International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE)

Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023, pp. 684~691

ISSN: 2252-8822, DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v12i2.24057  684

Higher vocational college students’ learning burnout during the

COVID-19 pandemic: A case study in China

Shenlong Tang, Siti Zuraidah Md Osman

School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: This study examines students’ levels of learning burnout during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Learning burnout levels were also investigated about
Received Mar 6, 2022 students’ gender, hometown, family member structure, and field of major.
Revised Dec 7, 2022 The study employs a random sampling survey method, with 1,098 students
Accepted Jan 9, 2023 from a public higher vocational college in Shandong Province, China. The
collected data was analyzed using SPSS 26. The results found that 71.5% of
students are at a moderate burnout level, 27.0% are at a low level, and only
Keywords: 1.5% are at a high level, and there was no high level of learning burnout on a
single item during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data showed that the levels
Chinese students of learning burnout of male students, students who live in town, non-only
COVID-19 pandemic child students, and students majoring in science and engineering were higher
Learning burnout than the other group of students. There was a statistically significant
Strategy difference in the level of student learning burnout by gender, but not in the
Vocational colleges variables of hometown, family structure, or field of major. Although studies
show that students’ learning burnout level is not affected by COVID-19,
students generally have learning burnout. Therefore, three strategies were
also put forward to reduce students' learning burnout from school.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Siti Zuraidah Md Osman
School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia
11800 USM Penang, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
Burnout was defined for the first time in the 1970s. Burnout refers to the comprehensive
psychological symptoms caused by long-term pressure and stress at work, including emotional exhaustion,
depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment [1]. Scholars have paid close attention to
burnout research since that time [2]–[10]. These burnouts can cause workers to experience psychological and
physical fatigue, thereby reducing work efficiency, affecting the quality of work, and adversely affecting the
people around them. Maslach et al. [11], [12] developed the Maslach burnout inventory (MBI), which was
widely used to evaluate the burnout level of workers. According to different scenarios and measurement
objects, MBI has developed three different versions, namely: i) MBI human service survey (MBI-HSS)
suitable for workers in the service industry; ii) MBI educator survey (MBI-ES) suitable for school workers;
and iii) MBI general survey (MBI-GS) suitable for workers in other industries.
Learning burnout, which is derived from job burnout, is defined as a student's exhaustion of energy
due to a long-term study load, loss of interest in learning activities, indifference and emotional alienation
towards classmates, and a negative attitude towards learning due to poor performance [13]–[16]. Some
researchers regard school studies as a similar working environment [17], [18]. According to Koutsimani,
Montgomery, and Georganta [19], students may suffer from learning burnout, showing various symptoms of

Journal homepage: http://ijere.iaescore.com

Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  685

burnout, such as feeling exhausted, indifferent to learning, and thus unable to activate the feeling of
effectiveness. When students have no interest in education or lack motivation to learn due to learning
pressure, academic burden, and psychological factors, they will suffer from learning burnout [20], [21].
Many studies have shown that college students have different levels of learning burnout [22]–[25]. and
learning burnout will lead to a series of adverse consequences, such as anxiety and depression [26], [27], and
harmful behaviors such as skipping classes, indulging in games and dropping out of school [28], [29].
The Chinese Government emphasizes the development of higher vocational education, and the
number of higher vocational students is increasing [30]. Students learning burnout directly affects the
teaching quality of higher vocational colleges and has a long-term negative impact on China's development
plan. Investigating the students' learning burnout will help teachers master students' status and adjust
education and teaching plans in time, which has crucial practical guidance significance for improving
education and teaching quality. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic impacts students' mental health and
their study attention [31]. However, little is known about Whether COVID-19 pandemic may have affected
students' levels of learning burnout. Therefore, this research aims to analyze the learning burnout level of
students in higher vocational colleges in China during the COVID-19 pandemic. The following are the
research questions: i) What is the level of higher vocational college students' learning burnout during the
COVID-19 pandemic?; ii) Is there a significant difference in higher vocational college students' learning
burnout according to demographic variables such as gender, hometown, family member structure, and field
of major?; and iii) What are the methods to reduce students' learning burnout?

2. RESEARCH DESIGN
This research analyzed learning burnout among higher vocational college students during the
COVID-19 pandemic. It determined whether there was a significant difference in learning burnout according
to students' gender, hometown, family member structure, and field of major. A quantitative descriptive
research design was adopted since this research aims to use the collected quantitative data to describe
students' level of learning burnout.

