Level of perceived stress among lectures in Nigerian universities.

The purpose of the study was to provide empirical evidence on the level of stress among lecturers in Nigerian universities. On the whole eight universities were used for the study. A sample of 228 (123 male and 105 female) lecturers was selected according to the variables of age, sex, marital status, experience, domicile, areas of specialization, and administrative responsibilities. The Stress Research Questionnaire developed by the researchers was used to collect data on the level of stress in relation to the variables. The finding revealed that the level of stress among academics is significantly high. Recommendations were made for policy options to reduce stress in Nigerian universities.

**********

Stress has become a popular concept for explaining a wide range of behaviours that appear to defy explanation. Indeed it has become fashionable in the Nigerian society to attribute erratic or unexplainable behaviour of people to the fact that they are under stress.

Stress is a process in which environmental events or forces threaten the well being of an individual in the society. Stress is a disruption of the emotional stability of the individual that induces a state of disorganization in personality and behaviour (Nweze, 1984). It is a biological phenomenon that is experienced by all persons regardless of their socio-economic status, occupation or age (Wiley, 2000). Egor (2000) viewed stress as the way the individual responds to conditions that scare, threaten, anger, bewilder or excite them. McGrath (1976) defines stress generally as a dynamic condition in which an individual is confronted with an opportunity, constraints, or demand on being, having and doing what he or she desires.

Evidently, in Nigeria there are life threatening, harmful and challenging situations, which are stressful to peoples' existence and well-being. Some of these include economic instability, driving on poorly maintained roads, religious intolerance and insecurity. The professional and personal concerns that seem to produce stress among university teachers in Nigeria include poor salaries, the status of the profession and the feeling of inadequacy as a lecturer.

Contemporary Nigerian universities have not been immuned from emerging forces of stress in the country. Despite the nation's declaration of the importance of university education in national development and the role it plays in satisfying manpower needs, there is growing evidence that there are really no universities private, states or federal that will genuinely claim to enjoy the basic facilities for teaching, learning and research. Today virtually all necessary facilities and resources, except students, are in acute short supply (Nwadiani and Ofoegbu, 2001). These could expose lecturers to such levels of stress that could force them to deviate from normal functioning.

Stress inducing factors in universities include lack of instructional resources, poor interpersonal relationship among staff (academic and non-academic) and between students and the administration, waves of student campus militancy and unmanageable student population. For example, during the 1995/1996, 2000/2001 and 2002/2003 academic sessions the student population of the University of Benin was 16281, 20364, and 24,914 respectively (University of Benin, 2003). An important related factor is government intervention in university governance. Efforts by the academicians to make the universities more responsive to the industrial and economic needs of the country have been viewed as a major attack on the political elites and on intellectuals who "play politics" with the educational policies of the country; policies which according to Nwagwu (2002) should be guarded by academic considerations. Consequently some lecturers in contemporary Nigeria are constantly faced with a complex array of stress inducing factors while meeting the daily learning and behavioural needs of students.

The United Kingdom National Health Service (2001) asserts that stress is not a weakness, but if unnoticed it can lead progressively to a decrease in performance, poor health and long term absence from work. Simply put stress is essentially the rate of wear and tear of the body occasioned by certain stimuli. It is impossible to live without experiencing some degree of stress at some point in ones life time (Wiley, 2000). Job stress is a condition wherein job-related factors interact with the worker to change his/her psychological or physiological condition such that he/she is forced to deviate from normal functioning (Beehr and Newman, (1978). According to Overland (2000) the term stress is a problematic one, not least because of its common use but because it is hard to tie it down to a strict definition due to the subjective nature of the word. It might also be confusing because it is used quite loosely in conversation.

Teacher stress is defined as experience by a teacher of unpleasant emotions, such as tension, frustration, anger and depression resulting from aspects of his work as a teacher (Kyriacou, 1987). Malik, Mueler and Meinhe (1998) identified teachers as an occupational group that functioned under conditions of high stress. Smith and Bourke (2000) UK national Union of Teachers (2000) and the UK Health and Safety Executive (2000) reported that two out of every five teachers were highly stressed as against one in every five in other occupations such as nursing, management, road haulage and security. Stress and its effects on teachers in the university had been studied in developed countries under such variables as workload (Johnstone, 1993), working conditions, poor motivation, external forces and low status (Boyd and Wylie, 1994; Kyriacou in Cole and Walker 1998 and Lam and Punch, 2001).The recent study on stress in Nigerian universities by Nwadiani and Ofoegbu (2001) investigated the level of stress among fresh students in Nigerian universities and found out that their level of stress was very high.

