Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(11): 2303-2313, 2019 http://www.hrpub.

org
DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2019.071108

Emotional Intelligence and Occupational

Stress among Filipino Teachers
Alberto D. Yazon, Karen Ang-Manaig*

College of Teacher Education, Laguna State Polytechnic University, Philippines

Received August 20, 2019; Revised October 7, 2019; Accepted October 16, 2019

Copyright©2019 by authors, all rights reserved. Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License

Abstract This study describes the emotional the face of frustrations; to control impulse and delay
intelligence and occupational stress among Filipino gratification, to regulate one’s moods and keep distress
teachers through descriptive – correlational analysis. from swamping the ability to think; to empathize and
Inferential statistics are used to establish a possible hope”.
relationship between emotional intelligence and Further, Schmutz (2017) mentioned that “Emotional
occupational stress. The respondents of the study were 797 Intelligence is a fairly new construct of intelligence,
Filipino teachers who voluntarily participated in an online receiving relevance and acknowledgment with the work of
survey using Google form. The Ganos Emotional scholars” such as Baron (1997), Mayer, Salovey, and
Intelligence Inventory was adopted to assess the Emotional Caruso (1995), and Goleman (1995). “Emotional
Intelligence of the respondents, while an adopted version intelligence has been shown to be more directly responsible
of the Teacher Stress Inventory (TSI) was used to measure for job success than cognitive intelligence (Goleman, 1995;
the occupational stress of respondents. The demographic Stein & Book 2011), otherwise known as IQ (Weschler,
characteristics of the respondents were described and 1939)”. Emotional intelligence, as defined by Multi-Health
analyzed using frequency count and percentage. Mean was Systems (2016a), the producer of the emotional quotient
used to measure emotional intelligence level and the inventory tool EQ-i 2.0, is “a set of emotional and social
strength of occupational stress among the respondents. skills that influence the way we perceive and express
Furthermore, Pearson r was utilized to test the significant ourselves, develop and maintain social relationships, cope
relationship between the main variables of the study. It was with challenges, and use emotional information in an
found that there is an inverse and high significant effective and meaningful way.”
relationship between respondent’s emotional intelligence Palmer, Stough, Harmer and Gignac (2019) defined
and occupational stress dimensions, hence the null “Emotional Intelligence as Emotional Intelligence (EI) or
hypothesis is rejected. This means that to overcome stress, emotional quotient (EQ) as a set of skills that help us better
teachers should have established a strong emotion and perceive, understand and manage emotions in ourselves
positive mindset. and in others”. Collectively they help us make intelligent
responses to, and use of, emotions. “These skills are as
Keywords Emotional Intelligence, Occupational important as your intellect (IQ) in determining success in
Stress, Teachers
work and in life. Everyone, no matter what job function,
has interactions with other people. Your capacity to
understand your emotions, to be aware of them and how
they impact the way you behave and relate to others, will
1. Introduction improve your ‘people’ skills and help you ultimately be
more satisfied and successful”.
Emotional intelligence (EI) is “an array of non-cognitive Goleman (as cited by Sommers, 2016) described “the
capabilities, competencies and skills that influence one’s impact of emotional intelligence (EI) in the school and
ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands classroom on learners’ development”. Within the
and pressures”. It consists of a learned set of competencies classroom setting, when “a teacher acts without EI, this can
that determine how we interact with people. According to cause a student and/or students to feel emotionally
Goleman (1995) as cited by Singh (2015), “emotional “hijacked,” negatively impacting their ability to learn”
intelligence is the ability to motivate oneself and persist in (Sommers, 2016 as cited by Schumtz, 2017).
2304 Emotional Intelligence and Occupational Stress among Filipino Teachers

