Sleep Disturbance, Mindfulness, Work-Life Balance, Teaching Demands and Classroom Assessment Practices as Predictors of Burnout Among College of Education Lecturers: Mediating and Moderating Role of Supervision Load and Marking Workload
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Amid increasing concerns about occupational stress and emotional exhaustion among higher education faculty, this study investigates the psychosocial and workload-related factors contributing to burnout among lecturers in Ghanaian Colleges of Education. The study examined the predictive effects of mindfulness, work-life balance, teaching demands, classroom assessment practices, and sleep disturbance on burnout among lecturers in Colleges of Education in Ghana, with an emphasis on the mediating and moderating roles of supervision load and marking workload. Utilizing a quantitative correlational research design, data were collected from 320 academic staff using a structured online questionnaire and analyzed through multiple regression, moderation-mediation modeling, and latent class analysis. The findings revealed that burnout levels were significantly elevated among lecturers with high teaching and assessment demands, poor sleep quality, and insufficient work-life balance. Mindfulness particularly present-centered and non-judging awareness emerged as a robust protective factor, negatively predicting burnout symptoms such as emotional exhaustion and depersonalization (β = -0.21, p = .002). Conversely, increased teaching hours, student mentorship, and assessment loads significantly predicted higher burnout levels (β = 0.13 to 0.20, p < .01). Sleep disturbance played a mediating role in the pathways between both teaching demands and work-life balance with burnout (κ² = 0.053–0.067), while supervision intensity and marking volume were found to moderate the effects of mindfulness and assessment practices respectively (f² = 0.036–0.054). Overall, the model accounted for 61.2% of the variance in burnout (R² = 0.612), demonstrating a large overall effect size (Cohen’s f² = 1.58). Latent class analysis further identified three burnout risk profiles, with approximately 16.2% of respondents falling into a high-risk class characterized by poor mindfulness, imbalanced work-life dynamics, excessive workload, and elevated sleep disturbance. These findings accentuate the urgent need for institutional reforms targeting workload management, emotional well-being, and systemic burnout prevention. Integrating mindfulness-based interventions, promoting flexible work arrangements, and addressing sleep-related challenges are critical strategies for sustaining academic staff vitality and productivity.