There are no known and reported studies on stress among Nigerian university lecturers. However a considerable number of studies have been conducted on stress generally particularly on the causes, symptoms and the effects of stress among workers (Ivancevich et al, 1975; McGrath, 1978; Murphy et al, 1988; Blix et al 1994; Lewin et al 1995; Murphy et al, 1996; Selye, 1999 and Wiley 2000), academic stress of college students (Misra, et al 2000) and sources of stress among college students (Ross, et al 1999). These studies were carried out in developed countries given their early concern (quite early) for industries and the workers. Jarvis (2002) asserted that teachers are highly stressed and that stress imparts greatly on teacher retention. The National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT, 2000) observed that dominate representations of teachers has become that of a highly stressful occupation

Statement of Problem

The focus of (teachers) teaching is to assist students to acquire knowledge and skill. Hence many lecturers embark on part-time education programme to assist adults and youths attain their educational objectives. The desire to help extend education and skills shows lecturers commitment to educational objectives. At the same time, part-time teaching provides the teachers with some extra cash. It is however, observed that lecturers in Nigerian universities are expected to perform at a high level in the areas of curriculum without the basic facilities for teaching, learning and research. Though the expectation is commendable it is not always possible for lecturers to competently manage the challenging diverse needs of students with the resource disabilities recorded in Nigerian universities without stress. It has been commonly assumed in recent times that lecturers in Nigerian universities are stressed. There is however no empirical evidence to show the actual level of perceived stress among lecturers in Nigerian Universities. The question therefore is 'what is the perceived level of stress among lecturers in Nigerian universities?'

The purpose of this study is to contribute to knowledge and to provide hard evidence on the level of perceived stress among Nigerian lecturers. To guide the thrust of the study the following hypotheses were formulated and tested at .05 level of significance.

Ho1: The perceived level of stress among university lecturers will not be significant.

Ho2: The perceived level of stress among male and female, married and single lecturers, those living within and outside the campus and those working in federal and state universities will not be significantly different.

Ho3: There will be no significant difference in perceived level of stress among experienced and not experienced lecturers, according to administrative responsibilities, specialization and age.

Ho4: The factors that may influence the perceived level of stress among lecturers will not be significantly different.

The study would have implications for lecturer's work experiences and the effects on student academic performance. The results of the study would enable the university administration enhance the quality of work life of lecturers in Nigerian universities.

Methodology

Eight universities on the whole were used for the study. Five out of the thirteen federal and three out of the eleven state universities were randomly selected for intensive study from the list of Nigerian universities sited in the southern part of Nigeria. The private universities and the younger generation federal universities were excluded from the study. 123 male and 105 female lecturers were selected according to the variables (age, sex, marital status, experience, domicile, areas of specialization, and administrative responsibilities) in the academic staff profile of 2003/2004. The 228 (number) of subjects (177 federal and 51 state university teachers) were selected from the eight universities based on a proportion of the size of the lecturers in the various universities sampled.

The Stress Research Instrument titled 'Stress Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ)' developed by the two researchers was adopted. The questionnaire was pilot tested using 60 lecturers from one of Nigeria's private Universities, which yielded a reliability coefficient of .87.

The instrument had three sections (a, b and c). In section "a" subjects were identified by such variables as areas of specialization, experience, gender and marital status and positions currently occupied.

In section "b" the academic stress situations were created to express the level of perceived stress experienced by university teachers. The scale consisted of 45 items that ranged from low to very high stress levels (1, indicated very low stress level, 2 for low, 3 for average stress level, 4 for medium stress level and 5 for high stress level. The participants were requested to rate the extent to which they were stressed by identifying (ticking) the corresponding numbers. In section "c" the respondents were asked to 'strongly Agree', 'Agree', 'Disagree', and 'Strongly Disagree with each statement on the factors that may influence the level of stress among lecturers.

In addition to the two researchers, five research assistants who are also lecturers (one from each university) were hired and trained for the job of data collection from the respondents. Two hundred and thirty Questionnaires were administered to the subjects. The exercise lasted for three weeks. At the end of the exercise 228 questionnaires were returned giving a rate of 99%. All the SAQ were found useable for data analysis.

