Title:

ACADEMIC STRESS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS: COMPARISON OF STUDENT

AND FACULTY PERCEPTIONS.
Authors:
Misra, Ranjita
McKean, Michelle
West, Sarah
Russo, Tony
Source:
College Student Journal. Jun2000, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p236. 10p. 3 Charts.
Abstract:
This study examined perceptions of academic stress among male and female college
students, and compared faculty and student perceptions of students' academic stress. The
sample consisted of 249 students and 67 faculty members from a midwestern University.
Mean age of the students and faculty members were 21 years and 42 years respectively.
Results indicated a considerable mismatch between faculty and students in their
perceptions of students' stressors and reactions to stressors. The faculty members
perceived the students to experience a higher level of stress and to display reactions to
stressors more frequently than the students actually perceived. This could result simply
from the faculty observing the students only during their moments of stress in the
classroom. Results also supported the hypotheses that stress varied across year in school
and by gender. Implications for improving faculty-student interactions are discussed.
[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of College Student Journal is the property of Project Innovation, Inc. and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given
about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of
the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Full Text Word Count:
3317
ISSN:
0146-3934
Accession Number:
3452556
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=3452556&site=ehostlive
Cut and Paste:
<A href="http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=aph&AN=3452556&site=ehost-live">ACADEMIC STRESS OF
COLLEGE STUDENTS: COMPARISON OF STUDENT AND FACULTY
PERCEPTIONS.</A>
Database:
Academic Search Premier

ACADEMIC STRESS OF COLLEGE

STUDENTS: COMPARISON OF STUDENT
AND FACULTY PERCEPTIONS
This study examined perceptions of academic stress among male and female college students,
and compared faculty and student perceptions of students' academic stress. The sample consisted
of 249 students and 67 faculty members from a midwestern University. Mean age of the students
and faculty members were 21 years and 42 years respectively. Results indicated a considerable
mismatch between faculty and students in their perceptions of students' stressors and reactions to
stressors. The faculty members perceived the students to experience a higher level of stress and
to display reactions to stressors more frequently than the students actually perceived. This could
result simply from the faculty observing the students only during their moments of stress in the
classroom. Results also supported the hypotheses that stress varied across year in school and by
gender. Implications for improving faculty-student interactions are discussed.
All further correspondence should be made to Ranjita Misra
Introduction
Academic stress among college students has been a topic of interest for many years. College
students experience high stress at predictable times each semester due to academic commitments,
financial pressures, and lack of time management skills. When stress is perceived negatively or
becomes excessive, it can affect both health and academic performance (Campbell & Svenson,
1992). University students often attempt to control and reduce their stress through avoidance,
religious and social support, or positive reappraisal (Mattlin, Wethington, & Kessler, 1990; Blake
& Vandiver, 1988). Leisure satisfaction and fitness activities act as stress buffers, providing a
sense of purpose and competence for college students (Ragheb & McKinney, 1993). Student
academic stress is also reduced and controlled through effective time management and study
techniques (Brown, 1991). Macan (1990) found that students who perceived themselves in
control of their time reported greater work and life satisfactions and fewer job-induced and
somatic tensions. Research examining gender differences and comparison of student and faculty
perceptions of students' academic stress, however, is limited.
A few studies have examined faculty perceptions of students' behaviors. Studies indicate that
student behavior is linked to the attitudes of faculty members (Williams & Winkworth, 1974).
Faculty members from predominantly teaching- or research-oriented universities, however, differ
in how they evaluate students' behavior (Brozo & Schmelzer, 1985). Interaction with students
significantly influences faculty behaviors (Pascarella, 1975). Stress levels of faculty members
vary due to personal and organizational behaviors (Pretorius, 1994) that may affect their
interactions with students. Although stress-causing stimuli are often similar in the lives of
professors and students (Brown, 1991; Pretorius, 1994), teachers also bring stress into the
classroom in the form of inherent personality traits (Kagan, 1987). However, stressful personality
of a teacher may be perceived as a positive rather than a negative attribute by students (Kagan,