2.1. Sample/participants
In this current study, participants were students from Shandong vocational college of science and
technology in 2021–2022. This study adopted the method of random sampling, and the students volunteered
to participate in the survey. Table 1 shows the distribution of the sample group.

Table 1. Summary of respondent’s demographic characteristics

Variables Characteristics N %
Gender Male 388 35.3
Female 710 64.7
Hometown Town 923 84.1
City 175 15.9
Major Humanities and Social Sciences 406 37.0
Science and Engineering 692 63.0
Family structure Only child 222 20.2
Non-only child 876 79.8

2.2. Instrument
The instrument used in this study was the undergraduate learning burnout scale (ULBS). The scale’s
Cronbach’s coefficient is 0.834, with split-half reliability of 0.836, meeting the requirements of
psychometrics. The scale consists of 20 questions scored by Likert’s five-point method, from “completely
disagree” to “fully agree,” divided into three dimensions (low emotional sense, misbehavior, and low sense
of achievement). The sample questions of the three dimensions are: i) Low emotional sense (eight questions):
I find what I have learned useless; ii) Misbehavior (six questions): I have my learning methods and plans in
place and am ready to implement them; iii) Low sense of achievement (six questions): Professional
knowledge mastery easily comes to me.

2.3. Data collection and analysis

All students were randomly selected and volunteered to participate in this research. Participants
complete the learning burnout questionnaire in the classroom, and each data collection process takes 10
minutes, and students have the right to stop answering at any time. A total of 1,150 questionnaires were
issued and recovered in this study, of which 1,098 were valid questionnaires. The study used percentages,

Higher vocational college students’ learning burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic … (Shenlong Tang)
686  ISSN: 2252-8822

means, standard deviations, and independent groups t-test functions of SPSS26 to answer the study questions.
The study obtained the mean range of students' learning burnout levels after the data conversion. The mean
scope is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Mean range for learning burnout level

Mean range Interpretation
1.00–2.33 Low level of learning burnout
2.34–3.67 Moderate level of learning burnout
3.68–5.00 High level of learning burnout

3. RESULTS
As seen in Table 3, the average score of learning burnout of higher vocational students is 2.63
during the COVID-19 pandemic. The lowest score is 1.20, and the highest score is 4.75. The proportion of
moderate-level students with learning burnout is the highest (71.5%), followed by low-level students (27%),
and finally, high-level students (1.5%). The mean score of low emotional sense (2.49) is the lowest of the
three subscales and is lower than the overall level of learning burnout. In this dimension, 51.7% of students
are at the moderate level, 42.2% are at the low level, and 6.1% are at the high level. The average scores of
misbehavior and low sense of achievement are 2.74 and 2.71, respectively, which are higher than the overall
level of learning burnout, and there is a tiny difference in the proportion of students' burnout levels in the two
dimensions (moderate: 77.8% and 78%; low: 18.6% and 18.6%; high: 3.6% and 3.4%).

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for learning burnout of higher vocational college students
Standard deviation Percentage (%)
Item Mean Min Max
(SD) Low Moderate High
Learning burnout 20 2.63 0.53 1.20 4.75 27.0 71.5 1.5
Low emotional sense 8 2.49 0.77 1.00 5.00 42.2 51.7 6.1
Misbehavior 6 2.74 0.62 1.00 5.00 18.6 77.8 3.6
Low sense of achievement 6 2.71 0.60 1.00 5.00 18.6 78.0 3.4

As showed in Table 4, the table presents the students' learning burnout of low emotional sense. The
mean score for low emotional sense was 2.49, which was moderate. However, the overall level of learning
burnout is 2.63. Data further research found that of the eight items in the dimension of low emotional sense,
item 7 (I felt exhausted after a long day's study) got the highest mean of 3.11, followed by item 5 (It's hard
for me to keep a long-term passion for learning), item 17 (I want to study but I feel that learning is boring)
and item 4 (When I got up early in the morning and thought of facing a day's study, I felt very tired). The
average value of the above three items is between 2.70 and 2.80, which are at a moderate level. Then came
item 20 (Exams always bore me) with a mean of 2.21, item 12 (I often doze off when I study) received a
mean score of 2.20, and item 9 (I'm tired of studying) obtained a mean of 2.18. Item 2 has the lowest average
score of 1.98. The last four items were at a low level of learning burnout.