Results:

The results of the study are presented in tables one to five.

[Ho.sub.1]: The perceived level of stress among University lecturers will not be significant.

The information in table I reveals the calculated t-value of 2.620, which exceeded the table value at .05 level of significance. It also shows that the calculated mean of 75.8 is significantly higher than the theoretical mean of 72.

Therefore the null hypothesis which states that the perceived level of stress among university lecturers will not be significant is not accepted. The situation here is one of an occupational group putting in an average days work throughout the year under stressful conditions.

Ho2: The perceived level of stress among male and female, married and single, those living within and outside the campus and those working in federal and state universities will not be significantly different.

The calculated Z-tests values and their means in table 2 reveal that the stress level of lecturers in Nigerian Universities will not differ significantly based on the variables of ownership (Z=.079, Mean=75.9), gender (Z=.236, Mean=75.9), and Domicile (Z=1.381, Mean=75.0) and marital status (Z=.265, Mean=76.5). The Hypotheses are therefore accepted at P<.05 level of significance. Lecturers in Nigerian Universities are stressed significantly whether they work in a federal or state university, married or single, living off-campus or within campus, and whether they are male and female lecturers.

Ho3: There will be no significant difference in perceived level of stress among experienced and not experienced lecturers, according to administrative responsibilities, specialization and age.

The result of the analysis in Table 3 shows the calculated F-value of the variables experience (F = 4.63) and age (F = 4.52) at P < .05 levels of significance. The calculated F-Values are statistically significant. The finding indicates that the level of stress among lecturers differs significantly based on experience and age of the lecturer. The table also shows a calculated F-value for Area of Specialization (.851) and Administrative Responsibilities (.493). At P < .05 level of significance the calculated F-values were not statistically significant. The meaning is that University teachers are equally stressed irrespective of their different areas of specialization and varying administrative responsibilities.

Ho4: The factors that may influence the perceived level of stress among lecturers will not be significantly different.

The result in Table 4 shows the significant factors influencing academic stress among lecturers in Nigerian universities. The factors that has the highest influence on academic stress are 'strike and school interruption' (F = 87.23). This was closely followed by 'delay and irregular payment of salary' and 'lack of instructional facilities' (F = 66.0) respectively, 'preparation of examination results' (F = 62.8), 'invigilation of examination' (F = 51.84), 'campus militancy' and 'high cost of living' (F = 46.6) respectively, the 'state of lecturers office accommodation' (F=43.9), 'lack of facilities for research' (F = 40.4) 'workload' (F = 34.7) 'lack of annual leave / holiday' (F = 26.38) and 'under funding of education' (F = 16.1) among others.

However the factors of 'students' behaviour' (F = 2.1), 'multi ethnic relationship' (F = .41), 'setting of examination questions' (F = .29) "relationship with students' (F = .06) do not significantly influence stress among university lecturers in Nigeria. Discussion

The central mandate of the study is to determine the level of stress among lecturers in Nigerian universities in relation to variables of gender, marital status, type of university, residential locations, experience, academic fields and specialization, administrative responsibilities and age.

The finding showed that the level of stress among lecturers in Nigerian Universities is significantly high with a mean of 75.8 as against the theoretical mean of 72. This situation of stress among Nigerian academics supports the findings of the National Educational Association (NEA) surveys (1951, 1967) Gray and Freedom (1988), Malik, Mueler and Meinhe (1998), Blix (1999) and Wiley (2000) and Jarvis (2002) which asserted that teachers experience a significant amount of stress. From the study, it is found that the level of stress was not significantly different among married and single lecturers (Z=.270) and male and female lecturers (Z= .236). Likewise, the level of stress did not vary significantly among lecturers who work in federal and state universities (Z = .079) and those that live within and those who live off-campus (Z = 1.301). The finding indicates that Nigerian lecturers are highly stressed, irrespective of their sex and marital status, place of domicile and whether they work in a federal or state university.

This study is novel in the sense that at least in Nigeria it presents the base line empirical evidence of 75.8% as the mean stress level among Nigerian academics. This is indeed a confirmation of the observation and positive assertion that Nigerian university academics are highly stressed. One thing that is incontestable is the fact that academics in Nigerian universities work perhaps under conditions that are worse than those else where in the world. They remained the least paid even in Africa.