1987). Faculty members' accurate perceptions of student academic stress are important for
effective communication with them. For instance faculty may highly prioritize prompt
attendance and good academic performance, while some students may not necessarily value such
items (Parish & Necessary, 1995).
This study examined (1) academic stress by gender and year in school (class status) of college
students and (2) compared faculty and students perceptions of students' stress. We expected that
there would be differences across year in school in academic stressors and reactions to stressors
due to disparate demands, unique stressors, and acquired coping capabilities of each class (e.g.,
freshmen leaving home and adjusting to group living, sophomores facing major field curricular
decisions, and seniors facing job searches or postgraduate training decisions). Gender differences
were also anticipated as had been indicated in previous research (Allen & Hiebert, 1991;
Davidson-Katz, 1991; Rawson, Bloomer, & Kendall, 1994) in which researchers argued that
women not only perceived more stress and anxiety in their environment, but they actually
experienced more symptoms of depression and anxiety. We expected differences between
students and faculty members, as past studies suggested that professors often misinterpret
students' stress levels.
Method
Sample Design, Sampling, and Data Collection:
The sample consisted of two components. Component 1 consisted of a cross-sectional survey of
full-time students (freshmen to senior) at Truman State University in Kirksville, Missouri. The
sampling frame chosen was the University Registrars' directory of address files. The advantage
of using this sampling frame was that it provided an up-to-date address list of students by gender
and class status. Information was collected using a questionnaire. Six hundred students were
randomly surveyed and 249 students returned the completed questionnaire, yielding a response
rate of 42%.
Component 2 consisted of a mailed survey of 200 faculty members randomly selected from the
faculty directory, and employed as full- or part-time instructors, assistant professors, associate
professors, or full-professors. Sixty-seven completed questionnaires were returned, a response
rate of 33.5%.
Instruments/Measures: The data collection instrument included the following:
Academic Stress Data from the study were obtained using two congruent forms of Gadzella's
Student-life Stress Inventory (SLSI) (1991). The SLSI was designed to assess the students
academic stress and reactions to stress. The instrument contained 51 items in a Likert response
format (1=never true to 5=always true) that assessed five categories of academic stressors
(frustrations, conflicts, pressures, changes, and self-imposed), and four categories describing
reactions to stressors (physiological, emotional, behavioral, and cognitive). The items were
summed to get a total score on all the nine sub categories (Chronbach's alpha ranged from 0.59
to 0.82). A higher score indicated greater stress and reactions to stress. A congruent form of the
SLSI was modified to assess faculty's perceptions of student academic stress. For example, if an

item from the frustration subscale read "As a student, I feel I was denied opportunities in spite of
my qualifications," the same question modified for faculty members read, "Students at your
university feel they are denied opportunities in spite of their qualifications."
Basic demographic information was collected on age, gender, ethnicity, educational level
(academic status for faculty), health risk behaviors (smoking and drinking) and degree sought.
Data Analyses: Demographic characteristics of faculty and students were compared using chisquare analysis. Total scores in addition to scores on the nine categories of the academic stress
scale were compared between students and faculty members, and between male and female
students using the t-test. Data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science
(SPSS) software.
Results
Demographics: The sample consisted of 249 students and 67 faculty members with mean age of
students 21 years (SD=2.0) and of faculty 42 years (SD=9.0). For both students and faculty,
respondents were primarily caucasians with more females than males represented for students.
Students of sophomore status and faculty with the rank of assistant professor comprised the
majority of the respondents. In regard to health behaviors, students reported engaging in more
cigarette smoking, alcoholic beverage consumption, and religious activities than did the faculty
members. Faculty reported drinking in moderation, while students defined alcohol consumption
as binge drinking on the weekend.
Table 1 compares stressors and reactions to stressors of male and female students. Students
experienced highest stress levels due to pressure, followed by self-imposed stress. Females
experienced higher stress than males due to frustration, self-imposed stress, and pressure. The
only statistically significant difference in stress between males and females occurred in the area
of self-imposed stress with females reporting significantly higher scores than males. Academic
stress due to changes, conflict, and frustration were found to only cause stress among students
occasionally.
The most common reaction to stress among the students appeared to be emotional (fear, anxiety,
worry, anger, guilt, grief, or depression) and cognitive reactions (i.e., their appraisal of stressful
situations and strategies). Other reactions that occurred less frequently were behavioral (crying,
abuse of self and others, smoking, and irritability) and physiological (sweating, trembling,
stuttering, headaches, weight loss or gain, or body aches). Although females had lower stress
levels than males in three of the five stress categories, they experienced more reactions than
males. This difference, however, was not statistically significant except in physiological
reactions.
Table 2 also compares faculty and students' perceptions of students' academic stress. Faculty
members perceived students to have higher academic stress than students' self-perceptions. The
difference was statistically significant for two stressors (frustration and pressure) and three
reactions to stressors (behavior, emotion and physiological). Both male and female faculty
members perceived students to have stress due to changes only occasionally. Perceptions of

