Lingard 2007

Journal for Education in the Built Environment
ISSN: (Print) 1747-4205 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhep13
Conflict Between Paid Work and Study: Does it

Impact upon Students Burnout and Satisfaction
with University Life?
Helen Lingard
To cite this article: Helen Lingard (2007) Conflict Between Paid Work and Study: Does it Impact
upon Students Burnout and Satisfaction with University Life?, Journal for Education in the Built
Environment, 2:1, 90-109
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2007.02010090
Copyright 2006 CEBE
Published online: 15 Dec 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 92
View related articles
Citing articles: 2 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rhep13
Download by: [117.244.16.111]
Date: 04 April 2016, At: 12:46
Journal for Education in the Built Environment, Vol 2, Issue 1, June 2007 pp. 90-109 (20)
ISSN: 1747-4205 (Online)
Conflict Between Paid Work and Study: Does it Impact upon

Students Burnout and Satisfaction with University Life?
Helen Lingard: RMIT University, Australia
Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016
Abstract
A survey of students enrolled in the post-practicum years of the Property and Construction
degree course at the University of Melbourne was undertaken. Students reported working
more hours in paid work each week than they spent at university. A measure of burnout
designed for use in student samples was tested and found to possess good discriminant
validity and internal consistency reliability in the Australian context. The property and
construction students were found to have very high levels of burnout compared to
professional samples. Future research is needed to identify the causes and consequences of
student burnout. The students time involvement in paid work was inversely related to their
time involvement in university. However, the amounts of time spent in paid work and study
were unrelated to work-university conflict. The work-university interface was asymmetrical in
that the relationship between time spent in paid employment and satisfaction with paid
employment was positive, while there was an inverse relationship between time spent at
university and satisfaction with university life. Students are cynical about the value of
university involvement in the post-practicum years, resent the time demands of university
and seek to minimise the time spent on the university campus. Strategies to redress this
imbalance are considered.
Keywords: Part-time Work, Higher Education, Work-University Conflict, Student Burnout
90
Copyright 2007 CEBE
H. Lingard: Conflict Between Paid Work and Study: Does it Impact upon Students Burnout and
Satisfaction with University Life?
Introduction
Students in paid work
In recent years, the cost of financing an education has increased to such an extent that
combining work and study is a necessity for many students (Lipke, 2000; Curtis and Lucas,
2001; Curtis and Williams, 2002). Curtis and Williams (2002) write of the "routinisation" of
students combining paid work and study, suggesting that this is now the norm in the UK.
Vickers et al. (2003) report a similar situation in Australia, highlighting the global significance
of this trend.
Some research suggests that semester-time work can provide positive social and
educational benefits to students (Lucas, 1997; Watts and Pickering, 2000; Watts, 2002;
Lucas and Lammont, 1998). Further, when paid work is related to students' vocational
coursework, it may be particularly beneficial as an aid to academic knowledge and career
prospects. However, semester-time paid work can also have a detrimental impact upon
students and their study. Working long hours can be particularly damaging to students
academic activities (Hansen and Jarvis, 2000; Sorensen and Winn, 1993; Lindsay and
Paton-Saltzberg, cited in Curtis and Williams, 2002). Recent research in Australia suggests
that the majority of university students combine their study with participation in paid work,
resulting in inter-role conflict and stress (Vickers et al., 2003). Vickers et al. (2003) report
that, for university students who worked 20 to 29 hours per week, the odds of dropping out
are approximately 160 per cent greater than for students who do not work at all. For those
who worked over 30 hours per week, this figure was between 200 and 204 per cent.
Student burnout
The possibility of excessive demands presented by the combination of paid work and study
also raises concerns about students mental health. Rolfe (2002) reports that UK academics
believe the excessive and unsocial hours of part-time work sometimes lead to tiredness and
depression among students. Several studies have investigated the issue of burnout in
student samples (see Neumann et al., 1990 for an early example). This research is pertinent
because burnout is reported to be more prevalent among younger people than among those
over 30 or 40 years of age and among highly educated compared to less educated people
(Maslach et al., 2001). These findings would suggest that university students are a high-risk
group for burnout. In a study of medical students, Boudreau et al. (2004) found that burnout
was associated with numerous stressors, including long hours engaged in practicum work,
concern about academic grades, uncertainty about the future, low levels of control, less
satisfaction with the balance between personal and professional life and low levels of support
from peers and friends. Further, burnout was reported to develop progressively during the
course of medical education, worsening as students progressed through their degree course.
Research suggests that burnout is predicted by long hours, subjective overload (the feeling
of having too much to do in the time available) and the requirement to fulfil the demands of
conflicting roles (Schaufeli and Enzmann, 1998).
91
Journal for Education in the Built Environment, Vol. 2, Issue 1, June 2007
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Aims and objectives
This paper builds on previous work which tested the reliability and validity of a scale to
measure burnout among undergraduate students in Australia (Lingard, 2005). The paper
presents an exploratory analysis of the factors predicting construction undergraduates
burnout and satisfaction with university life. The aims of this paper are:
to explore the extent to which students of property and construction suffer from
burnout,
to develop a model of the work-study interface, describing the relationship between

time commitments to paid work and university, work-university conflict and students
satisfaction and burnout, and
to test the model of the work-study interface in a sample of undergraduate students

enrolled in an undergraduate property and construction programme.
Conflict between paid work and study

