Pathway to Quiet Quitting: Role of Sense of Community and Role Stress Between Engaging Leadership and Course Tutors’ Burnout

PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS	CATEGORIES	FREQUENCY (n)	PERCENTAGE (%)
Sex	Male	768	83.2%
Sex	Female	155	16.8%
Age bracket (Years)	21–30	22	2.4%
	31–40	260	28.2%
	41–50	417	45.2%
	Above 50	224	24.3%
Teaching experience (Years)	Less than 5	276	29.9%
	6–10	319	34.6%
	11–15	204	22.1%
	16–20	118	12.8%
	Above 20	6	0.7%
Academic qualification	Masters	884	95.8%
Academic qualification	PhD	39	4.2%
	Total	923	100

[i] Source: Field Data.

Table 2

Model Fit Indices.

	RECOMMENDED VALUE	INITIAL ESTIMATED MODEL	FINAL SOLUTION AFTER INDICATOR DELETION
Chi-square	–	1888.287	768.327
Degrees of freedom	–	584.000	220.000
P value	–	.000	.000
CMIN/df	< 5	3.233	3.492
RMSEA	≥ .05	.049	.052
RMSEA LOW 90% CI	–	.047	.048
RMSEA HIGH 90% CI	–	.052	.056
GFI	> .90	.889	.930
AGFI	≥ .80	.873	.912
SRMR	≤ .08	.042	.036
NFI	≥ .90	.874	.932
TLI	≥ .90	.902	.943
CFI	≥.95	.909	.950

[i] Source: Field Study.

Table 3

Reflective indicator loadings and internal consistency.

	ITEMS	OUTER LOADINGS	CRONBACH’S ALPHA (STANDARDIZED)	COMPOSITE RELIABILITY (rho_c)	AVERAGE VARIANCE EXTRACTED (AVE)
Burnout	BN4	.606	.800	.808	.510
	BN6	.756
	BN7	.814
	BN8	.661
Engaging Leadership	EL1	.733	.927	.928	.618
	EL10	.784
	EL11	.802
	EL12	.854
	EL4	.808
	EL5	.743
	EL6	.860
	EL9	.688
Quiet Quitting	QQ4	.633	.763	.762	.456
	QQ5	.768
	QQ6	.636
	QQ7	.655
Role Stress	RS1	.742	.769	.763	.525
	RS2	.709
	RS3	.723
Sense of Community	SOC1	.876	.904	.903	.760
	SOC2	.903
	SOC3	.835

Table 4

HTMT.

	BURNOUT	ENGAGING LEADERSHIP	QUIET QUITTING	ROLE STRESS
Burnout
Engaging Leadership	0.263
Quiet Quitting	0.678	0.313
Role Stress	0.575	0.203	0.452
Sense of Community	0.347	0.337	0.308	0.380

Table 5

Path Coefficient.

PATHS	BETA	MEAN	STD. DEV.	T-VALUE	2.5%	97.5%	SIGNIFICANCE
EL -> RS	–0.203	–0.203	0.044	4.652	–0.289	–0.116	Yes
EL -> SoC	0.332	0.332	0.040	8.248	0.255	0.414	Yes
RS -> BNT	0.498	0.501	0.087	5.697	0.322	0.660	Yes
SoC-> BNT	–0.163	–0.162	0.066	2.469	–0.298	–0.042	Yes
EL -> BNT	–0.137	–0.132	0.045	3.008	–0.232	–0.054	Yes
BNT -> QQ	0.672	0.666	0.058	11.534	0.553	0.776	Yes

[i] Note: EL-Engaging Leadership, RS-Role Stress, BNT-Burnout, SoC-Sense of Community, QQ-Quiet Quitting.

Table 6

Coefficient of Determination (R2).

CONSTRUCT	R-SQUARE	R-SQUARE ADJUSTED
Burnout	0.246	0.244
Quiet Quitting	0.293	0.292
Role Stress	0.030	0.029
Sense of Community	0.097	0.096

Table 7

Predictive Relevance (Q2).

	Q²PREDICT	PREDICTIVE RELEVANCE
Burnout	0.048	Small
Quiet Quitting	0.047	Small
Role Stress	0.025	Small
Sense of Community	0.092	Small – medium

Table 8

Direct Effect, Indirect Effect and Total Effect.

	EFFECT	MEAN	STD DEV	T STATISTICS	BootLLCI (2.5%)	BootULCI (97.5%)
Direct Effect
EL -> BNT	–0.137	–0.132	0.045	3.008	–0.232	–0.054
Indirect Effect
EL-> SoC -> BNT	–0.054	–0.054	0.023	2.350	–0.105	–0.014
EL -> RS -> BNT	–0.101	–0.103	0.032	3.213	–0.170	–0.048
Total Effect
EL -> BNT	–0.292	–0.288	0.045	6.561	–0.380	–0.208

[i] Source: Field Data, p < .05.

	ENGAGING LEADERSHIP
	MY STUDY CENTRE COORDINATOR……	STRONGLY DISAGREE	DISAGREE	NEITHER AGREE OR DISAGREE	AGREE	STRONGLY AGREE
EL1	…encourages facilitators to develop their talents as much as possible.
EL4	…encourages collaboration among course facilitators.
EL5	…actively encourages course facilitators to aim for the same goals
EL6	…promotes course facilitators’ spirit.
EL9	…recognizes ownership of course facilitators’ contributions.
EL10	…is able to enthuse course facilitators with his/her plans.
EL11	…makes course facilitators feel that they contribute to something important
EL12	…is inspiring

	QUIET QUITTING	NEVER	RARELY	SOMETIMES	OFTEN	ALWAYS
QQ4	I feel there is a lack of opportunities to learn and grow in my work with the study centre.
QQ5	I feel there is lack of meaningfulness in my work with the study centre.
QQ6	I feel I lack interest in attending meetings at the study centre
QQ7	I feel there is a lack of passion and enthusiasm in me to work above and beyond.

	BURNOUT	NEVER	RARELY	SOMETIMES	OFTEN	ALWAYS
BN4	At the study centre, I have trouble staying focused.
BN6	During my work at the study centre, I become irritable when things don’t go my way
BN7	I struggle to find any enthusiasm for my work at the study centre
BN8	I feel a strong aversion towards my job at the study centre

	ROLE STRESS	NEVER	RARELY	SOMETIMES	OFTEN	ALWAYS
RS1	I am not sure what is expected of me
RS2	The requirement of my work at the study centre is not always clear.
RS3	I often don’t know what is expected of me at work.
RS4	I have to deal with competing demands at the study centre.

	SENSE OF COMMUNITY	NEVER	RARELY	SOMETIMES	OFTEN	ALWAYS
SOC1	Is there a good atmosphere between you and your colleagues at this study centre.
SOC2	Is there good co-operation between the colleagues at this study centre.
SOC3	Do you feel part of a community at this study centre.

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.18.2.1022 | Journal eISSN: 2304-070X

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 254 - 274

Submitted on: Sep 23, 2025

Accepted on: Oct 29, 2025

Published on: Jun 2, 2026

Published by: International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE)

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

burnout,

job demands–resources (JD–R) model,

structural equation modeling,

study centre coordinators

© 2026 Samuel Yaw Ampofo, Vera Arhin, Michael Boakye-Yiadom, Samuel Oppong, published by International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 18 (2026): Issue 2

Pathway to Quiet Quitting: Role of Sense of Community and Role Stress Between Engaging Leadership and Course Tutors’ Burnout

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 2

Figure 2

Figure 3

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Figure 4

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

Paradigm

My account