Abstract

The study investigated family interference with work conflict (FIW) among female teachers based on selected demographic variables and its impact on their job performance; with job performance as the dependent variable and FIW the independent variable. The data was gathered from 295 female teachers from fifteen FEF girls’ degree colleges across Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through a survey questionnaire of 42 closed-end items on five-point Likert scale. Of the total 295 teachers, 220 respondents including 177 married and 43 unmarried returned the questionnaire. The findings divulged that the teachers faced FIW with different magnitude based on various demographic factors and has an adverse impact on their job performance. The findings are useful for researchers, policy makers, teacher and employers as they give an insight into the female teachers’ problems in their efforts of balancing their roles in family and work domains.

Key Words

Work-family Conflict, College Teachers, Job Performance, Pakistan, KPK

Introduction

Work-family conflict is an inter-role conflict caused by an individual’s efforts to be equally efficient and effective in discharging the expected responsibilities at a time in multiple roles like family and work. To manage a balance needs continuous struggle as both the domains call for the individual’s time and energy leading to physical as well as mental stress. The tussle thus ensued has a pernicious effect on the individual’s performance in both the spheres. 

This inter-role friction is more frequent among working women than men around the globe (Fatima & Sahibzada, 2012). Gender-related expectations further Exacerbate the situation. They have to play dual role in fulfilling their responsibilities at home and work. They go out for working to earn but in return get no concession on chores and their family responsibilities. 

Often work and family domains trespass mutually which make working women’s life stressful. It is more stressful for married working women when they have to prioritize their societal and cultural obligations of procreation and family care. These societal and cultural norms even impact their career choices as they are bound to prefer family over work role and accordingly they opt for jobs.

In a patriarchal society with tightly woven social fabric like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Pakistan, the gender role expectations strictly demarcate women’s career choices. They have limited career options and generally the most suitable jobs considered for women are in medicine and teaching. In case of any deviation they may confront intense work-family conflict (Saher et al., 2013) and even society disapproval. Women have to prefer family over work role but they are supposed to maintain a balance between the roles. A slight tilt to any side results in a clash making women’s life stressful. Studies have shown that female teachers face severe conflict resulting in absenteeism and irregularity which adversely affect their performance (Saher, et al., 2013; Fatima & Sahibzada, 2012). They are unable to discharge their professional obligations effectively which adversely affects the quality of education. 

Prevailing situation in KPK province of Pakistan necessitates a study probing how working women especially teachers are shouldering dual responsibilities while braving the cultural and societal restrictions and to what extent family obligations spill-over are affecting the education they are imparting. This study was designed to investigate work family conflict impact on female teachers’ performance at FEF Colleges. Earlier studies have focused on WFC and its relationship to organizational commitment, job satisfaction, employees’ retention and stress (Saher, et al., 2013; Fatima & Sahibzada, 2012). This study investigates the impact of WFC on the female teachers’ job performance in KPK. 

Research Questions

1) Are female teachers at FEF colleges facing WFC?

2) Is there any difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the selected demographic factors? 

3) Has WFC any impact on the female teachers’ job performance at FEF colleges?

Literature Review

WFC is an individual’s continuous struggle to balance the work and family roles. Failure to do so leads to conflict as fulfilling the requirements of one obstruct The same for the other domain (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). It has been expounded in terms of role theory framework when an individual fails to demonstrate the expected behaviour in both the spheres. 

WFC has three types including time, strain and behaviour based. In time-based WFC, an individual invests more time in one domain results in poor performance in the other (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Sometimes strain experienced in one domain adversely affects the performance in other domains due to the side effect of the structural changes in the role like a new dependent’s care in the family and change in schedule at work. This newly introduced element to the role environment causing strain is called a stressor. The stressor of one domain causes an adverse effect in the other domain like frustration, hypertension and fatigue etc. hindering satisfactory discharge of the role responsibilities. Similarly, a certain role’s behaviour is unacceptable for another, so constant changing of behaviour between the roles becomes hectic and stressful leading to behaviour based conflict. (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Noor, 2010)

Effects of focus on one domain spill over into other (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985) resulting in an individual’s disturbance, sometimes culminating in quitting the job (Ashraf, et al., 2011). Job related factors like commuting problems to workplace, unsupportive colleagues, bothersome boss and constantly changing work schedule etc. affects an individual’s life adversely (Greenhaus & Beutell,1985). When an individual spends more time at work like frequent travelling as a job requirement leaves them with little time for family responsibilities, or a sick child or an old parents’ care demands more time for their care keeps the individual away from work results in time-based WFC (Netemeyer, et al., 1996). Similarly, job-related factors like job burnout due to workload (Netemeyer, et al., 1996), insufficient workplace communication and workplace environment (Greenhaus, et al., 2000) etc. or family-related factors like unsupportive family, dependent children, spouse’s job and aged parents results in cumbersome responsibilities make it impossible to perform as expected and lead to strain based WFC. Sometimes behaviour becomes an issue when there is a mismatch in work and family role environment (Frone, et al., 1997) necessitating constantly adapting behaviour befitting the role. Such a clash results in behaviour based WFC.