The conflict between ones work role and other life roles is an important aspect of the
relationship between work and non-work life. Much research and theory building has focused
on the conflict between work and family. For example, Greenhaus and Beutell (1985, p.77)
define work-family conflict as a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures from the
work and family domains are mutually incompatible in some respect. In adult life, work and
family are primary life domains and researchers have developed and tested various models
of the antecedents (e.g. work hours, number of children etc.) and consequences (e.g.
absenteeism, low job satisfaction) of work-family conflict. Very little theory development has
related to the forms of inter-role conflict affecting adolescents or young adults in full-time
education. However, the work-family literature provides a useful basis for this development.
Markel and Frone (1998) suggest that, in adolescent life, work and education are likely to be
primary life domains. Empirical evidence indicates that the number of hours spent in paid
employment each week is positively associated with a sense of conflict between work and
education among adolescents and young adults (Hammer et al., 1998; Markel and Frone,
1998).
Empirical research demonstrates that inter-role conflict is a stressor which is consistently
associated with negative consequences for individuals well-being and performance. British
research suggests that university students experience difficulty in balancing work and study
and experience above average levels of stress as a result (Humphrey et al., 1998) and other
studies reveal high levels of stress in university students (Abouserie, 1994; Felsten and
Wilcox, 1992; Cotton et al., 2002). Markel and Frone (1998) also report that work-school
conflict is inversely related to school readiness and academic performance.
92
Copyright 2007 CEBE
A Model of the Work and University Interface
For the purposes of this study a model of the work-university interface was developed based
upon a model of the work-family interface, proposed and tested by Frone et al. (1997). This
model uses work-study conflict as a key mediating variable in the relationship between the
time demands of both work and university, students satisfaction with work and university life
and burnout. Thus, it is hypothesised that time demands impact upon students satisfaction
and burnout via work-study conflict. The model, depicted in Figure 1, is explained below.
Figure 1 Integrated model of the work-university interface
Bi-directional nature of work-university conflict

Work-university conflict represents the extent to which involvement in one role (e.g. work)
interferes with students ability to participate in the other role (e.g. university). However,
consistent with the research on the work-family interface, work-university conflict is
conceptualised as a bi-directional phenomenon. Therefore, a distinction is made between the
extent to which participation in paid work interferes with students ability to meet university
responsibilities (work-to-university conflict) and the extent to which participation in university
life interferes with students ability to fulfil the requirements of their paid work (university-towork conflict).
Predictors of work-university conflict

In the model, role-related time commitments are regarded as predictors of work-university
conflict. Time is a limited resource and university students time commitments to paid work
reduce the time available to fulfil duties required of another role. It may therefore be expected
that excessive time involvement in paid work would make the fulfilment of university
requirements more difficult for students, giving rise to a sense of work-to-university conflict.
Conversely, the time requirements of university might negatively interfere with students work
93
Copyright 2007 CEBE
responsibilities, for example when a lecture clashes with a scheduled project meeting. Thus,
it was expected that there would be a positive relationship between the number of hours
spent at university and university-to-work conflict.
Outcomes of work-university conflict
In the work-family domain, inter-role conflict has been positively linked to psychological
distress. One manifestation of such distress is the phenomenon of burnout. The most widely
accepted definition of burnout conceptualises it as a syndrome of emotional exhaustion,
cynicism and reduced personal accomplishment (Maslach et al., 1996).
Few studies of student burnout have been undertaken (see Chang et al. (2000) for a notable
exception). However, Schaufeli et al. (2002a; 2002b) have adapted the most commonly used
measure of burnout for use within student samples. This adaptation is domain-specific in that
burnout is framed as an emotional exhaustion, cynicism and sense of diminished
accomplishment associated with ones studies. Schaufeli and his colleagues report that
student burnout is negatively correlated with academic performance and positively correlated
with students disengagement from university life (Schaufeli et al., 2002a). Owing to the link
between inter-role conflict and burnout in the work-family research (Lingard and Francis,
2005), it was expected that work-to-university conflict would be positively associated with
students burnout.
The work-family research also demonstrates a link between work-family conflict and domainspecific satisfaction. In most studies, job satisfaction has been treated as an outcome of
work-family conflict and it is widely reported that job satisfaction decreases as work-life
conflict increases (Kossek and Ozeki, 1998; Boles et al., 2001; Bruck et al., 2002). Bruck et
al. (2002) also highlight the domain specificity of the conflict-satisfaction relationship,
whereby family interference with work has no affect on job satisfaction over and above that
explained by work interference with family. This may be explained because the sources of
work-to-family conflict reside in the work domain, and therefore it could be expected that
individuals high in work-to-family conflict would feel less positive about their job. On the basis
of these findings, it was expected that when students perceive that their paid work negatively
interferes with their study, they would be less satisfied with their job. Conversely, as
university-to-work conflict increases, it was expected that satisfaction with university life
would decrease.
The Research Context