faculty and students were similar for stress occurring occasionally due to conflicts and
frustrations but higher stress (average response in the often category) due to pressure. Both
students and faculty perceived that students get stressed due to pressure from competition,
meeting deadlines, and interpersonal relationships. Both female faculty members and female
students had higher scores on self-imposed stress, indicating that females have higher stress that
is self-imposed and female faculty also perceive female students to have higher stress levels that
are self-imposed.
A gender difference existed between male and female faculty members' perceptions of students'
academic stress (stressors and reactions to stressors). Although not statistically significant,
female faculty members perceived that students in general commonly experience more stress due
to conflicts, pressures, and self-imposed stressors more than their male peers. Female faculty
members also perceived female students to have higher behavioral (p<0.05), cognitive,
emotional, and physiological reactions to stress than their male peers. Male faculty members
perceived students' stress mostly due to changes and frustrations.
Table 3 compares stressors and reactions to stressors by year in school. No statistical difference
was observed in stressors and reactions to stressors by year in school. Freshmen and sophomores
in this study indicated they have higher mean levels of stress than juniors and seniors. Freshmen
had stress related to changes and conflicts, while sophomores were more stressed due to
pressures and self-imposed stress. Juniors and seniors indicated higher stress both self-imposed
and due to pressure. Emotional, behavioral, and physiological reactions to stress were the highest
among freshman level students.
Discussion
Results supported the initial hypotheses that differences between faculty and students would be
found in students' perceived academic stress. Results indicated a considerable mismatch among
faculty and students in their perceptions of students' stressors and reactions to stressors. Faculty
members perceived students to experience higher levels of stress and display more reactions to
stressors than the students' own self-perceptions. Both male and female faculty members
perceived that students frequently exhibited behavioral, emotional, and physiological reactions to
stressors. This difference could result simply from faculty observing students mostly during their
moments of stress in the classroom and office hours. Students may experience less stress when
they are detached from this environment, thus allowing them to experience leisure time at a more
satisfactory stress level. Past research has suggested that professors often misinterpret students'
stress levels, and the results from this study concur. This has important implications. Institutions
should develop ways to improve effective communication between students and professors,
thereby improving academic and social efficiency of students. Faculty members' understanding
of students' academic stress will help them to practice techniques and adopt attitudes essential to
assist and mentor them to cope/deal with academic stress more effectively. Furthermore, they can
also help students seek appropriate stress reduction methods to improve their academic
performance. A considerable mismatch between students' and professors' perceptions of students'
academic stress may decrease interactions and reduce effective communication.

Results also supported the hypotheses that stress varied across year in school and by gender. Our
finding that stress differed across year in school corresponds with research on coping behavior
and social support. Coping behavior and social support structures moderate the effects of stress
and anxiety on the individual (Allen & Hiebert, 1991; Rawson, Bloomer & Kendall, 1994;
Wohlgemuth & Betz, 1991). Our results indicated that within this college population, freshmen
and sophomores had higher mean levels of stress than juniors and seniors. Although support is
provided to freshmen students (through freshman orientation, special programs, advising, and
counselors), students of freshmen status in this study had high stress due to change, conflict and
frustration. This could possibly explain high behavioral, emotional, and physiological reactions
to stress among them. This has important implications for stress management. Institutions should
include problem-solving training, especially for freshmen and sophomores that emphasizes the
cognitive component to deal with academic stress. Since the freshmen and sophomores scored
low in their cognitive reactions indicates they have not yet learned to use their problem-solving
ability to deal with academic stress. Within a college social system, freshmen and sophomores
lack the strong social support networks and they have not yet developed the coping mechanisms
used by older students to deal with college stress (Allen & Heibert, 1991). Hence, they have
fewer resources for managing stress and the anxiety of demanding school work and tasks.
The gender difference found for stressors and reactions to stressors among students supported the
hypothesis and also affirmed the results of other studies. Female students reported experiencing
more stressors and reactions to stressors than did male students. This probably reflects not an
actual inequality in number of stressors by gender, but possibly indicates females rating their
experiences as more stressful. Females tend to report having been affected by negative events
more often and more markedly than males (Allen & Hiebert, 1991). Higher scores on selfimposed stress among females than males indicated that females liked to compete, be noticed,
loved, and worry for others, sometimes seeking perfect solutions that lead to higher anxiety and
stress. Possibly, female students attempt to do several activities such as achieve academic
excellence, take care of families, and work at one time. Females had higher scores on reactions
to stress on all the four categories than males. Gender differences in reactions to stress may result
from the socialization of males, which teaches them that emotional expression is an admission of
weakness and not masculine (Davidson-Katz, 1991). Male students seemed to be less stressed
and have less reaction to stressors. These findings may help students to understand their
experiences, attitudes, and behaviors. It may also help faculty members and counselors to
understand why some students display high anxiety, fear, and depression. The most common
stressors among the students were due to conflict, pressures, and self-imposed stress. Both male
and female students had higher scores on their cognitive appraisal, indicating the use of problemsolving ability to lower stress levels. Previous studies have shown that problem solving is an
important coping strategy that can reduce, minimize, or prevent stress by enabling a person to
better manage daily problematic situations and its emotional effects (D'Zurilla & Sheedy, 1991).
Future research should explore the social support structures available across college class
standings as well as the coping mechanisms used by students at each level. Furthermore, any
differences in life stress and experiences at each class level should be investigated to ascertain if
an environmental difference could account for the sophomores' higher stress levels. There is a
need for replication on a more heterogeneous population to further delineate the factors involved.

