cites this paper as Fernandez-Bernabe & Fabella, 2020
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abaya, D. (2025) · Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives · doi:10.69569/jip.2025.467 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fernandez-Bernabe, R., & Fabella, F. E.
- Affiliations
- Mary the Queen College of Quezon City (PH)
- Corresponding author
- Fernandez-Bernabe, Racquel
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3136428866
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Burnout
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
- Keywords
- teacher stress, self-efficacy, inclusive education, special educational needs, teacher professional development, teacher workload, teacher attrition, teacher job satisfaction, teacher burnout, teacher support systems, teacher self-efficacy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review