The Bachelor of Property and Construction (BPC) is offered by the Faculty of Architecture,
Building and Planning at the University of Melbourne. The course structure involves three
years of study, followed by a 12 month industry placement. Following this placement,
students return to the university for a final year of study. The industry placement is greatly
valued by staff and students who regard it as an important learning experience. Many
students work part-time for the company in which they undertook this practicum, when they
return to complete their final year of the BPC. In recent years, the extent to which BPC
94
Copyright 2007 CEBE
students are working during semester time has become a source of concern. In some cases,
students report working up to 39 hours each week in paid employment during semester time.
Anecdotal evidence from staff suggests that many students are missing lectures and tutorials
because of work commitments. A preliminary study found students involvement in paid work
dramatically rose in the post-practicum years of the course (Lingard et al., 2003) and thus
students in these years were targeted for the present study.
Methods
The sample
A questionnaire was administered to undergraduate students enrolled in the third year of the
Bachelor of Property and Construction degree course. Questionnaires were distributed
during a lecture in a compulsory subject for year three students. Students were asked to
complete the survey during the lecture and place completed, un-named questionnaires into a
sealed box provided for this purpose. The questionnaire was administered four weeks prior
to the end of semester when student attendance at lectures is generally high. However, the
sampling method used was limited in the respect that only students attending the lecture
were invited to participate. This could introduce bias into the results as students whose
workload is the greatest may not have been in attendance.
A total of 102 usable questionnaires were returned, representing a 93% response rate
among students in attendance at the scheduled lecture at which questionnaires were
distributed.
Questionnaire structure
The questionnaire comprised of five sections as follows:
Information about the students course enrolment,
Students participation in paid work, including hours, schedule requirements

and nature of employing organisation,
Students participation and feelings about university life, including contact

hours, hours spent on campus, feelings of burnout and engagement and
satisfaction with university life,
Students experiences in balancing work and study, including perceived workstudy conflict and perceptions of the relative ease/difficulty experienced in
meeting university requirements, and
Qualitative comments regarding the level of satisfaction/dissatisfaction with

university life and paid work.
Owing to the sensitivity of data being collected, students were not asked to provide detailed
demographic information, such as gender and age, as it was believed this could compromise
their anonymity (see ethics procedure below).
95
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Self-report measures of time involvement in paid work and university were used. Time
commitments to paid work were ascertained by asking students to indicate whether they
work in paid employment during university semester time and, if so, the number of hours they
spent in paid employment in the most recent week they worked prior to completing the
survey. Students were also asked to indicate whether this number of hours was about
average, more than average or less than average. Students were asked to indicate the
average number of hours they spend at university during a normal week during semester and
also the number of days per week (including evenings) they spend on campus.
Work-university conflict was measured using a modified version of the bi-directional workfamily conflict scale developed by Netemeyer et al. (1996). Items were re-worded to replace
aspects of family life with study or university life. For example, the demands of my work
interfere with my home and family life was changed to the demands of my work interfere
with my study. The amended items are presented in Appendix 1. Items were rated on a
seven point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
Burnout was measured using a modified version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory General
Survey (MBI-GS). Schaufeli et al. (2002a; 2002b) adapted the MBI-GS for use within student
samples. For example, the item I feel emotionally drained from my work [italics added] was
changed to I feel emotionally drained by my study [italics added]. The MBI-Student Survey
(MBI-SS) consists of 16 items that constitute three scales: exhaustion (5 items), cynicism (5
items), and efficacy (6 items). All items are scored on a 7-point frequency rating scale
ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (every day). High scores on exhaustion and cynicism and low
scores on efficacy are indicative of burnout.
Students were asked to indicate the extent to which they were satisfied with university life
and their paid employment. Students were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with
each life domain on a five point scale ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied).
Ethics procedure
The research was subject to approval under the University of Melbournes ethics process for
research involving human subjects. Accordingly, students were advised that participation
was voluntary and that a failure to participate would not prejudice their treatment in the
Faculty. Students were also advised that participation was in no way linked to the
assessment of any of their university work. The students were advised that returning the
questionnaire indicated their willingness to participate in the survey and that data would be
stored in a locked, secure location and be treated with strict confidentiality. Students were
also provided with the option of placing completed questionnaires in a sealed box in the
Facultys Student Services office, if they preferred.
Data analysis procedures