Tajudin, et al (2014) found that “Emotional Intelligence come up with hundreds of ad-hoc decisions every day,
correlates with teacher competence wherein high level of which demands a high tolerance for uncertainty and great
emotional intelligence has significant correlation with high and consistent abilities of attention focusing.
level of capability”. Their research involved 169 high The abovementioned realities prompted the researchers
school teachers in the province of Tuscany, Italy. Further, to examine the emotional intelligence and occupational
the study revealed that emotional intelligence is associated stress among Filipino teachers using a
with higher self-efficacy, teacher with higher ability to descriptive-correlational research design. Likewise, a
manage the classroom, students' motivation and relationship between those two constructs was determined
appropriate teaching strategies. to come up with teacher development plan designed to
Meanwhile, “occupational stress pertains to the physical, strengthen the emotional intelligence of teachers and lessen
mental, and emotional reactions of employees who their occupational stress.
perceive that their work demands exceed their abilities
and/or their resources (e.g. time, access to help/support) to 1.1. Purpose of the Study
do the work” (Work Cover State of Queensland, 2019).
Thus, significant health and safety issues for workers were The purpose of this explorative study was to describe
caused by occupational stress. aspects of emotional intelligence and occupational stress
The World Health Organization (2019) claimed that “a amongst Filipino teachers through a descriptive -
healthy job is likely to be one where the pressures on correlational analysis, and through inferential statistics, to
employees are appropriate in relation to their abilities and establish a possible relationship between emotional
resources, to the amount of control they have over their intelligence and occupational stress.
work, and to the support they receive from people who
matter to them. As health is not merely the absence of 1.2. Research Questions
disease or infirmity but a positive state of complete
physical, mental and social well-being (WHO, 1986), a 1. What is the demographic characteristics of the
healthy working environment is one in which there is not respondents in terms of sex, number of years in
only an absence of harmful conditions but an abundance of teaching, year level handled, type of school, and
health-promoting ones”. Quick and Demetria (2016) stated highest educational attainment?
that “occupational stress is a known health risk for a range 2. What is the level of emotional intelligence of the
of psychological, behavioral, and medical disorders and respondents?
3. What is the level of occupational stress of the
diseases. They also described stress as directly linked to the
respondents?
top leading causes of death in the world, such as
4. Is there a significant relationship between the
cardiovascular disease being the prominent cause for both
emotional intelligence and occupational stress of the
men and women”.
respondents?
Jain and Batra (2015) cited Beehr and Newman (1978)
that “occupational stress in the workplace causes anxiety
like walking dread in the office every morning and then
make them worry about their jobs at night. It has become
2. Methodology
more globalized and has the tendency to affect all workers The study employed descriptive-correlational research
irrespective of the job profile or category, the only design since it investigates the relationships among two or
difference being the intensity levels. Stress as a situation more variables (Calmorin and Calmorin, 2010). This
which forces a person to deviate from its routine design was appropriate to use since the study involves
functioning due to change in psychological or describing, analyzing, interpreting the present nature, and
physiological condition” (Beehr & Newman, 1978). the relationship between emotional intelligence and
“One of the most stressful professions is teaching for a occupational stress.
variety reasons based upon the findings of Johnson et al. The respondents of the study were the 797 Filipino
(2005); Roeser et al.,(2013) as cited by Hendres, Curelaru, teachers who voluntarily participated in an online survey
Arhiri, Gherman and Diac (2014). One of the main theories using Google form.
that attempts to explain the high levels of stress associated The Ganos Emotional Intelligence Inventory of Palmer,
with teaching focuses on the high levels of social and Harmer, and Gignac (2009) was adopted to assess the EI
emotional personal resources that teachers are supposed to of the respondents. It is a 14-item scale which according
invest when working with large numbers of children and/or to the proponents measured a simple rather than complex
adolescents at the same time (Schutz & Zembylas, 2009; model, was able to be completed in less than 15 minutes,
Zapf, 2002)”. Other theories argue that the activity of has high “workplace face validity, and generated scores
teaching requires great decisional flexibility and creativity that were meaningfully related to the organizational and
due to the ever-changing nature of the work environment role specific outcomes. It has an internal consistency
(Roeser et al., 2012). Basically, a teacher is supposed to reliability of 𝛼 = 0.87. The EI inventory is scored on a
 Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(11): 2303-2313, 2019 2305