Comparing the work environment of Nigerian university academics with that elsewhere, lecturers in Nigeria seem to be using bare hands to cut down matured "iroko" trees in the forest. All working resources in the universities are in acute short supply except students. For the science based academics, they are teaching mainly theoretical/'traditional science'. Students' no longer carryout laboratory experiments because of the large number of learners and emptiness of the laboratories. What they do now is "alternative to practical". Such induce serious stress.

In terms of take home pay, Nigerian academics are grazing in hell. From 1992 to 2003 except for 1997, there was no year that their salaries were not seized for at least four months. The April and May salaries in 2003 are yet to be paid to any Nigerian academic. People are frustrated as they live on borrowed money from illiterate and shylock money lenders. In short Nigerian university academics are sentenced to a perpetual life of decent poverty. All these sum up to induce and promote significant stress among university academic irrespective of sex, marital status, type of university and experience of the academics. It is therefore not surprising that Nigerian lecturers are stressed.

The level of stress was however statistically different at p< .05 among experienced and inexperienced lecturers (F = 4.634) and among young and older lecturers (F=4.523). The reasons are not farfetched. The younger and newly employed lecturers enter the system beaming with ideas and only too eager to get into a classroom and start teaching. Although slightly nervous they walk into the university environments with a bounce in their steps. They enter with very high hopes of enjoying a bright and comfortable life, buying a car. building a house and taking care of their families. Only too soon, they are confronted with unmanageable classroom student population, which makes reading of assignments, setting and marking of examination questions odious and stressful tasks. They are faced with inadequate and inefficient instructional facilities, unsteady school calendar, campus militancy, violence and cultism, high cost of living, unmanageable invigilation of examination and tedious preparation of examination results among others (Table 4). They are soon saddled with workload that virtually overlooks relaxation and holidays. Meanwhile, the more experienced and older colleagues have adapted to the system. They are more relaxed. They have come to accept a situation that they cannot change and according to Cole and Walker (1991) have accomplished the trick to learn to love it and sanctify it and sometimes claiming they would not do without it.

The extent to which lecturers, in different areas of specialization and administrative responsibilities experience stress was not statistically different. The finding is in consonance with Wiley (2000) who stated that stress was a biological phenomenon experienced by persons regardless of type of occupation.

The result of the analysis established that several factors contribute to the high level of stress among university teachers in Nigeria (Table 4). There is strong influence of the level of university teachers stress by lecturers' strike actions and unstable school calendar (F = 87.2), lack of instructional facilities and irregular payment of salary (F = 66.0), campus militancy, violence and cultism (f = 46.6) among others. The finding is not contrary to expectations. Stress becomes apparent where one is faced with poor working conditions, which is compounded by frequent shortage of life basic needs such as water, electricity and roads in very poor state of disrepair akin to death traps even at this level of development of Nigeria.

Conclusion

The study identifies lecturers in Nigerian universities as one occupational group that functions under conditions of high stress. The stress is induced by several factors (see Table 4). It can therefore be concluded that once the identified factors remained constant the level of stress among male and female lecturers would remain a permanent feature in Nigerian universities.

Recommendation

There is need to acknowledge the existence of stress in Nigerian universities irrespective of ownership. As important as the university systems are in the development of high level manpower for national development they need to adopt practices that may help alleviate stress for their employees. The universities should attempt to provide recreational facilities and opportunities and ensure that lecturers go on annual leave as at when due. It is strongly recommended that the university authority should improve the climate of social support and ensure stress free environment. The high level of stress for academics has particular import for effective programme of staff development, more recognition of teachers' efforts, reducing classroom size and making a clearer description of job tasks and expectation.

References

Beehr, T. & Newman, J. E. (1998). Job Stress, Employee Health and Organizational Effectiveness: A Factor Analysis, Model and Language Review. Personnel Psychology, 31, 665-99.

Blix, A.G. (1904). Occupational Stress Among University Teachers. Educational Research, 36 (2), 157-69.

Boyd, S & Wylie, C. (1994). Workload and Stress in New Zealand Universities. Wellington New Zealand Council for Educational Research.

Cole, M. & Walker, S. (1989). Teaching and Stress. Milton Keynes Open University Press.