Research studies have reported a negative impact on the individual’s health like depression, aggression and anxiety leading to ill-health; interpersonal attitudes like aggression towards family members and divorce and professional attitudes like late coming, sluggishness and procrastination and job dissatisfaction (Cinamon & Rich 2005; Ahmad & Masood, 2011). It also adversely affects job ethics, work satisfaction, job performance and job commitment (Greenhaus, et al., 2000; Maeran, et al., 2013; Ahmad 2008). 




Teachers’ Job Performance




The study measured the teachers’ job performance in terms of adaptive, task and contextual performance. Adaptive performance requires that the teacher must keep abreast of the knowledge and methodological developments in their discipline and subject areas by participating in different interventions. Adaptive performance is reflected in teacher’s ability to respond to emerging demands of the profession, effectively tackle emergencies and stress and creative problem solving (Pulakos, et al., 2000). Task performance encompasses a teacher’s behaviour and activities related to teaching learning process like effective teaching, teaching ethics and interaction with pupils (Cai & Lin, 2006). A teacher’s major tasks include preparing and delivering lectures, giving feedback on students’ assignments, assessment, record keeping, observing class timings and ensuring covering the specified course contents on time. Contextual performance covers a teacher’s contribution to creating a conducive work environment for the attainment of institutional objectives (Cai & Lin, 2006). A teacher can contribute by showing professional integrity and ethics, professional commitment, relationship with the colleagues and providing out of class assistance and guidance for the students’ personal problems solution.  

Studies have shown that WFC has an undesired effect on work behaviour (Frone, et al., 1997). Family demands consume a big chunk of working women’s time taxing the work domain (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Consequently female teachers’ job performance is not what is expected of them (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). WFC induced stress and ill health prevent the female teachers perform to their full potentials crippling the whole education system. So the following proposition was tested: 

 H0 WFC has no significant impact on the job performance of the female teachers at FEF girls’ colleges.




Work-Family Conflict and Teaching Profession  




Studies have revealed unique stressors of teaching profession which include unruly students, interruptive parents, large class size, special kids in the class, colleagues’ support, family support, poor students’ performance and work hour flexibility (Cinamon, et al., 2011; Ross, 1998). These antecedents of WFC affects female teachers more than their male counterparts. 

In light of the literature review, the following demographic factors causing WFC among the female teachers were identified and considered for the study.

Marital Status

Married women face higher WFC than the single working women as additional duties of being a wife and mother leave them with less time for their professional obligations. However, a husband’s role is critical and can go either way (Ahmad & Masood, 2011). In case of working couples and dependent children, intense WFC has been reported (Akintayo, 2010). Studies in Education have found husband’s support, income, household expenses and colleagues support a positive impact on WFC (Fatima & Sahibzada, 2012; Ahmad & Masood, 2011). So, the following hypothesis was developed to test:

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the marital status of the female teachers. 




Family Structure and Support




Studies have shown that in a joint family women enjoy the family and spouse’s support which reduces WFC. They are helped out in handling their children and elders. However, family structure and size is a double edged sword (Inayatullah & Jehangir, 2013). So the following hypothesis was forwarded.     

H0 : There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on family structure and support 







Dependent Children at Home




Women with young children face WFC. Dependent children’s care strains the relationship between work and family. Children’s age and number have an adverse effect. They need care and attention and increase in their number exacerbates the situation. Similarly, children’s age and dependency contribute to WFC. Studies on academics revealed that children and elder’s care responsibilities add to the working women’s strain (Fatima & Sahibzada, 2012; Achour, et al., 2015). The following hypothesis was tested.

H0 There is no significant difference in magnitude of WFC among female teachers based on the number of dependent children at home.

Teaching Work Hours and Class Size




Long and irregular work schedule results in disturb social and family life (Carthy, 2007). Frequent travelling and working for long and irregular hours add to WFC as women in Pakistan are expected to focus more on family responsibilities than work. Long working hours make female teachers drain of energy and time for their household responsibilities (Lee & Zenglim, 2013). Similarly, studies have shown that large class size, lack of working facilities, unsupportive colleagues also lead to WFC and poor performance (Ogbogu, 2013).  However, given fixed hours, holidays and compatibility with women’s nature, teaching is their preferred profession and they can easily manage both the domain as compared to other professions (Cinamon & Rich 2005; Hanif, et al., 2011; Inayatullah & Jehangir, 2013). Based on these factors, the following hypotheses were developed:

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the female teachers’ teaching workload per day.