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Almost Never, 2 = Seldom, 3 = The demographic characteristics of the respondents
Sometimes, 4 = Usually, and 5 = Almost Always. The were described and analyzed using frequency count and
scale contains eight (8) true keyed items and six (6) false percentage. Mean was used to measure emotional
keyed items. The latter were reverse coded prior to intelligence level and the strength of occupational stress
calculating the Total EI score. among the respondents. Furthermore, Pearson r was
Meanwhile, the respondent’s occupational stress was utilized to test the significant relationship between the
determined through an adopted Teacher Stress Inventory main variables of the study.
(TSI) of Fimian (1988). It is composed of 49 stress-related
items with ten (10) subscales or factors such as
professional investment, behavioral manifestations, time 3. Results and Discussions
management, discipline and motivation, emotional Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the
manifestations, work-related stress, gastronomic respondents in terms of sex, length of teaching experience,
manifestations, cardiovascular manifestations, fatigue type of school, year level handled, and highest educational
manifestations, and professional distress. Each subscale is attainment
composed of three to eight items which takes 15 minutes As shown in Table 1, majority (88.2%) of the
to complete. TSI has a reliability index 𝛼 = 0.93. It is respondents are female which consistently justify that the
also a – point Likert scale: 1 = no strength, not noticeable, teaching profession is a female – dominant profession.
2 = mild strength, barely noticeable; 3 = medium strength, Most (57.8%) of them are teaching for almost 10 years now.
moderately noticeable, 4 = great strength, very noticeable, A great majority (97.9%) are tenured in public schools
and 5 = major strength, extremely noticeable. Each which connote a secured and well-compensated job than
subscale on the TSI is scored one at a time. The total those from private institutions. More than half (58.2%) of
stress score was computed based on the average mean the respondents are bachelor’s degree and still need to
score of the ten subscales. pursue further studies.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the respondents in terms of sex, length of teaching experience, type of school, year level handled, and highest
educational attainment

Demographic Characteristic Frequencies Frequency Percentages

Sex
Male 94 11.8
Female 703 88.2
Length of Teaching Experience
1 – 10 years 461 57.8
11 – 20 years 226 28.4
21 – 30 years 97 12.2
> 30 years 13 1.6
Type of School
Private 17 2.1
Public 780 97.9
Year Level Handled
Tertiary 575 72.1
Senior High School 192 24.1
Junior High School 17 2.1
Elementary 13 1.6
Highest Educational Attainment
Doctorate Degree 25 3.1
Master’s Degree 308 38.6
Bachelor’s Degree 464 58.2
Total (N) 797 100.00
2306 Emotional Intelligence and Occupational Stress among Filipino Teachers

Table 2. Emotional Intelligence (EI) level of the respondents

Std.
Indicative Statement Mean DI Level
Dev.
I appropriately communicate decisions to stakeholders. 3.66 0.87 U High
I fail to recognize how my feelings drive my behavior at work. (R) 2.37 0.91 Se Low
When upset at work, I still think clearly. 3.75 0.94 U High
I fail to handle stressful situations at work effectively. (R) 2.54 1.00 So Moderate
I understand the things that make people feel optimistic at work. 3.80 0.91 U High
I fail to keep calm in difficult situations at work. (R) 2.50 1.04 So Moderate
I am effective in helping others feel positive at work. 3.84 0.88 U High
I find it difficult to identify the things that motivate people at work. (R) 2.35 0.95 Se Low
I consider the way others may react to decisions when communicating them. 3.68 0.90 U High
I have trouble finding the right words to express how I feel at work. (R) 2.42 1.00 Se Low
When I get frustrated with something at work I discuss my frustration appropriately. 3.33 0.95 So Moderate
I don’t know what to do or say when colleagues get upset at work. (R) 2.46 0.91 Se Low
I am aware of my mood state at work. 3.79 0.92 U High
I effectively deal with things that annoy me at work. 3.53 0.89 U High
Overall 3.14 0.49 So Moderate
(R) – Reversely Scored
Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level
4.50 – 5.00 Almost Always (AA) Very High
3.50 – 4.49 Usually (U) High
2.50 – 3.49 Sometimes (So) Moderate
1.50 – 2.49 Seldom (Se) Low
1.00 – 1.49 Almost Never (AN) Very Low