Ivancevich, J.M & Donnelly, J.F. (1975). Relation of Organization Structure to Job Satisfaction, Anxiety, Stress and Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 272-80.

Jarvis, M. (2002). Teacher Stress: a Critical Review of Recent Findings and Suggestions for Future Research Direction. Stress News, 14(1).

Johnstone, M. (1993). Time and Tasks: Teacher Workload and Stress. Scottish Council for Research in Education (SCRE) Spotlights, 44, 1-5.

Kyriacou, C. (1987). Teacher Stress and Burnout: A International Review. Educational Research, 29(2).

Kyriacou, C. & Sutcliffe, J. (1977). Teacher Stress: A Review. Educational Review, 29(4), 299-306.

Lam, J. Y.L. & Punch, K.F. (2001). External Environment and School Organizational Learning: Conceptualizing the Empirically Neglected. International Studies in Educational Administration, 29(3), 28-38.

Malik, J.L., Mudler, R.O. & Meinhe D.L. (1998). The Effects of Teaching Experience and Grade Level Taught on Teacher Stress: A Listrel Analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7, 57.

McGrath, J.E. (1976). Stress and Behaviour in Organizations in M.D. Dunnett (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1341-1396. Chicago. Rand-McNally.

Misra, R., Mckean, M., West, S. & Russo, T. (2000). Academic Stress of College Students: Comparism of Student and Faculty Perceptions. College Student Journal NEED Volume information.

National Education Association (1951). Teaching Load in 1950. NEA Research Bulletin, 1, 3-50.

National Education Association (1967) Teacher Problems. NEA Research Bulletin, 45, 116-117.

National Association of Head Teachers (2000). www.Teacher Stress.co.uk

Nwadiani, M. & Ofoegbu, F.I. (2001). Perceived Level of Stress Among First-times in Nigerian Universities. College Student Journal, 35(1), 1-9.

Nwagwu, N.A. (2002). The Politics of Education Policies in Nigeria. First distinguished faculty lecture series, Faculty of Education, University of Benin.

Overland, D. (2000). Stress the Point: The Effects of Teacher Stress. Students Writings.

Ross, S. E., Niebling, B. C., & Heckert, T. M. (1999). College Student Journal.

Selye, H. (1976). The Stress of Life New York. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Incorporated, (revised edition).

Smith, B & Bourke, S (2000). Teacher Stress: Examining a Model Based on Context, Workload and Satisfaction. Teacher and Teacher Education, 8(1).

UK Health and Safety Executive (2000). Tackling Work-Related Stress: A guide for Employees. UK Publications.

UK National Union of Teachers (2000). Stress 2000*. United Kingdom. NUT Publications.

Academic Planning Department. (2002, 2003 and 2004). Statistics of Students Total Enrolment. University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria.

Wiley, C. (2000). A Synthesis of Research on the Causes, Effects and Reduction Strategies of Teacher Stress. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27, 1-9.

Dr. Felicia Ofoegbu and Revd Professor Mon Nwadiani. Department of Educational Administration and Foundations. Faculty of Education. University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Felicia Ofoegbu at [e-mail].

Table 1 Calculated Mean of Perceived Level of
Stress Among Lecturers, in Nigerian Universities

      Calculated                       Theoretical
N      [bar.x]        SD        Df       [bar.x]

228      75.8       12.78       75         72

          Z         Table     Remark
N     Calculated      Z

228     2.620      [+ or -]    Sig.
                     1.96

P < .05 Source: Investigators fieldwork

Table 2
Z-test Summary of Perceived Level of Stress Among
Lecturers in Nigerian Universities

  Variable    N    Mean      Std      Df    F       Z     Remarks
                          Deviation

Ownership
  Federal    177   75.7     12.8      74   .047   .079      NS
  State      51    76.0     13.0
  Total      228   75.9

Gender
  Male       123   76.2     12.0      74   .997   .236      NS
  Female     105   75.5     13.4
  Total      228   75.8

Domicile
  Off        147   77.1     13.5-
  Campus                              74   .405   1.381     NS

  Within     81    73.0     11.1
  Campus

  Total      228   75.0

Marital
Status
  Married    189   75.9     12.7      74   .383   .265      NS
  Single     39    77.1     13.1
  Total      228   76.5

