Secondary School Burnout Scale (SSBS).

Abstract The purpose of this study is to develop "Secondary School Burnout Scale. " Study group included 728 students out of 14 schools in four cities in Turkey. Both Exploratory Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis were conducted on the data. A seven-factor solution emerged. The seven factors explained 61 % of the total variance. The model indices of the Confirmatory Factor Analysis indicated a good-fit. Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficients for the sub-dimensions of the instrument ranged from . 67 to . 86. Split-half correlation coefficient for the sub-dimensions of the instrument ranged between . 63 and . 86. To establish criterion validity of the scale 'Academic Locus of Control Belief Scale" was used. There were low and medium correlations among the scales Key Words 3urnout, School Burnout, Scale The majority of research that focused on the rela¬tionship between "school-student" concerned with the effects of psychological and social of school characteristics on students (Kuperminc, Lead-beater, & Blatt, 2001; Normandeau & Guay 1998; Rigby 1999; Schunk, 1991). One of the strands that is concerned with the relationship between school and student in the literature is school burnout, a phenomenon that stem from school life. Since it has come up in the literature, the concept of burnout was considered only a syndrome that experienced in business life (Yang & Farn, 2005). The main reason for that, a high level of burnout was perceived as a threat to both organizational psychology and individual effectiveness in orga¬nizations (Kahill, 1988; Lowenstein, 1991). Thus, studies usually designed around individual busi¬ness practices and issues related to burnout which emerge in business contexts (Burke, Greenglass, & Schwarzer, 1996; Jacobs & Dodd, 2003). Since school requires an intensive and contini-ous interaction (Farber & Miller, 1981; Van Horn, Schaufeli, & Enzmann, 1999) and it is a source of stress by itself (Chang, Rand, & Strunk, 2000); there have been studies conducted on the burnout of teachers, school psychologists and other school staff(Akcamete, Kaner, & Sucuoglu 2001; Bakker & Schaufeli, 2000; Cemaloglu & Kayabasi, 2007; Far¬ber & Miller; Friedman, 1999; Greenglass, Fiksen-baum, & Burke, 1994; Huebner, 1992; Ross, Altmai-er, & Russell, 1989; Russell, Altmaier, & Van Velzen, 1987; Sandoval, 1993; Sucuoglu & Kuloglu, 1996; Tatar & Horenczyk, 2003). However, it is ignored until recently that the relationship among "student-school-burnout" handled as if schools are busi¬ness contexts (McCarthy, Pretty & Catano, 1990; Salmela-Aro, Savolainen, & Holopainen, 2009) and students carried out tasks regarding school related duties like work environment (Balogun, Helgemoe, Pellegrini, & Hoeberlein, 1996; Chambel & Curral, 2005; Fimian, Fastenau, Tashner, & Cross, 1989). The syndrome cited in the literature as school burn¬out defined burnout observed on students. This syndrome could be defined as the exhaustion as a result of the stress and pressure that stem from as¬signments and responsibilities of students concern¬ing school and school related activities (McCarthy, Pretty, & Catano, 1990; Yang & Farn, 2005). The concept of burnout is defined as a three-dimen¬sional syndrome: emotional exhaustion, depersonali¬zation and reduced "sense of" personal accomplish¬ment (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). The basic indicators of emotional exhaustion are chronic fatique and ten¬sion. The main indicator of depersonalization is cal¬lousness (Vasalampi, Salmela-Aro, & Nurmi, 2009). Individual finds the work meaningless and loses out his/her motivation (Green, Walkey & Taylor, 1991). The main indicator of reduced sense of personal achievement is a perception of low level of self-effica¬cy (Jacobs & Dodd, 2003; Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001; Salmela-Aro, Savolainen et al. …