Table 2 presents the emotional intelligence (EI) level of handle stressful situations at work and fail to keep calm in
the respondents. difficult situations. These self-reported assessment may be
Generally, the respondents have a moderate level of attributed by voluminous workload among teachers. They
emotional intelligence with an overall mean score of 3.14 are sometimes burdened by a lot of tasks expected of them
(SD = 0.49). This means that teachers - respondents to perform which triggers mismanagement of their
possess an average level of accurate appraisal of emotions emotions.
among themselves and others. They also exhibit Nevertheless, Filipino teachers are characterized to be
appropriate expression and adaptive regulation of their resilient and patient. No matter how difficult the task may
emotions. be, they can still find ways to overcome difficult situations.
As presented in Table 2, the respondents are usually They try to become more positive to achieve better results
aware of their mood state and they effectively deal with not only for themselves, but more importantly, for the
things that annoy them at work. They mostly consider the learners they are nurturing.
way others may react to decisions when communicating Table 3 depicts the occupational stress level of the
them. According to them, they are effective in helping respondents in terms of professional investment.
others feel positive at work and understand the things that As depicted in Table 3, the respondents sometimes
make people feel optimistic. When upset at work, these notice that their personal opinions are not sufficiently aired
teachers can still think clearly. If these parameters are with a mean score of 2.65 (SD = 1.07). With an overall
considered, the teacher-respondents are considered to have mean score of 2.47 (SD = 0.89), they barely experience
high levels of emotional knowledge and able to that they lack control over decisions made about
demonstrate effective use of that knowledge in the classroom/school matters; not emotionally/intellectually
workplace. stimulated on the job, and lack opportunities for
However, they admitted that they sometimes fail to professional improvement.
 Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(11): 2303-2313, 2019 2307

Table 3. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of professional investment

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

My personal opinions are not sufficiently aired. 2.65 1.07 MeS MN
I lack control over decisions made about classroom/school matters. 2.46 1.02 MiS BN
I am not emotionally/intellectually stimulated on the job. 2.34 1.10 MiS BN
I lack opportunities for professional improvement. 2.41 1.10 MiS BN
Overall 2.47 0.89 MiS BN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

Table 4 presents the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of time management.
Table 4. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of time management

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I easily over-commit myself. 3.28 0.98 MeS MN
I become impatient if others do things to slowly. 2.71 1.11 MeS MN
I have to try doing more than one thing at a time. 3.48 1.00 MeS MN
I have little time to relax/enjoy the time of day. 3.35 1.04 MeS MN
I think about unrelated matters during conversations. 2.53 1.13 MeS MN
I feel uncomfortable wasting time. 3.39 1.20 MeS MN
There isn't enough time to get things done. 3.13 1.11 MeS MN
I rush in my speech. 2.60 1.03 MeS MN
Overall 3.06 0.66 MeS MN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As presented in Table 4, the respondents sometimes try doing more than one thing at a time with the highest mean score
of 3.48 (SD = 1.00). As a result, they feel uncomfortable wasting time and have a little time to relax/enjoy the time of day.
With the lowest mean score of 2.53 (SD = 1.13), the respondents think about unrelated matters during conversations. The
overall mean score of 3.06 (SD = 0.66), it is moderately noticeable that the respondents experience a medium strength of
time management as a source of occupational stress.
Table 5 reveals the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of work-related stressors.
2308 Emotional Intelligence and Occupational Stress among Filipino Teachers

Table 5. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of work-related stressors
Std.
Indicative Statement Mean DI Level
Dev.
There is little time to prepare for my lessons/responsibilities. 3.04 1.13 MeS MN
There is too much work to do. 3.75 1.08 GS VN
The pace of the school day is too fast. 3.40 1.00 MeS MN
My caseload/class is too big. 2.86 1.15 MeS MN
My personal priorities are being short-changed due to time demands. 3.30 1.05 MeS MN
There is too much administrative paperwork in my job. 3.46 1.11 MeS MN
Overall 3.30 0.82 MeS MN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As revealed in Table 5, the respondents greatly feel that there is too much work to do (mean = 3.75, SD = 1.08).
Similarly, they feel that there is too much administrative paperwork in their job and sometimes their personal priorities are
being short-changed due to time demands with a mean score of 3.46 and 3.30 respectively. Generally, it is moderately
noticeable that work-related stressors are evident among the respondents as they perform their duties and responsibilities
as teachers of today’s generation.
Table 6 illustrates the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of professional distress.
Table 6. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of professional distress