Firstly, descriptive statistics were calculated for hours spent at work and at university.
Secondly, given that the MBI-SS is a relatively new psychometric measure, a Principal
Components Analysis (PCA) was performed in order to examine its factorial structure and
96
Copyright 2007 CEBE
compare these to the factor structures hypothesised by Schaufeli et al. (2002b). Lastly, to
determine the extent to which the hypothesised relationships between variables were
supported, a series of regression analyses were performed using the statistical software
package SPSS.
Results
Time commitments to paid work and university

The majority of students (n=77, 74%) indicated they worked in paid employment during
semester time. Only 23 students (22.1%) indicated that they do not engage in paid work
during semester time. The minimum number of hours students reported working in the week
prior to completing the survey was zero and the maximum was 45. The mean number of
hours worked was 17.6 (SD=8.0). Most students (n=62, 59.6%) indicated that this was about
average. Seven students (6.7%) indicated this was more than average and ten students
(9.6%) indicated this was less than average. The majority of students (n=61, 58.7%)
indicated they work during the day, while 18 students (17.3%) indicated they work only in the
evening. Four students (3.8%) reported that they work both during the day and in the
evening. Table 1 shows the type of work students report engaging in during semester time.
Slightly less than half of the students who worked during semester time (n=35, 45.5%)
reported working in casual work unrelated to the construction industry. Of the industry-based
jobs, most students worked in an architects office (n=13, 16.9%) or worked for a contractor
(n=11, 14.3%). Several students reported working in more than one job during semester
time.
The minimum number of hours per week students report attending university for study
purposes was one hour and the maximum was 20 hours. The mean number of hours
students indicated spending at university for study purposes was 12.5 (SD=3.2). The
minimum number of days students reported spending at university each week was zero and
the maximum was seven. The mean days spent at university each week was 3.9 (SD =0.9)
97
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Table 1 Type of work engaged in by students during semester time

Type of Work
Casual work (non industry)
35
45.5
Working for a contractor
11
14.3
Working in an architects office
13
16.9
Working in a quantity surveyors office
6.5
Working for a property developer
7.8
Casual work and working for a contactor
2.6
Working for a contractor and working for a prop developer
2.6
Casual work working in an architects office
1.3
All of the above
1.3
Other (unspecified)
1.3
Total
77
100
NB Not all students engaged in paid work and therefore the total is less than 102
Factor analysis of burnout scores

A principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation confirmed the discriminant
validity of the three burnout dimensions. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 2.
Items loaded clearly on expected factors and double-loading of items was minimal. Only one
item, I have become less enthusiastic about my studies, loaded on two factors. This item
was eliminated from further analysis. Internal consistency reliability for the three burnout
dimensions was high. Cronbachs alpha coefficients were .76, .77 and .78 for personal
efficacy, emotional exhaustion and cynicism respectively.
98
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Table 2 Burnout factor scores

Items
Factors Loadings
Personal
Efficacy
During class I feel confident that I am effective in getting
things done
.808
I can effectively solve the problems that arise in my studies
.723
I feel stimulated when I achieve my study goals
.699
In my opinion, I am a good student
.627
I believe I am making an effective contribution to the

classes I attend
.597
I have learned many interesting things during the course of

my studies
.582
Emotional
Exhaustion
I feel used up at the end of a day at university
.753
I feel burned out from my studies
.744
I feel emotionally drained from my studies
.728
I feel tired when I get up in the morning and have to face

another day at the university
.688
I have become less enthusiastic about my studies*
.441
Cynicism
.439
I doubt the significance of my studies
.802
I have become more cynical about the potential usefulness

of my studies
.792
I have become less interested in my studies since my

enrolment at the university
.676
Studying or attending a class is really a strain for me
.620
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
*Item removed due to double-loading
Burnout levels
Table 3 shows the students level of burnout compared to levels of burnout reported by
employed adults in various professions. These data should be compared with caution
because, in the non-student samples, burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout
Inventory General Survey and relates to burnout associated with professional work. In
contrast, students burnout was measured using a modified instrument and relates
specifically to burnout associated with subjects study. Despite this cautionary note, Table 3
reveals that the burnout levels of property and construction undergraduates are exceptionally
high. Students mean scores of 3.28 and 2.80 for emotional exhaustion and cynicism
99
Copyright 2007 CEBE
respectively are considerably higher than emotional exhaustion and cynicism scores for
employed professionals. The students mean personal efficacy score of 3.51 is also
considerably lower than that reported among employed professionals.
Table 3 Cross-occupation comparisons of burnout scores