Table 4. Descriptive statistics for the low emotional sense of higher vocational college students
Mean SD Level
2. I find what I have learned useless 1.98 1.08 Low
4. When I got up early and thought of facing a day's study, I felt very tired. 2.70 1.15 Moderate
5. It's hard for me to keep a long-term passion for learning 2.78 1.05 Moderate
7. I felt exhausted after a long day's study 3.11 1.11 Moderate
9. I’m tired of studying 2.18 0.98 Low
12. I often doze off when I study 2.20 1.02 Low
17. I want to study, but I feel that learning is boring 2.71 1.09 Moderate
20. Exams always bore me 2.21 1.03 Low
Low emotional sense 2.49 0.77 Moderate
Learning burnout 2.63 0.53 Moderate

The results of the misbehavior of students are presented in Table 5. The mean of students'
misbehavior is 2.74, higher than the average learning burnout (mean=2.63). Of the six items, the top three
with the highest scores are item 14 (I don't think I'm patient enough in my study), item 19 (I rarely schedule
my study time.), and item 10 (I rarely study after class). Although the students are in the moderate level in

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 684-691
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  687

these items, the average score from 2.80 to 3.33 is higher than that of the low emotional sense dimension.
Those items were followed by item 8 (So far, a university study has fully demonstrated my ability) with a
mean of 2.70. Item 1 (I have my learning methods and plans in place and am ready to implement them)
received an average score of 2.56. The two items were also at a moderate level of learning burnout. Item 16
(I will only read books when I take the exam) obtained the lowest mean score of 2.20, which was a low level.

Table 5. Descriptive statistics for the misbehavior of higher vocational college students
Mean SD Level
1. I have my learning methods and plans in place and am ready to 2.56 0.92 Moderate
implement them
8. So far, a university study has fully demonstrated my ability 2.70 0.87 Moderate
10. I rarely study after class 2.80 1.01 Moderate
14. I don't think I'm patient enough in my study 3.33 0.99 Moderate
16. I will only read books when I take the exam 2.20 0.98 Low
19. I rarely schedule my study time. 2.85 1.00 Moderate
Misbehavior 2.74 0.62 Moderate
Learning burnout 2.63 0.53 Moderate

As presented in Table 6 is the statistical data for the low sense of achievement of higher vocational
college students. The average value of this dimension is 2.71, which is also higher than the total mean score
of learning burnout. Item 15 (It's easy for me to get a bachelor's degree) got the highest mean score
of 3.51, followed by item 3 (Professional knowledge mastery comes so easily to me) with a mean of 3.00.
Then the mean score from high to low was item 18 (I am full of energy when I study), item 11 (I'm qualified
for the university course), and item 6 (When I study, I can calmly deal with my emotional problems), and
item 13 (I'm interested in my major). The mean difference between these items is very small, with an average
score ranging from 2.30 to 2.57. Except for item 13, which is at a low level, students' learning burnout in
other items is moderate

Table 6. Descriptive statistics for the low sense of achievement of higher vocational college students
Mean SD Level
3. Professional knowledge mastery comes so easily to me. 3.00 0.88 Moderate
6. When I study, I can calmly deal with my emotional problems 2.40 0.81 Moderate
11. I'm qualified for the university course 2.47 0.79 Moderate
13. I'm interested in my major 2.30 0.83 Low
15. It's easy for me to get a bachelor's degree 3.51 1.03 Moderate
18. I am full of energy when I study 2.57 0.86 Moderate
Low sense of achievement 2.71 0.60 Moderate
Learning burnout 2.63 0.53 Moderate

As shown in Table 7, the average score of learning burnout for female students is 2.59, which is
0.11 lower than that of male students (mean=2.70). In other words, the overall burnout level of female
students is lower than that of male students. From each dimension, the mean of male students in the
dimensions of low emotional sense (mean=2.64) and misbehavior (mean=2.80) was higher than that of
female students. On the contrary, female students (mean=2.74) in the low sense of achievement dimension
have a higher mean than male students (mean=2.66). The levels of male students' learning burnout from high
to low are misbehavior, low sense of achievement, and low emotional sense. As for female students, the low
sense of achievement got the highest mean score (mean=2.74), followed by misbehavior (mean=2.70) and
low emotional sense (mean=2.40). There are significant differences in the overall level of learning burnout
and its dimensions according to students' gender (P<0.05).