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I lack promotion and/or advancement opportunities. 2.76 1.09 MeS MN
I am not progressing my job as rapidly as I would like. 2.67 1.07 MeS MN
I need more status and respect on my job. 3.01 1.16 MeS MN
I receive an inadequate salary for the work I do. 3.09 1.18 MeS MN
I lack recognition for the extra work and/or good
2.82 1.17 MeS MN
teaching I do.
Overall 2.87 0.87 MeS MN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As illustrated in Table 6, the respondents reported that they sometimes that they receive an inadequate salary for the
work I do (mean = 3.09, SD = 1.18). They also feel that they need more status and respect on my job (mean = 3.01, SD =
1.16). It seems that they lack recognition for the extra work and/or good teaching they do and promotion and/or
advancement opportunities are wanting. With a self-reported overall mean score of 2.87 (SD = 0.87), the respondents are
moderately experiencing professional distress at work.
Table 7 presents the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of discipline and motivation.
 Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(11): 2303-2313, 2019 2309

Table 7. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of discipline and motivation

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I feel frustrated...
because of discipline problems in my classroom. 2.98 1.16 MeS MN
having to monitor pupil behavior. 2.96 1.08 MeS MN
because some students would better if they tried. 3.15 1.05 MeS MN
attempting to teach students who are poorly motivated. 3.13 1.15 MeS MN
because of inadequate/poorly defined discipline problems. 3.09 1.11 MeS MN
when my authority is rejected by pupils/administration. 3.04 1.09 MeS MN
Overall 3.06 0.90 MeS MN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As presented in Table 7, the respondents feel frustrated because some students would better if they tried (mean = 3.15,
SD = 1.05). They are attempting to teach students who are poorly motivated and sometimes feel frustrated because of
inadequate/poorly defined discipline problems. They are frustrated when their authority is rejected by
pupils/administration. With an overall mean of 3.06 (SD = 0.90), the respondents moderately experience occupational
stress in terms of discipline and motivation.
Table 8 shows the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of emotional manifestations
Table 8. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of emotional manifestations

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I respond to stress...
by feeling insecure. 2.08 1.11 MiS BN
by feeling vulnerable. 2.37 1.13 MiS BN
by feeling unable to cope. 2.31 1.13 MiS BN
by feeling depressed. 2.33 1.20 MiS BN
by feeling anxious. 2.37 1.15 MiS BN
Overall 2.29 1.02 MiS BN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As shown in Table 8, it is barely noticeable that the respondents experience emotional manifestations of occupational
stress. It indicates that they rarely feel being insecure, vulnerable, unable to cope, depressed, and anxious. With these
findings, the respondents still manage to handle situations so they will not be affected by emotional disturbance.
Table 9 describes the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of fatigue manifestations.
2310 Emotional Intelligence and Occupational Stress among Filipino Teachers

Table 9. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of fatigue manifestations
Indicative Statement
Mean Std. Dev. DI Level
I respond to stress…
by sleeping more than usual. 2.82 1.21 MeS MN
by procrastinating. 2.48 1.05 MiS BN
by becoming fatigued in a very short time. 2.75 1.10 MeS MN
with physical exhaustion. 2.83 1.13 MeS MN
with physical weakness. 2.75 1.12 MeS MN
Overall 2.73 0.89 MeS MN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As described in Table 9, there is a medium strength of fatigue manifestations of occupational stress among the
respondents (mean = 2.73, SD = 0.89). It means that they sometimes respond to stress by sleeping more than usual, with
physical exhaustion, with physical weakness, and little procrastination.
Table 10 shows the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of cardiovascular manifestations
Table 10. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of cardiovascular manifestations

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I respond to stress...
with feelings of increased blood pressure. 2.28 1.19 MiS BN
with feeling or heart pounding or racing. 2.29 1.18 MiS BN
with rapid and/or shallow breath. 2.42 1.23 MiS BN
Overall 2.33 1.12 MiS BN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As shown in Table 10, there is a mild strength of cardiovascular manifestations of occupational stress among the
respondents (mean = 2.33, SD = 1.12). It directs that they barely respond to stress with rapid and/or shallow breath,
feeling or heart pounding or racing, and feeling of increased blood pressure. It is safe to assume that the respondents are
not physically bothered by these manifestations of occupational stress.
Table 11 reveals the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of gastronomical manifestations
 Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(11): 2303-2313, 2019 2311