BPC Students
Military
Technologist
Management
Nursing
Mean (SD)
Mean (SD)
Mean(SD)
Mean(SD)
Mean(SD)
Emotional
Exhaustion
3.28
(SD=1.25)
2.05 (SD=1.23)
2.65
(SD=1.31)
2.55(SD=1.40)
2.98(SD=1.3)
Cynicism
2.80
(SD=1.25)
1.63 (SD=1.35)
1.72
(SD=1.14)
1.32(SD=1.06)
1.80(SD=1.2)
Personal
Efficacy
3.51(SD=.99)
4.60 (SD=0.93)
4.54
(SD=1.03)
4.73(SD=0.88)
4.41(SD=0.9)
Bi-variate correlations
Table 4 shows some meaningful linkages between the variables in the study. There was an
inverse relationship between time involvement in university and paid work. The number of
hours spent in paid work was negatively correlated with course contact hours (r=-.238,
p<.05) and days spent at university each week (r=-.439, p<.001). The amount of time
devoted to paid work was also positively correlated with satisfaction with the paid work role
(r=.256, p<.05). The number of days spent on campus was also negatively correlated with
satisfaction with university life (r=-.255, p<.05). Inter-correlations between the burnout
dimensions were as predicted, with emotional exhaustion positively correlated with cynicism
(r=.534, p<.001) and cynicism inversely related to personal efficacy (r=-.249, p<.05). All three
of the dimensions of burnout were significantly correlated with satisfaction with university life.
Thus, satisfaction with university life was positively related to personal efficacy (r=.273,
p<.05) and inversely related to cynicism (r=-.468, p<.001) and emotional exhaustion (r=.452,
p<.001). Both work-to-university conflict (r=-232, p<.05) and university-to-work conflict (r=.285, p<.05) were significantly and inversely related to personal efficacy. University-to-work
conflict was also positively correlated with emotional exhaustion (r=.269, p<.05). Both workto-university conflict (r=-.311, p<.01) and university-to-work conflict (r=-.377, p<.01) were
significantly and inversely related to satisfaction with university life. Satisfaction with
university life was positively correlated with satisfaction with paid work (r=.244, p<.05).
100
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Table 4 Bi-variate correlations between the variables