P <.05 Source: Investigators fieldwork

Table 3
ANOVA Summary of Perceived Level of Stress Among
Lecturers in Nigeria Universities

   Variables              N           Mean         Std
                                                Deviation

Experience
   0-5 Years              27          83.6        13.9
   6-10 Years             75          76.9        13.6
   11-15 Years            81          77.9         9.5
   Above 16 Years         45          66.4        11.6
   Total                 228          75.9        12.8

Area of
Specialization
   Science                57          74.8        14.2
   Social Science         39          80.5         8.3
   Humanities             36          77.0        10.9
   Education              96          74.0        13.9
   Total                 228          75.8        12.7

Administrative
Responsibilities
   Exam Officer           72          77.3        12.2
   Course Advisor         33          81.5        10.7
   *HOD/Coordinator       42          77.4        12.6
   Dean/Director          27          78.0        10.4
   Others                 54          73.7        12.4
   Total                 228          77.2        11.9

Age of
Lecturers
   25-30 Years            18         71.17        17.4
   31-45 Years            81         79.93        11.47
   46-55 Years            78         77.88        11.34
   Above 56 Years         48         66.94        11.78
   Total                 228         75.75        12.84

   Variables          [Df.sub.1]   [Df.sub.2]       F       Remark

Experience
   0-5 Years              3            72         4.63        S
   6-10 Years
   11-15 Years
   Above 16 Years
   Total

Area of
Specialization
   Science                3            72          .85        NS
   Social Science
   Humanities
   Education
   Total

Administrative
Responsibilities
   Exam Officer           4            71          .49        NS
   Course Advisor
   *HOD/Coordinator
   Dean/Director
   Others
   Total

Age of
Lecturers
   25-30 Years            3            72         4.52        S
   31-45 Years
   46-55 Years
   Above 56 Years
   Total

Table 4
Mean Scores, Standard Deviation and F-Value of
Causes of Stress Among University Teachers

Stress Factors                       Mean   SD     F-value      Remark

Strikes/school interruption          3.98   1.41      87.2 *     Sig.
Lack of instructional facilities     3.88    .83      66.0 *     Sig.
Delay/irregular payment of salary    3.88    .83      66.0 *     Sig.
Preparation of examination results   3.71    .92      62.8 *     Sig.
Invigilation of examination          3.62    .99      51.8 *     Sig.
Campus militancy/violence/cultism    3.48    .87      46.6 *     Sig.
High cost of living                  3.48    .87      46.6 *     Sig.
State of lecturers office
  accommodation/facilities           3.52   1.00      43.9 *     Sig.
Lack of facilities for research      3.00    .30      40.4 *     Sig.
Workload                             3.21    .95      34.7 *     Sig.
Lack of holiday/annual
  leave/vacation                     3.18   1.09      26.4 *     Sig.
Time pressures/work demands          2.92   1.04      23.9 *     Sig.
Students' continuous assessment      3.25    .98      19.8 *     Sig.
Grading of papers                    3.02   1.85      17.8 *     Sig.
Relationship with non-academics      3.03   1.08      17.8 *     Sig.
Leadership behaviour of
  university chief executives.       3.03   1.08      17.8 *     Sig.
Government interference
  in academic affairs                2.91    .93      16.3 *     Sig.
Under funding of education           2.91    .83      16.1 *     Sig.
Student project/
  thesis supervision                 2.84   1.21      11.2 *     Sig.
Student population/density           2.64    .95       9.4 *     Sig.
Poor research/
  conference incentives              2.92    .85       7.3 *     Sig.
Lectures preparation                 2.21   1.07       5.0 *     Sig.
Students' classroom behaviour        1.40    .98       2.1     Not Sig.
Advancement/promotion criteria.      2.15   1.01       1.6     Not Sig.
Administrative behaviour
  of departmental heads              2.09   1.01       1.6     Not Sig.
Delivery of lecture                  2.01   1.01      1.06     Not Sig.
Delay in release of promotion        2.06   1.18        .6     Not Sig.
Multi ethnic relationship             .65    .95        .4     Not Sig.
Setting of examination questions     1.38    .94        .3     Not Sig.
Participation in
  institutional administration       1.89   1.13        .1     Not Sig.
Relationship with students           2.89   1.13        .1     Not Sig.

* Significant at P < .05

Source: Investigators fieldwork.