Table 11. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of gastronomical manifestations

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I respond to stress...
with stomach pain of extended duration. 2.47 1.24 MiS BN
with stomach cramps. 2.50 1.17 MeS MN
with stomach acid. 2.48 1.17 MiS BN
Overall 2.49 1.08 MiS BN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As revealed in Table 11, the respondents barely experience gastronomical manifestations of occupational stress at work.
It clearly denotes that they rarely respond to stress with stomach cramps, acid, and pain. Most of the time, the respondents
are composed enough to hurdle difficult situations. Their health condition is not compromised even they deal with work
pressure and challenging tasks.
Table 12 divulges the occupational stress level of the respondents in terms of behavioral manifestations
Table 12. Occupational Stress (OS) level of the respondents in terms of behavioral manifestations

Indicative Statement Mean Std. Dev. DI Level

I respond to stress...
by using over-the-counter drugs. 1.71 1.09 MiS BN
by using prescription drugs. 1.87 1.17 MiS BN
by using alcohol. 1.48 0.96 MiS BN
by calling in sick. 1.85 1.16 MiS BN
Overall 1.73 0.90 MiS BN

Mean Descriptive Interpretation (DI) Level

4.50 – 5.00 Major Strength (MaS) Extremely Noticeable (EN)
3.50 – 4.49 Great Strength (GS) Very Noticeable (VN)
2.50 – 3.49 Medium Strength (MeS); Moderately Noticeable (MN)
1.50 – 2.49 Mild Strength (MiS) Barely Noticeable (BN)
1.00 – 1.49 No Strength (NS) Not Noticeable (NN)

As disclosed in Table 12, the respondents least experience behavioral manifestations of occupational stress (mean =
1.73, SD = 0.90). This means that they barely use over-the-counter drugs and alcohol in responding to stress. It means that
the respondents are resilient in the adverse effects of occupational stress to their behavior.
2312 Emotional Intelligence and Occupational Stress among Filipino Teachers

Table 13 discloses the results of test of significant of emotional and social skills that influence the way they
relationship between emotional intelligence and perceive and express themselves, develop and maintain
occupational stress dimensions. social relationships, cope with challenges, and use
As revealed in Table 13, respondent’s emotional emotional information in an effective and meaningful way
intelligence and professional investment, emotional is inversely proportional to the dimensions of occupational
manifestations, and fatigue manifestations as dimensions stress such as professional investment, emotional
of occupational stress have medium strength of negative manifestations, discipline and motivation, fatigue
association which tend towards practically significant manifestations, professional distress, behavioral
correlation with r-values of -.442, .417, and .313 manifestations, cardiovascular manifestations,
respectively (p < .001). Meanwhile, teachers’ emotional gastronomic manifestations, time management and
intelligence is statistically and significantly related to work-related stressors. As the respondents feel positive
discipline and motivation (r = -.284, p < .001), professional about themselves, the less occupational stress they
distress (r = -.251, p < .001), behavioral manifestations (r = experience. Hence, if the teacher wants to be stress-free,
-.251, p < .001), cardiovascular manifestations (r = -.229, p they should learn to be emotionally prepared. These
< .001), gastronomic manifestations (r = -.220, p < .001), findings indicate that teachers adapt to the situations which
time management (r = -.166, p < .001), and work-related leads to more satisfaction and less stress.
stressors (r = -.124, p < .001). It means that respondent’s set

Table 13. Test of significant relationship between emotional intelligence and occupational stress dimensions

Occupational Stress Dimensions r-value p-value

Professional Investment -.442** <.0001
Time Management -.166** <.0001
Work-related Stressors -.124** <.0001
Professional Distress -.251** <.0001
Discipline and Motivation -.284** <.0001
Emotional Manifestations -.417** <.0001
Fatigue Manifestations -.313** <.0001
Cardiovascular Manifestations -.229** <.0001
Gastronomic Manifestations -.220** <.0001
Behavioral Manifestations -.251** <.0001
**Significant at p < .01

Strength of Coefficient, r
Interpretation
Association Positive Negative
Small .10 to .30 -.10 to -.30 Statistically Significant