1
1. Hours in paid
work per week
10
2. Course contact
hours per week
-.238a
3. No of days per
week on campus
-.439
.469
4. Personal
efficacy
.086
.042
.071
5. Emotional
exhaustion
-.200
.138
.147
-.097
6. Cynicism
-.028
.070
.194
-.249
.534
7. Work-touniversity conflict
.079
.070
-.079
-.232
.216
.156
8. University-towork conflict
-.117
.125
.173
-.285a
.269a
.206
.689c
9. Satisfaction
with university life
.181
-.213
-.255
.273
-.452
-.468
-.311
-.377
10. Satisfaction
with paid work
.256a
-.028
-.017
.211
-.149
.073
-.216
-.106
.244a
1
c
1
c
1
c
Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
c
Correlation is significant at the .001 level (2-tailed).
b
Regression analyses
Linear regression analyses were conducted to test the model of the work-university interface
depicted in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the standardised path coefficients for each
hypothesised pathway. The model received only partial support; i.e. some but not all of the
pathway coefficients were significant. Neither of the time involvement variables significantly
predicted work-university conflict. Thus, time involvement in paid work did not significantly
predict work-to-university conflict and time involvement in university did not significantly
predict university-to-work conflict. Students time involvement in work did, however, directly
predict students time involvement in university and vice versa. Owing to the cross-sectional
nature of the study, the direction of this relationship cannot be ascertained.
Contrary to expectation, work-to-university conflict did not significantly predict students
emotional exhaustion or cynicism. Neither did work-to-university conflict predict students
satisfaction with their paid work role. However, work-to-university conflict did significantly
predict the students sense of personal efficacy (=-.232, p<.05). While work-to-university
conflict did not significantly predict satisfaction with the paid work role, university-to-work
101
Copyright 2007 CEBE
conflict did significantly predict students satisfaction with university life (=-.377, p<.001).
The higher the university-to-work conflict, the less satisfied students were with university life.
Figure 2 Pathway coefficients for work-university interface
Discussion
The results of this exploratory study confirm that, at least at the University of Melbourne,
property and construction students have extensive time commitments to paid work during
semester. On average, they spend more time engaged in paid work than they spend
attending university. Further, the inverse relationship between time involvement in the two
domains suggests that students spend time at work at the expense of time involvement in
university life. When asked about the ease with which they were able to undertake a number
of different requirements of university life, the same group of students indicated that they
experienced difficulty undertaking readings before a class, preparing for lectures and tutorials
and using library study resources (reported elsewhere). Together, these findings suggest that
when students make sacrifices in relation to university life, sacrifices are most often made in
the extent to which independent study is undertaken, rather than in attendance of lectures
and tutorials. Indeed, students appear to spend no more time at university than that required
for timetabled lectures and tutorials. This is consistent with Rolfes (2002) finding that British
university students are disengaged from university life and minimise the time they spend on
campus. Qualitative comments provided by some of the BPC students at the end of the
questionnaire also revealed students preferences for minimising the time spent at the
university so that they can engage in uninterrupted paid work. For example students
suggested that timetables should reflect that most of us work full-time hours during final
year. Lectures should be condensed into two days and another commented that faculties
should combine and condense core subjects into strings of no more than three days on
campus to allow at least two days of paid work without missing classes.
102
Copyright 2007 CEBE
The MBI-Student Survey (MBI-SS) was tested and found to possess good discriminant
validity and internal consistency reliability in the Australian student population. The property
and construction students scores on the MBI-SS were high and indicate that students suffer
from high levels of study-related emotional exhaustion, are considerably cynical about the
value of their university involvement and have low personal efficacy relating to their study.
This finding is worrying because burnout is related to health problems and turnover intention
(Schaufeli and Bakker, 2004). Future research should explore ways in which student burnout
may be reduced.
The non-significant relationship between time involvement and students perceptions of workuniversity conflict was unexpected. This finding indicates that work-university conflict does
not mediate the relationship between time demands of work or university and the outcome
variables measured in the study. This is in contrast to the role played by work-family conflict,
which mediates the relationship between time demands of work and burnout in employed
adults. This result also suggests that, among the students in our study, the amount of time
spent in paid work may be a less significant source of work-university conflict than other
variables. This finding is similar to a report by Ackerman and Gross (2003) that marketing
students in an American university were less affected by a perceived scarcity of free time
than by an individuals emotional reaction to work and university commitments. Future
research should examine the extent to which variables other than time involvement predict
students work-university conflict. Other variables of interest may include subjective
perceptions of the qualitative and quantitative workload, available resources and support and
the amount of control that the students are able to exercise over their work and university
arrangements.
One noteworthy finding in the present study was that the relationship between time
involvement in paid work and satisfaction with paid work was significant and positive,
whereas the relationship between the time demands of university and satisfaction with
university life was significant and negative. This suggests that the students are less tolerant
of time demands associated with their university education than they are of their paid work.
Indeed, university-to-work conflict was found to predict satisfaction with university life: i.e. the
greater the perception that university interfered with paid work, the less satisfied students
were with university life. In contrast, work-to-university conflict was unrelated to satisfaction
with paid work role. Students commitment to their work and/or their university education was
not measured in this study but it is possible that these findings reflect that the role of
employee is more salient to property and construction students than the role of university
student.
In the qualitative comments provided by the students at the end of the questionnaire a
common theme was the need for greater flexibility on the part of the university to
accommodate the requirements of students in paid work. These comments made repeated
reference to timetabling, for example one student wrote classes could be scheduled earlier
in the morning rather than later in the afternoon because after work I feel drained. Students
also commented on the importance of providing lecture notes on the Internet and of
103
Copyright 2007 CEBE
extending library opening times to provide greater flexibility to students. Lastly, several
students commented that university work was often submitted late due to time commitments
to paid work. For example, one student wrote I think that lecturers have to be understanding
that due dates are not always met because of long hours in the industry.
There is a need to accept students working as a new reality(Harvey, 2000) and recognise
that combining part-time work with study can provide students with personal and intellectual
attributes beyond those traditionally delivered in university degree programmes. However, at
present it seems that students in the Bachelor of Property and Construction programme
place greater emphasis on their paid work than they do their study and are burned out and
cynical about their university role. In contrast, the students are engaged and satisfied with
their involvement in paid work. This suggests an imbalance between paid work and study.
Ways to redress this imbalance might usefully be explored in future research.
For example, strategies designed to assist students to make linkages between theory
learned at university and experience in the workplace could help students to recognise that
university and work are complementary rather than conflicting parts of the learning process.
Work-based learning might be a valuable approach in highlighting this complementarity.
In higher education research there is a growing interest in the importance of work-based
learning, which is defined as linking learning to the work role. Little (2000) suggests that
work-based learning requires consensus and agreement from key players in the learning
process, namely: the student, the employer, and the higher education institution. Work-based
learning helps to bridge the gap between theory and practice by permitting reflection on
actions and the testing out and re-applying of theories when faced with dilemmas and when
confronting new situations in the workplace (Little, 2000).
The involvement of the property and construction students in industry-based paid work in the
post practicum years of their course is likely to continue. This experience undoubtedly
provides a valuable learning opportunity and should not be discouraged. However, at present
it appears that work involvement occurs at the expense of university engagement. Efforts to
redress the asymmetrical nature of the work-university interface could focus on developing a
partnership between the university and industry to foster a synergy between industry work
and study. At present, work-based learning is not formally adopted in most property and
construction undergraduate programmes. However, work-based learning provides an
opportunity to ensure that students learn to critically apply theory to practice and reflect upon
its usefulness. It may also overcome some of the problems identified in this exploratory
investigation.
Conclusions
This exploratory study confirms that property and construction students work long hours in
paid work. The students levels of study-related burnout were high. Property and construction
students are emotionally exhausted and cynical about their study and have low levels of
personal efficacy. This is a concern because burnout is consistently linked to health
104
Copyright 2007 CEBE
problems and turnover. Students experiences at the work-university interface are presently
asymmetrical with students indicating a greater tolerance for the time demands of paid work
than those of university study. Overall these findings suggest that the students in the present
sample resent the time commitments required of university. However, the present asymmetry
between students involvement and satisfaction in their university life and paid work may be
modified through programmes designed to make clear the linkages between theory and
practice and ensure that students experience of paid work contributes to their learning.
Limitations and future research