Table 7. Mean, SD, and t-test analysis of the study variables according to students’ gender
Male Female
Dimension t p
Mean SD Mean SD
Learning burnout 2.70 0.55 2.59 0.51 3.056 0.002
Low emotional sense 2.64 0.79 2.40 0.74 4.998 0.000
Misbehavior 2.80 0.66 2.70 0.59 2.496 0.013
Low sense of achievement 2.66 0.65 2.74 0.56 -2.278 0.038
Note: Male=388; Female=710

Higher vocational college students’ learning burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic … (Shenlong Tang)
688  ISSN: 2252-8822

Table 8 shows that the learning burnout average score of students from the city is 2.56, while that of
students from the town is 2.64. It means that students who live in town have relatively higher levels of
burnout. The mean score of students in the city is lower than that of students in the town on three subscales.
The levels of students who come from a town in learning burnout from high to low are misbehavior
(mean=2.75), low sense of achievement (mean=2.73), and low emotional sense (mean=2.50). The order of
city students is the same as that of town students in three dimensions, with a mean score ranging
from 2.45 to 2.68. The results of the t-test showed no significant difference except in the dimension of a low
sense of achievement (P<0.05) according to the students' hometown variable.

Table 8. Mean, SD, and t-test analysis of the study variables according to students’ hometown
Town City
Dimension t p
Mean SD Mean SD
Learning burnout 2.64 0.52 2.56 0.56 1.814 0.070
Low emotional sense 2.50 0.76 2.45 0.79 0.698 0.485
Misbehavior 2.75 0.61 2.68 0.65 1.421 0.156
Low sense of achievement 2.73 0.59 2.60 0.62 2.710 0.007
Note: Town=923; City=175

As seen in Table 9, the difference in average scores between only child students (mean=2.62）and
non-only child students (mean=2.63) is tiny, showing that the two groups have similar levels of learning
burnout. The mean score of only child students in low emotional sense (mean=2.51) and misbehavior
(mean=2.76) was higher than that of non-only child students. In contrast, the opposite is true in the low sense
of achievement dimension. The burnout degree of two groups in misbehavior is higher than the other two
dimensions. The data of the t-test confirmed that there was no significant difference in all aspects according
to students' family structure (p>0.05).

Table 9. Mean, SD, and t-test analysis of the study variables according to students’ family structure
Only child Non-only child
Dimension t p
Mean SD Mean SD
Learning burnout 2.62 0.56 2.63 0.52 -0.129 0.898
Low emotional sense 2.51 0.78 2.48 0.77 0.418 0.676
Misbehavior 2.76 0.64 2.74 0.61 0.532 0.595
Low sense of achievement 2.65 0.63 2.72 0.58 -1.661 0.097
Note: Only child=222; non-only child=876

Table 10 shows that the learning burnout average score of students who study humanities and social
sciences (mean=2.61) was lower than that of science and engineering students (mean=2.67). The highest
level of burnout in the two groups is misbehavior, and the lowest in the low emotional sense, but the mean of
students majoring in Science and Engineering is higher than the other group in these two dimensions. The
average score in low sense of achievement for students who choose humanities and social sciences
is 2.72, which is higher than that of the other group (mean=2.69). The result found that the differences in the
low emotional sense and misbehavior are statistically significant (P<0.05), while other aspects are not
significant (P>0.05).

Table 10. Mean, SD, and t-test analysis of the study variables according to students’ major
Science and Engineering Humanities and Social Sciences
Dimension t p
Mean SD Mean SD
Learning burnout 2.67 0.52 2.61 0.53 1.882 0.069
Low emotional sense 2.55 0.79 2.45 0.75 2.222 0.026
Misbehavior 2.80 0.62 2.71 0.61 2.088 0.037
Low sense of achievement 2.69 0.60 2.72 0.59 -0.592 0.554
Note: Science and Engineering=406;
Humanities and Social Sciences=692

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 684-691
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  689