Medium .31 to .50 -.31 to -.50 Towards Practically

Significant Correlation

Large .51 to 1.0 -.51 to -1.0 Practically Significant

Correlation
 Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(11): 2303-2313, 2019 2313

4. Conclusions and Recommendations [2] Cherry, K. (2019). Cross-Sectional Research Method: How
Does it Work? Retrieved from: www.verywellmind.com
Based from the salient findings of the study, the [3] World Health Organization (2019) Stress at Workplace.
following conclusion was drawn: Retrieved from https://www.who.int/occupational_health/t
There is an inverse and high significant relationship opics/stressatwp/en/
between respondent’s emotional intelligence and
[4] Quick, J. C., & Henderson, D. F. (2016). Occupational Stress:
occupational stress dimensions, hence the null hypothesis Preventing Suffering, Enhancing Wellbeing. International
is rejected. This means that to overcome stress, teachers journal of environmental research and public health, 13(5),
should have established a strong emotion and positive 459. doi:10.3390/ijerph13050459
mindset. [5] Jain, P. & Batra, A. (2015) Occupational Stress at
Workplace: Study of the Corporate Sector in India. IOSR
Journal of Business and Management. E-ISSN: 2278-487X,
5. Recommendations p-ISSN: 2319-7668. Volume 17, Issue 1.Ver. III (Jan. 2015),
PP 13-21. DOI: 10.9790/487X-17131321
Based on the conclusion of the study, the researchers [6] Hendres, D. M., Curilaru, V., Arhiri, L., Gherman, M.A. &
recommend the following: Diac, G. (2014) Teachers’ Occupational Stress
1. Appropriate and specialized stress management Questionnaire: Psychometric Properties. Rev. Psih., vol. 60,
training for teachers early in their career may be nr. 2, p. 131–140.
designed, taking into account the educational level [7] Schmutz, Nathan L. (2017) Levels of Teacher Emotional
they will teach in and the relevant job demands. Intelligence in Selected Beat the Odds Schools: A
2. Include communication and counseling skills in their Descriptive Study. Retrieved from
training in order to enhance future supporting https://commons.cu-portland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?refer
working environments. er=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1023
&context=edudissertations
3. Systematically monitor factors, such as difficult
students’ situations, in order to design effective [8] Palmer, B.J., Stough, C., Harmer, R. & Gigna, G (2019),
interventions. Assessing Emotional Intelligence. The Springer Series on
4. Stress in teaching cannot be eliminated. It could, Human Exceptionality, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-88370-0_
6,
however, be reduced to manageable levels in order for
teachers to be able to function efficiently and [9] Singh, J.D. (2015) A Study of Emotional Intelligence of
maintain mental health and inner harmony. teacher Educators in Relation to Certain Demographical
5. Providing educators with training on how to maintain Variables. Scholarly Research Journal for Interdisciplinary
Studies ISSN 2278-8808. Retrieved from https://www.rese
a balance between work demands and duties, and archgate.net/publication/301675452_A_STUDY_OF_EM
personal and social-life time, on how to set realistic OTIONAL_INTELLIGENCE_OF_TEACHER_EDUCAT
targets in order to fulfill them, on how to ORS_IN_RELATION_TO_CERTAIN_DEMOGRAPHIC
communicate and sustain supportive relations in the AL_VARIABLES
workplace, and on how to develop stress-coping [10] Tajudin, A. et al (2014) The Effect of Emotional Intelligence
strategies, should be foreseen and implemented in and Job Stress on the Teaching Effectiveness among
undergraduate and postgraduate teachers’ studies. Malaysia Polytechnic Lecturers. International Journal of
6. Future research may be conducted, assessing various Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR)(2014)
forms of such training, in order to produce Volume 17, No 1, pp 226-235
evidence-based training interventions, appropriate for
educators of each teaching level.
7. Building supportive and helpful relations in the
workplace and practicing coping and empowering
techniques may help teachers significantly in
reducing anxiety and in dealing with occupational
stress.

REFERENCES
[1] Anon. (2019) Occupational Stress. WorkCover State of
Queensland. Retrieved from https://www.worksafe.qld.gov
.au/laws-and-compliance/workplace-health-and-safety-law
s/specific-obligations/health-safety-contact-centres/occupat
ional-stress