The present study did not attempt to measure students academic performance and it is
therefore unclear whether time commitments to paid work, work-university conflict and/or
burnout have a deleterious effect on students academic achievements. Future research
should examine the impact of paid work on academic performance, both directly and
indirectly, through work-to-university conflict and burnout.
The research did not take into consideration the age and/or life stage of students. Given the
increasing number of older and re-entry students who must often juggle work, education and
family it is important that future research examine the combined effects of commitments to
these three life domains and the extent to which conflict arises between work and university,
university and family and work and family within this group of students.
The study was limited to students enrolled in a single programme at one Australian
university. The results cannot be generalised to all property and construction students in
Australia. However, further research into this subject is being undertaken at RMIT University,
in collaboration with several other Australian universities. It is envisaged that data to be
collected in 2006, will provide insight into whether the relationship between paid work, workuniversity conflict, student burnout and satisfaction are similar in other Australian student
populations. International replication of this work would also be of interest.
Lastly, given the high levels of student burnout reported in this exploratory study, it is very
important that future research identify causes and consequences of student burnout in order
to inform strategies for its reduction.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank Professor Jon Robinson, Professor of Property and
Construction, the University of Melbourne for granting permission for this article to be
published.
105
Copyright 2007 CEBE
References
Abouserie, R. (1994). Sources and levels of stress in relation to locus of control and self
esteem in university students. Educational Psychology, 14, 323-330.
Ackerman, D. S. & Gross, B. L. (2003). Is time pressure all bad? Measuring the relationship
between free time availability and student performance and perceptions. Marketing
Education review, 13, 21-32.
Boles, J. S., Howards, W. G. & Donofrio, H. H. (2001). An investigation into the interrelationships of work-family conflict, family-work conflict and work satisfaction. Journal of
Managerial Issues, 13, 376-390.
Boudreau, D., Santen, S. A., Hemphill R. R. & Dobson J. (2004). Burnout in medical
students: Examining the prevalence and predisposing factors during the four years of
medical school. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 44 (4), Supplement 1, S75-S76.
Bruck, C. S., Allen, T. D. & Spector, P. E. (2002). The relation between work-family conflict
and job satisfaction: a finer-grained analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 336-353.
Chang, E. C., Rand, K. L. & Strunk, D. R. (2000). Optimism and risk for job burnout among
working college students: stress as a mediator. Personality and Individual Differences, 29,
255-263.
Cotton, S. J., Dollard, M. F. & de Jonge, J. (2002). Stress and student job design:
Satisfaction, well-being and performance in university students. International Journal of
Stress Management, 9, 147-161.
Curtis, S. & Lucas, R. (2001). A coincidence of needs: Employers and full-time students.
Employee Relations, 23, 38-54.
Curtis, S. & Williams, J. (2002). The reluctant workforce: undergraduates' part-time
employment. Education and Training, 44, 5-10.
Felsten, G. & Wilcox, K. (1992). Influences of stress and situation-specific mastery beliefs
and satisfaction with social support on well-being and academic performance. Psychological
Reports, 70, 291-303.
Frone, M. R., Yardley, J. K. & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative
model of the work-family interface. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, 145-167.
Greenhaus, J. H. & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.
Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.
Hammer, L. B., Grigsby, T. D. & Woods, S. (1998). The conflicting demands of work, family
and school among students at an urban university. The Journal of Psychology, 132, 220-226.
Hansen, D. M. & Jarvis, P. A. (2000). Adolescent employment and psychological outcomes.
Youth and Society, 31, 417-436.
106
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Harvey, L. (2000). New realities: the relationship between higher education and employment.
Tertiary Education and Management, 6, 3-17.
Humphrey, R., McCarthy, P., Popham, F., Charles, Z., Garland, M., Gooch, S., Hornsby, C.
H. & Muldoon, C. (1998). Stress and the contemporary student. Higher Education Quarterly,
52, 221-242.
Kossek, E. E. & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work-family conflict, policies and the job-life satisfaction
relationship: A review and directions for organizational behaviour-human resources research.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 139-149.
Lingard, H. (2005). Balancing study and paid work: the experiences of construction
undergraduates in Australia. Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 5,
41-47.
Lingard, H. & Francis, V. (2005). Does work-family conflict mediate the relationship between
job schedule demands and burnout in male construction professionals and managers?
Construction Management and Economics, 23, 733-745.
Lingard, H., Mills, A. & Ashford, P. (2003). Patterns of semester-time employment among
undergraduate property and construction students: a preliminary investigation. Proceedings
of the Australasian University Building Educators Association 26th Annual conference,
Geelong.
Lipke, D. J. (2000). Work study. American Demographics, 22, 9-14.
Little, B. (2000). Undergraduates work based learning and skills development. Tertiary
Education and Management, 6, 119-135.
Lucas, R. (1997). Youth, gender and part-time work: Students in the labour process. Work,
Employment and Society, 11, 595-614.
Lucas, R. & Lammont, N. (1998). Combining work and study: an empirical study of full-time
students in school, college and university. Journal of Education and Work, 11, 41-56.
Markel, K. S. & Frone, M. R. (1998). Job characteristics, work-school conflict and school
outcomes among adolescents: Testing a structural model. Journal of Applied Psychology,
83, 277-287.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E. & Leiter, M. P. (1996). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual. (3rd
ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B. & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 397-422.
Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S. & McMurrian, R. (1996). Development and validation of workfamily conflict and family-work conflict scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 400-401.
Neumann, Y., Finaly-Neumann, E. & Reichel, A. (1990). Determinants and consequences of
students burnout in universities. Journal of Higher Education, 61 (1), 20-31.
107
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Rolfe, H. (2002). Students demands and expectations in an age of reduced financial

