Exploring Job Satisfaction, Stress and Coping Strategies Employed by Engineering Faculty

The current study aims to Explore Job Satisfaction, Stress and Coping Strategies employed by Engineering Faculty. The sample consisted of 187 faculties from 7 engineering colleges affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU). Job satisfaction was assessed using Minnesota Satisfaction questionnaire by David et. al (1967). Stress is assessed by a stress checklist developed by the researcher under guidance and expertise of her guide. The coping strategies employed by faculty in engineering colleges were assessed using the COPE inventory developed by Carver et. al (1989). Descriptive statistics such as Mean and SD was used to understand the job satisfaction and coping dimensions for which faculty in engineering colleges have the highest and lowest scores. Percentage was used to understand the factors that are most stressful and least stressful for engineering faculty. Inferential statistics such as independent t-test and one-way ANOVA was used to understand whether job satisfaction, stress and coping strategies employed by engineering faculty differ with regard to the selected demographic variables. Results indicate that faculty in engineering colleges are most satisfied with the activity, social service and co-workers dimensions of job satisfaction, whereas they are least satisfied with the compensation, advancement and company policies and practices dimensions. There is no significant difference in job satisfaction related to gender and age of the faculty. However there is a significant difference in how the education qualification, years of experience, marital status and designation of the faculty is related to their job satisfaction. Engineering faculty experience the highest amount of stress on additional factors and the lowest amount of stress on psychological factors. There is no significant difference in stress experienced by engineering faculty with regard to their marital status and educational qualification. However there is a significant difference between how psychological, organisational, Inter-personal and additional factors of stress impact faculty with regard to their gender, age, years of experience and designation. The coping strategies most frequently adopted by engineering faculty are positive reinterpretation and growth, planning and active coping. The coping strategies that are not frequently adopted by engineering faculty are substance use, behavioural disengagement and denial. There is no significant difference in the coping strategies used by engineering faculty with regard to their marital status. However the coping strategies employed by faculty in engineering differ with regard to their gender, age, years of experience, educational qualification and designation. The current study gives us an insight into the challenges faced by faculty in engineering colleges and can further be used as a frame work to develop strategies to improve the quality of engineering education.