References
Allen, S., & Hiebert, B. (1991). Stress and coping in adolescents. Canadian Journal of
Counselling, 25, 19-32.
Blake, R.L., & Vandiver, T.A. (1988). The association of health with stressful life changes, social
supports, and coping. Family Practice Research Journal, 7, 205-218.
Brown, R. T. (1991). Helping students confront and deal with stress and procrastination. Journal
of College Student psychotherapy, 6(2), 87-102.
Brozo, W.G. & Schmelzer, R.V. (1985). Faculty perceptions of student behaviors: A comparison
of two universities. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 229-234.
Campbell, R.L. & Svenson, L.W. (1992). Perceived level of stress among university
undergraduate students in Edmonton, Canada. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75,552-554.
Coehlo, G. (1980). Environmental stress and adolescent coping behavior: Key ecological factors
in college student adaption. In I.G. Sarason & C.D. Spielberger (Eds), Stress and anxiety (Vol. 7,
pp. 247-264). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
Davidson-Katz, K. (1991). Gender roles and health. In C.R. Snyder & D.R. Forsyth (Eds.),
Handbook of social and clinical psychology: The health perspective, (pp179-196). New York,
Pergamon.
D'Zurilla, T.J., & Sheedy, C.F. (1991). Relation between social problem-solving ability and
subsequent level of psychological stress in college students. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 61(5), 841-846.
Gadzella, B. M. (1991). Student-Life stress inventory. Commerce, TX: Author.
Kagan, D.M. (1987). Stress in the college and university classroom: a synthesis of eight
empirical studies. College Student Journal. 21(4), 312-316.
Macan, T. H. Shahani, C., Dipboye, R. L., & Phillips, A. P. (1990). College student' time
management: Correlations with academic performance and stress. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, 760-768.
Mattlin, J.A., Wethington, E., & Kessler, R.C. (1990). Situational determinants of coping and
coping effectiveness. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 103-122.
Parish, T. S., & Necessary, J. R. (1995). Professors and students: Are they" worlds apart"?
College Student Journal, 29, 168-170.
Pascarella, E.T. (1975). Informal interaction and faculty perceptions of students. Journal of
College Student Personnel, 16, 131-136.

Pretorius, T.B. (1994). Using the maslach burnout inventory to assess educators' burnout at a
university in South Africa. Psychological Reports, 6, 75-81.
Ragheb, K.G., & McKinney, J. (1993). Campus recreation and perceived academic stress.
Journal of College Student Development, 34, 5-10.
Rawson, H.E., Bloomer, K., & Kendall, A. (1994). Stress, anxiety, depression, and physical
illness in college students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 155 (3), 321-330.
Willams, V.G., & Winkworth, J.M. (1974). The faculty looks at student behavior. Journal of
College Student Personnel, 15, 305-310.
Wohlgemuth, E., & Betz, N.E. (1991). Gender as a moderator of the relationships of stress and
social support to physical health in college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38,
Table 1 Descriptive Statistics of Stressors & Reactions to Stressors of Students and Faculty by
Gender
Legend for Chart:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G

STRESSORS
FACULTY, MALES (N=30) MEAN (SD)
STUDENTS, FEMALES (N=37) MEAN (SD)
STUDENTS, T-TEST (p-value)
STUDENTS, MALES (N=63) MEAN (SD)
STUDENTS, FEMALES (N=186) MEAN (SD)
STUDENTS, T-TEST (p-value)