4. DISCUSSION
The data of higher vocational college students' learning burnout concluded that the average score for
students' learning burnout is 2.63, and 71.5% of students are at the moderate level (mean score range from
2.34–3.67). The studies carried out by several scholars [23], [24], [32], [33], all got similar findings.
Misbehavior obtains the highest score (mean=2.74), followed by low sense of achievement (mean=2.71), and
finally low emotional sense (mean=2.49). The study results are consistent with ours [15]. However, the
scores of learning burnout from high to low are low emotional sense, low sense of achievement, and
misbehavior [34]. In addition, Ying [22] found that the mean score of low emotional sense is in the middle of
these three dimensions.
The research result showed that in the dimension of low emotional sense, four items are at a low
level, and four are at a moderate level. Regarding misbehavior and low sense of achievement, one item is at
a low level, and the other five are at a moderate level. All items did not indicate a high level of learning
burnout.
Our study found that students of different genders significantly differ in the overall level and
dimensions of learning burnout. Female students' learning burnout is lower than that of male students. The
differences in gender variables in each subscale of learning burnout were statistically significant [35]. In the
two dimensions of depression and misconduct, the scores of females are significantly higher than those of
males. Dan and Pan [15] also found that female students' learning burnout is lower than that of male students.
However, there is no significant difference in gender variables.
According to the variable of students' hometown, there is no significant difference in learning
burnout and its subscales. The learning burnout level of students living in the city is lower than that of
students living in the town on the three subscales. Li and Li [36] came to the same conclusion that there were
no significant differences in the low emotional sense, low sense of achievement, and misbehavior among
students, and the average scores of students from the town were higher than those of students from the city in
each category. The level of learning burnout of students in different hometowns is the same, and there is no
significant difference in the variable of students' hometowns [24].
The current study found that whether the students are only children, the average difference in their
overall learning burnout is only 0.01. There is no significant difference between the two groups. According to
Ren, Zhang, and Zhang [37], learning burnout of only child students is lower than that of non-only child
students, and significant gender differences exist between the two groups.
The overall level of learning burnout and the dimension of low sense of achievement do not
significantly differ in students' major choices. Still, significant differences were found in misbehavior and
low emotional sense. The average learning burnout score of humanities and social sciences students was
lower than that of science and engineering students. Liao, Zhang, and Hu [32] also confirmed that science
and engineering students are more prone to learning burnout than humanities and social sciences students
[33]. They are more likely to show misbehavior and low emotional sense. There is also no statistically
significant difference in the variable of students' major [38].

5. CONCLUSION
According to the research results, higher vocational students’ level of learning burnout is similar to
that of previous studies and has not increased. There is no significant difference from previous studies
regarding student gender, hometown, major, and family structure. In other words, although the pandemic of
COVID-19 has some influence on students’ psychology and normal teaching activities, it does not increase
students’ learning burnout levels. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the learning
psychology of Chinese higher vocational college students still has much to be studied. In addition, from the
research data, we know that students in higher vocational colleges generally suffer from learning burnout,
which will inevitably lead to declining students’ learning quality and wasting educational resources.
Therefore, the study proposed three strategies from the perspective of educators to reduce student burnout.
Pay attention to the emotional management of students. First, through emotional education for
students, teachers let students learn to control their emotions and prevent negative emotions from interfering
with their regular learning. Second, we should also help students exercise their rational thinking ability, let
students learn to observe behavior objectively and reasonably, and promote the realization of learning
objectives and life values through thinking and learning.
Create a good campus learning atmosphere and stimulate students’ interest in learning. Higher
vocational colleges can create a more suitable learning atmosphere by introducing new teaching equipment,
building new training rooms, and creating a good campus environment for academic research. In the teaching
process, we need to be “student-oriented”, respect students, understand students, and fully mobilize students’
subjective initiative. In addition, teachers stimulate students’ interest in learning by constantly reforming
teaching methods, exploring new methods, and increasing their interest in teaching as much as possible.
Higher vocational college students’ learning burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic … (Shenlong Tang)
690  ISSN: 2252-8822

Strengthen students’ career development and employment guidance education. First, employment
guidance teachers should improve students’ employability and discover and tap students’ potential. Secondly,
teachers should formulate their career planning with students’ professional development. Finally, teachers
should constantly revise students’ career planning to improve college students’ willpower and prevent
learning burnout continuously.