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC among the female teachers based on the class size they teach. 




Teachers’ Academic Qualifications and Age 




Qualified and senior employees are expected to face low WFC but literature showcases contradictory results. Qualified and senior people enjoy financial relaxation but more demands regarding time and energy escalating WFC. WFC among female teachers is related to teaching tenure and the level they are teaching to (Cinamon & Rich 2005). Another study found age a stressor adversely Impacting female teachers’ performance (Hanif, 2010).  So the following hypotheses were developed: 

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the female teachers’ academic qualifications.

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the female teachers’ age.

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the teachers’ professional qualifications.

Conceptual Framework

The study investigated Family Interference with Work faced by the female teachers with respect to academic qualifications, professional qualifications, dependent children, marital status, teaching workload, family structure and support, class size and age. The study also examined the impact of FIW conflict on their job performance. Job performance was the dependent while FIW was treated as the independent variable. 



Methodology

The study was descriptive and cross-sectional adopting survey questionnaire methodology by administering a reliable and validated instrument to glean the data from female teachers of FEF girls’ colleges.

Population and Sample




A population is a cluster of individual or organizations having some common characteristics which are of interest to the researcher while a sample is a representative subgroup of the population that the researcher intends to study to generalize about the population (Gay, 1992). The population of the study consisted of 168 female lecturers posted in 16 FEF girls colleges across KPK, Pakistan. Keeping in view the small size and ease of access, the sample and population were the same to minimize sampling error and maximize rate of return of the survey questionnaire (Gay, 1992)

Instrumentation




A three-section questionnaire of adopted and self-constructed items were used to glean data from the participants. The participants’ demographic profile section Had 08 items. The second section of FIW consisted of adopted 14 items; first five items were from Netemyer, Boles and McCurrian (1996) developed scale having reliability co-efficient 0.89 while the remaining 08 items were form Gutek, Searle and Kelpa. (1991) developed scale having reliability co-efficient 0.83. The third section comprised of literature extracted 20 items measuring the teachers’ job performance; first 08 items measured the teachers’ task performance, next 06 items measured the teachers’ contextual performance while the last 06 items measured adaptive performance. A five-point Likert scale measured female teachers’ perceptions regarding FIW and job performance. The participants’ responses were coded as ‘strongly agree = 05 and ‘strongly disagree = 01 while negative statements were reverse coded.




Validation of the Questionnaire 




Validity is the characteristic of an instrument of how accurately it measures what it claims to measures (Gay, 1992). The questionnaire comprised already validated adopted items plus self-constructed items. The complete instrument was first validated in consultation with senior faculty members and pilot-tested with thirty-Two (32) female teachers at one of the FEF girls’ colleges. Consequently, some of the adopted items wordings were changed for the ease of understanding to enhance its validity and reliability.

Reliability is another characteristic of a research instrument reflecting its consistency when administered multiple times under similar conditions (Gay, 1992). Internal consistency technique of Cronbach Alpha was adopted for the Instrument reliability. The acceptable value of reliability co-efficient for social sciences is 0.65 (Gay, 1992).  Cronbach Alpha value for FIW items 1-5 was 0.79 which corresponds with the original scale value 0.89 (Netemyer, et al., 1996). Similarly, the reliability co-efficient value for FIW items 06-09 was 0.76 which corresponds with the original co-efficient value 0.83 (Gutek, et al., 1991) while for items 10-14 the co-efficient value was 0.81. The overall FIW scale co-efficient value was 0.82. The co-efficient value for twenty items job performance scale was 0.92.




Data Collection




The questionnaire along with a cover letter was disseminated among FEF college teachers through post after seeking due permission from the concerned authorities.  The completed questionnaires were returned in already provided self-addressed and stamped envelopes. The whole process of survey took six weeks. Totally 295 questionnaires were dispatched to the lecturers of fifteen colleges. Out of these 237 were returned, of which 220 were complete and usable consisting of 80% married and 20% unmarried respondents. The total response rate was 85%. 