2.77
(64)

2.71
(.57)

0.37
(.71)

2.61
(.72)

2.60
(.72)

0.16
(.87)

CONFLICT

3.09
(.42)

3.19
(.51)

-0.82
(.41)

3.14
(.59)

3.06
(.62)

0.86
(.38)

FRUSTRATION

2.96
(.46)

2.90
(.41)

0.55
(.58)

2.71
(.48)

2.73
(.53)

-0.13
(.89)

PRESSURE

3.85
(.54)

4.04
(.44)

-1.59
(.11)

3.62
(.65)

3.68
(.60)

-0.68
(.49)

SELF-IMPOSED

3.60
(.52)

3.78
(.49)

-1.44
(.15)

3.60
(.52)

3.77
(.55)

-2.08
(.03)

CHANGE

REACTIONS TO STRESSORS
EMOTIONAL

3.27
(.72)

3.52
(.51)

-1.64
(.10)

2.69
(.94)

2.86
(1.09)

-1.07
(.28)

COGNITIVE

2.68
(.62)

2.86
(.95)

-0.83
(.40)

2.77
(1.01)

2.92
(.97)

-1.00
(.32)

BEHAVIORAL

2.66
(.82)

2.82
(.66)

-0.85
(.39)

1.96
(.69)

2.08
(.74)

-1.18
(.23)

PHYSIOLOGICAL

2.47
(.97)

2.59
(.72)

-0.57
(.56)

1.77
(2.03)

2.03
(.77)

-2.42
(.01)

Table 2 Comparison of Stressors & Reactions to Stressors Between Faculty and Students
Legend for Chart:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G

STRESSORS
FACULTY, MEAN
FACULTY, SD
STUDENTS, MEAN
STUDENTS, SD
T-TEST
P-VALUE

CHANGES
CONFLICT
FRUSTRATION
SELF-IMPOSED
PRESSURE

2.73
3.15
2.93
3.70
3.95

.60
.48
.44
.50
.49

2.60
3.08
2.72
3.72
3.67

.72
.62
.51
.55
.62

-1.41
-0.82
-3.05
0.27
-3.51

0.16
0.41
0.002
0.76
0.001

.74
.83
.62
.84

2.05
2.89
2.82
1.97

.73
.98
1.05
.74

-6.91
0.75
-4.37
-5.39

0.001
0.45
0.001
0.001

REACTIONS TO STRESSORS
BEHAVIORAL
COGNITIVE
EMOTIONAL
PHYSIOLOGICAL

2.75
2.78
3.41
2.54

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics of Stressors & Reactions to Stressors by Year in School

Legend for Chart:
A
B
C
D
E

STRESSORS
FRESHMAN (N=55) MEAN (SD)
SOPHOMORE (N=90) MEAN (SD)
JUNIOR (N=46) MEAN (SD)
SENIORS (N=53) MEAN (SD)

CHANGE

2.75
(.88)

2.58
(.70)

2.52
(.68)

2.58
(.62)

CONFLICT

3.19
(.61)

3.06
(.59)

3.16
(.44)

2.90
(.77)

FRUSTRATION

2.73
(.52)

2.77
(.54)

2.73
(.49)

2.64
(.51)

3.58

3.62

3.69

3.83

PRESSURE

SELF-IMPOSED

(.59)

(.66)

(.60)

(.55)

3.70
(.56)

3.68
(.53)

3.78
(.51)

3.78
(.63)

REACTIONS TO STRESSORS
EMOTIONAL

3.05
(1.07)

2.76
(1.02)

2.72
(.99)

2.76
(1.19)

COGNITIVE

2.92
(1.05)

2.82
(.94)

3.03
(.96)

2.76
(1.01)

BEHAVIORAL

2.21
(.77)

2.08
(.67)

1.90
(.73)

1.97
(.78)

PHYSIOLOGICAL

2.14
(.72)

1.91
(.72)

1.86
(.70)

1.93
(.84)

~~~~~~~~
By Ranjita Misra, Ph.D., CHES, Assistant Professor, Health Science; Michelle McKean, Junior,
Undergraduate Student, Health Science (Pre-Nutrition Pattern); Sarah West, Senior,
Undergraduate Student, Health Science (Worksite Pattern) and Tony Russo, Senior,
Undergraduate Student, Health Science (Public Health Pattern), Truman State University
Adapted by Ph.D.
Copyright of College Student Journal is the property of Project Innovation, Inc. and its content
may not be copied