support: the perspectives of lecturers in four English universities. Journal of Higher
Education, Policy and Management, 24, 171-182.
Schaufeli, W. & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and practice: a critical
analysis. London: Taylor & Francis.
Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Marques Pinto, A., Salanova, M. & Bakker, A. B. (2002a).
Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 33 464-481.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanove, M., Gonzalez-Roma, V. & Bakker, A. (2002b). The measurement
of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92.
Schaufeli, W. & Bakker, A. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with
burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293315.
Sorensen, L. & Winn, S. (1993). Student loans: a case study. Higher Education Review, 25,
48-65.
Vickers, N., Lamb, S. & Hinkley, J. (2003). Student workers in high school and beyond: the
effects of part-time employment on participation in education, training and work. Longitudinal
Surveys of Australian Youth Research Report No. 30. Victoria: Australian Council for
Educational Research.
Watts, C. (2002). The effects of semester-time employment on academic performance.
Education and Training, 44, 67-75.
Watts, C. & Pickering, A. (2000). Pay as you learn: student employment and academic
progress. Education and Training, 42, 129-134.
108
Copyright 2007 CEBE
Appendix 1
Work-university conflict items
The demands of my work interfere with my study.
Because of my job, I cant involve myself as much as I would like in my study.
Things I want to do at university do not get done because of the demands my job puts on
me.
I often have to miss important study activities because of my work.
There is conflict between my job and the commitments I have as a university student.
The demands of my study interfere with work-related activities.

I sometimes have to miss work so that study responsibilities are met.
Things I want to do at work dont get done because of the demands of my study.
My study interferes with my responsibilities at work, such as getting to work on time,
accomplishing daily tasks and working overtime.
My employer and/or co-workers dislike how often I am preoccupied with university life.
109
Copyright 2007 CEBE

Lingard 2007

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lingard 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal for Education in the Built Environment

ISSN: (Print) 1747-4205 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhep13

Conflict Between Paid Work and Study: Does it

Copyright 2006 CEBE

Published online: 15 Dec 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Date: 04 April 2016, At: 12:46

Conflict Between Paid Work and Study: Does it Impact upon

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Keywords: Part-time Work, Higher Education, Work-University Conflict, Student Burnout

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Aims and objectives

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

to develop a model of the work-study interface, describing the relationship between

to test the model of the work-study interface in a sample of undergraduate students

Conflict between paid work and study

A Model of the Work and University Interface

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Figure 1 Integrated model of the work-university interface

Bi-directional nature of work-university conflict

Predictors of work-university conflict

Outcomes of work-university conflict

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

The Research Context

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Information about the students course enrolment,

Students participation in paid work, including hours, schedule requirements

Students participation and feelings about university life, including contact

Qualitative comments regarding the level of satisfaction/dissatisfaction with

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Data analysis procedures

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Time commitments to paid work and university

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

Table 1 Type of work engaged in by students during semester time

Casual work (non industry)

Working for a contractor

Working in an architects office

Working in a quantity surveyors office

Working for a property developer

Casual work and working for a contactor

Working for a contractor and working for a prop developer

Casual work working in an architects office

All of the above

Factor analysis of burnout scores

Table 2 Burnout factor scores

Downloaded by [117.244.16.111] at 12:46 04 April 2016

I can effectively solve the problems that arise in my studies

I feel stimulated when I achieve my study goals

In my opinion, I am a good student

I believe I am making an effective contribution to the

I have learned many interesting things during the course of

I feel used up at the end of a day at university

I feel burned out from my studies

I feel emotionally drained from my studies

I feel tired when I get up in the morning and have to face

I have become less enthusiastic about my studies*

I doubt the significance of my studies

I have become more cynical about the potential usefulness

I have become less interested in my studies since my

Studying or attending a class is really a strain for me