Journal of dental education · 2022
Impact of Covid-19 on dental hygiene educators: A national survey.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Arnett Michelle C, Ramaswamy Vidya, Evans Michael D, Rulli Danielle
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on dental hygiene (DH) educators' perception of personal and professional burnout and efficacy in the online/hybrid learning environment.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study of DH faculty members from 327 United States entry level DH programs was invited to participate in this study. A 36 item survey was disseminated in Qualtricsxm March 2021. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory was used to measure personal, work-related, and burnout related to working with students. The Michigan Nurse Educators Sense of Efficacy for Online Teaching instrument was used to measure efficacy in online/hybrid learning.
RESULTS: The survey had an institutional response rate of 46%. Personal burnout scores had a significantly higher mean as compared to work-related and burnout working with students' scores. A majority (66%) of respondents reported often feeling tired. Only personal burnout scores had a significant negative correlation with teaching efficacy scores. Administrators/program directors and full-time faculty had significantly higher mean personal and work-related burnout scores as compared to part-time/adjunct clinical faculty. There were no significant differences in teaching efficacy scores by faculty position and institutional setting.
CONCLUSION: COVID-19 had significant impact on full-time DH educators' personal and professional burnout levels. Full-time administrators/program directors/DH educators reported higher levels of personal burnout. It seems that personal burnout has a negative relationship with teaching efficacy. Faculty position rather than institution impacted personal burnout. Despite personal and professional burnout, DH faculty reported low-levels of burnout related to working with students.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study of DH faculty members from 327 United States entry level DH programs was invited to participate in this study. A 36 item survey was disseminated in Qualtricsxm March 2021. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory was used to measure personal, work-related, and burnout related to working with students. The Michigan Nurse Educators Sense of Efficacy for Online Teaching instrument was used to measure efficacy in online/hybrid learning.
RESULTS: The survey had an institutional response rate of 46%. Personal burnout scores had a significantly higher mean as compared to work-related and burnout working with students' scores. A majority (66%) of respondents reported often feeling tired. Only personal burnout scores had a significant negative correlation with teaching efficacy scores. Administrators/program directors and full-time faculty had significantly higher mean personal and work-related burnout scores as compared to part-time/adjunct clinical faculty. There were no significant differences in teaching efficacy scores by faculty position and institutional setting.
CONCLUSION: COVID-19 had significant impact on full-time DH educators' personal and professional burnout levels. Full-time administrators/program directors/DH educators reported higher levels of personal burnout. It seems that personal burnout has a negative relationship with teaching efficacy. Faculty position rather than institution impacted personal burnout. Despite personal and professional burnout, DH faculty reported low-levels of burnout related to working with students.