REFERENCES
[1] H. J. Freudenberger, “Staff Burn-Out,” Journal of Social Issues, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 159–165, Jan. 1974, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-
4560.1974.tb00706.x.
[2] C. Maslach and S. E. Jackson, “The role of sex and family variables in burnout,” Sex Roles, vol. 12, no. 7–8, pp. 837–851, Apr.
1985, doi: 10.1007/BF00287876.
[3] M. R. Lahoz and H. L. Mason, “Maslach Burnout Inventory: Factor Structures and Norms for USA Pharmacists,” Psychological
Reports, vol. 64, no. 3_suppl, pp. 1059–1063, Jun. 1989, doi: 10.2466/pr0.1989.64.3c.1059.
[4] S. E. Jackson, R. L. Schwab, and R. S. Schuler, “Toward an understanding of the burnout phenomenon.,” Journal of Applied
Psychology, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 630–640, 1986, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.71.4.630.
[5] M. R. Abarghouei, M. H. Sorbi, M. Abarghouei, R. Bidaki, and S. Yazdanpoor, “A study of job stress and burnout and related
factors in the hospital personnel of Iran,” Electronic Physician, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 2625–2632, Jul. 2016, doi: 10.19082/2625.
[6] C. C. Lebares, E. V Guvva, N. L. Ascher, P. S. O’Sullivan, H. W. Harris, and E. S. Epel, “Burnout and Stress Among US Surgery
Residents: Psychological Distress and Resilience,” Journal of the American College of Surgeons, vol. 226, no. 1, pp. 80–90,
2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.10.010.
[7] L. S. Rotenstein et al., “Prevalence of Burnout Among Physicians,” JAMA, vol. 320, no. 11, pp. 1131-1150, Sep. 2018, doi:
10.1001/jama.2018.12777.
[8] T. C. Ogbuanya et al., “Effect of Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy Program on the Symptoms of Burnout Syndrome Among
Undergraduate Electronics Work Students in Nigeria,” Psychological Reports, vol. 122, no. 1, pp. 4–22, Feb. 2019, doi:
10.1177/0033294117748587.
[9] Y.-Y. Hu et al., “Discrimination, Abuse, Harassment, and Burnout in Surgical Residency Training,” New England Journal of
Medicine, vol. 381, no. 18, pp. 1741–1752, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1903759.
[10] C. Zhang et al., “Survey of Insomnia and Related Social Psychological Factors Among Medical Staff Involved in the 2019 Novel
Coronavirus Disease Outbreak,” Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 11, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00306.
[11] C. Maslach and S. E. Jackson, The Maslach burnout inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1981.
[12] C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, and M. P. Leiter, Maslach burnout inventory manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press,
1996.
[13] D. Kafry, A. Pines, and E. Aronson, Burnout: From tedium to personal growth. New York, NY: Free Press, 1981.
[14] Y. Dan, L. Sancai, and W. Haimei, “The Relationship between College Students’ Achievement Motivation and Learning
Burnout: Hope as a Mediator,” China Journal of Health Psychology, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 225–259, 2016, doi:
10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2016.02.026.
[15] W. Dan and H. Pan, “Study on Influencing Factors of College Students’ Academic Burnout,” Theory and Practice of
Contemporary Education, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 71–77, 2018, doi: 10.13582/j.cnki.1674-5884.2018.05.014.
[16] R. Cui, “Effects of College Students’ psychological elasticity and learning adaptation on Learning Burnout,” Modern
Communication, no. 8, pp. 163–169, 2021.
[17] S. R. Jacobs and D. Dodd, “Student Burnout as a Function of Personality, Social Support, and Workload,” Journal of College
Student Development, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 291–303, 2003, doi: 10.1353/csd.2003.0028.
[18] C. Sulea, I. van Beek, P. Sarbescu, D. Virga, and W. B. Schaufeli, “Engagement, boredom, and burnout among students: Basic
need satisfaction matters more than personality traits,” Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 42, pp. 132–138, Aug. 2015,
doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.018.
[19] P. Koutsimani, A. Montgomery, and K. Georganta, “The Relationship Between Burnout, Depression, and Anxiety: A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 10, p. 284, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00284.
[20] R. Lian, “The Status and Relationship of Undergraduates’ Professional Commitment and Learning Burnout,” Journal of
Psychological Science, no. 1, pp. 47–51, 2006.
[21] Y. Y. Zou, “Research on the Relationship between College Students’ Achievement Motivation and Learning Burnout,” Value
Engineering, vol. 20, no. 31, pp. 16–17, 2011.
[22] W. Ying, “A Study of College Students’ Learning Boredom and Corresponding Countermeasures,” Journal of Luoyang Institute
of Science and Technology (Social Science), vol. 30, pp. 91–96, 2015, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-5035.2015.06.018.
[23] M. Charkhabi, M. A Abarghuei, and D. Hayati, “The association of academic burnout with self-efficacy and quality of learning
experience among Iranian students,” SpringerPlus, vol. 2, 2013, doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-677.
[24] L. L. Duan, P. Ye, P.Q. Shen, and D. Zhu, “Survey of Students’ Learning Burnout in Higher Vocational Colleges and
Countermeasures: Taking Jiangsu Aviation Technical College as an Example,” Journal of Suzhou Education Institute, vol. 24,
no. 2, pp. 93–97, 2021.
[25] J. Wang, L. Bu, Y. Li, J. Song, and N. Li, “The mediating effect of academic engagement between psychological capital and
academic burnout among nursing students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study,” Nurse Education Today,
vol. 102, p. 104938, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2021.104938.
[26] D. K. Creedy, M. Sidebotham, J. Gamble, J. Pallant, and J. Fenwick, “Prevalence of burnout, depression, anxiety and stress in
Australian midwives: a cross-sectional survey,” BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 13, Dec. 2017, doi:
10.1186/s12884-016-1212-5.
[27] J. E. Lehto, L. Kortesoja, and T. Partonen, “School burnout and sleep in Finnish secondary school students,” Sleep Science,
vol. 12, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.5935/1984-0063.20190051.
[28] L. Xu, “An investigation on normal school students’ learning burnout - A case study of English normal students,” Research on
Modern Higher Education 4, pp. 111–115, 2017, doi: 10.24104/rmhe/2017.04.02012.
[29] E. M. de Vasconcelos, C. O. Trindade, L. R. Barbosa, and M. M. F. de Martino, “Predictive factors of burnout syndrome in
nursing students at a public university,” Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, vol. 54, 2020, doi: 10.1590/s1980-
220x2018044003564.

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 684-691
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  691

[30] Y. Zhang and W. L. Xu, “Investigation on learning burnout and its influencing factors of medical students in Vocational
Schools,” Journal of Qiqihar Medical College, vol. 37, pp. 4081–4082, 2016.
[31] X. T. T. Le et al., “Evaluating the Psychological Impacts Related to COVID-19 of Vietnamese People Under the First Nationwide
Partial Lockdown in Vietnam,” Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 11, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00824.
[32] Y. Liao, L. J. Zhang, and W. Hu, “Research on the current situation and countermeasures of college students’ academic burnout,”
Time Education, vol. 5, pp. 55–56, 2016, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-8181.2016.09.040.
[33] C. Ding, “A Study on the Dropout Predictive System – Lunghwa University as an Example,” Educator, vol. 9, pp. 86–89, 2021.
[34] C. Q. Guo, “On the Relationship among the Academic Self – efficacy, Coping Style and Learning Burnout of University
Students,” Contemporary Continuing Education, vol. 33, pp. 81–84, 2015.
[35] W. J. Zhang, L. L. Jin, and M. Zhang, “The Relationship between College Students’ Learning Engagement, Academic Self-
efficacy and Learning Burnout,” Journal of Bingtuan Education Institute, vol. 31, pp. 39–43, 2021.
[36] X. Li and W. M. Li, “The Research on the College Students’ Learning Burnout in Guizhou,” Journal of Xingyi Normal University
for Nationalities, vol. 3, pp. 55–56, 2011.
[37] A.Q. Ren, H. F. Zhang, and W. C. Zhang, “Study on the relationship between academic self-efficacy, professional commitment
and learning burnout of clinical medical undergraduates,” Journal of Taiyuan Urban Vocational College, vol. 2, pp. 103–107,
2020.
[38] Z. W. Deng, “Investigation on Learning Burnout Situation of Engineering Higher Vocational College and the Corresponding
Countermeasures,” Journal of Beijing Vocational and Technical College, vol. 14, pp. 63–65, 2015, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671—
6558.2015.04.016.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Tang Shenlong is a lecturer in College Chinese. He held a Master's degree in

Chinese International Education from the Renmin University of China in 2017. He worked in
the Basic Department of Shandong Vocational College of Science and Technology from 2018
to the present. He studied for a doctorate in higher education at the school of educational
studies of the University of Science Malaysia from 2021. Among his research interests are
higher vocational education, educational psychology and College Chinese teaching. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Siti Zuraidah Md Osman is a senior lecturer in the Department of School of

Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 USM Penang, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.
She holds a Ph.D. in Instructional System Development from Universiti Sains Malaysia,
Malaysia. Her research focuses on Educational Technology, TVET Education, and Accounting
Education. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Higher vocational college students’ learning burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic … (Shenlong Tang)