Data Analysis and Findings

For descriptive analysis of the data, frequencies and percentages were calculated with the help of SPSS. The decision regarding the majority was made by comparing the addition of strongly agree and Agree (SA+A) with the sum of strongly disagree and Disagree (SDA+DA) while ignoring undecided (UD). The correlation co-efficient (r) was interpreted as: r > 0.69= Strong correlation, 0.50 < r <0.69= Large correlation, 0.30 < r < 0.49= Moderate Correlation and 0.01< r < 0.29 = Weak correlation. Following are the respondents’ demographic details:

Table 1. Frequencies and Percentages of Demographic Profile of the Participants

Academic Qualifications		Age
M.A/M.Sc	M.S/M.Phil	25-35	36-45	? 46
213 (97)	7 (03)	191 (87)	26 (12)	3 (1)
Marital Status		Professional Qualifications
Single	Married	B. Ed	M. Ed	Other
43 (20)	177 (80)	101 (46)	91 (41)	28 (13)
Family Structure		No. of Dependent Children
Joint	Single/Nucleus	0-1	2-3	4-5
129 (59)	91 (41)	95 (43)	117 (53)	8 (04)
Teaching Workload (Classes per Day)		Average Class Size
2-3	4-5	2-23	24-45	46-67
121 (55)	99 (45)	26 (12)	131 (60)	63   28)

             * n = 220

Table 1 reveals that majority of the participants (87%) were 25-35 years old, 97% of them were MA/M.Sc , 46% had professional B. Ed degree holders., 80% were married, 53% had children of age 2-3, 59% were from joint family system, 60% teachers taught a class consisting of 24-45 students and 55% of the teachers taught 2-3 classes per day.

 

Table 2. Frequencies and Percentages of the Respondents’ Responses to FIW

Statements	Responses (n = 220)
	SD(%)	DA(%)	UD(%)	A(%)	SA(%)
Family’s demands interfere with my work activities	00(00)	57(26)	11(05)	148(67)	4(02)
Delaying work activities due to my home responsibilities.	01(00)	57(26)	23(10)	131(60)	8(04)
Thing can’t get done at work because of my family’s demands	06(03)	52(24)	16(07)	123(56)	23(10)
Home life interferes with my work responsibilities like starting or accomplishing tasks on time or work over time	05(02)	48(22)	23(10)	132(60)	12(05)
Family strain interferes with my ability to do job duties.	06(03)	57(26)	22(10)	124(56)	11(05)
Because of home chores, often feeling tired at work	07(03)	55(25)	11(05)	125(57)	22(10)
Because of enormous family responsibilities, I keep thinking about them at work.	07(03)	33(15)	23(10)	138(63)	19(09)
My co-workers dislike  my thinking about my personal life worries during work hours	06(03)	63(29)	36(16)	102(46)	13(06)
Much of my time I want to spend at work is taken by my personal life	02(01)	61(28)	20(09)	133(60)	4(02)
Because of my family responsibilities, I’m not emotionally tired at work.	21(10)	110(50)	23(10)	61(28)	5(02)
Have headaches at work due to family responsibilities induced strain	08(04)	74(34)	16(07)	102(46)	20(09)
I don’t feel stressed in balancing family and work.	22(10)	126(57)	10(05)	56(25)	6(03)
When at work I am worried about my children.	09(04)	66(30)	16(07)	114(52)	15(07)
I feel working more I can comfortably handle.	00(00)	23(10)	16(07)	161(73)	20(09)

 

Table 2 shows that majority of the teachers confessed that family demands interfered with their work activities (69%) and they delayed doing things at work Due to family demands (64%). Majority of them maintained that the things they wanted to do at work didn’t get done due to family demands (66%), home life interfered with responsibilities at work (65%) and family strain interfered with job duties (61%). Majority of the teachers felt tired because of family chores (67%) and they were haunted by their family responsibilities while at work (72%). Majority believed that their colleagues disliked their preoccupation with personal life while at work (52%) and their personal life consumed much of their time that they wanted to spend at work. (62%). Similarly, a majority of them were worried about their dependent children (59%) and had headache due to family Responsibilities induced strain while at work (52%). Majority felt overworked (82%). Similarly, a majority disagreed and they did not feel emotionally tired at work because of family responsibilities (60%) or stressed in keeping balance between family and work (67%).

 

 

Table 3. Frequencies and Percentages of the Respondents’ Responses to Task Performance

Statements	Participants (n = 220)
	SD(%)	DA(%)	UD(%)	A(%)	SA(%)
Due to family responsibilities usually I’ m not prepared for my classes.	00(00)	82(37)	09(04)	120(55)	09(04)
Due to family responsibilities, I have no time to check students’ papers and assignments thoroughly.	02(01)	55(25)	18(08)	140(64)	05(02)
Due to family responsibilities, I face difficulty in completing job tasks in time.	06(03)	73(33)	09(04)	120(55)	12(05)
Due to family responsibilities, I have no time for lecture preparation at home.	05(02)	54(25)	12(05)	133(60)	16(07)
Due to family responsibilities, I find it difficult to complete my course in time.	00(00)	10(05)	76(35)	14(06)	120(55)
Due to family responsibilities, I have to put extra efforts to create learning environment for students.	02(01)	58(26)	16(07)	139(63)	05(02)
Due to family responsibilities, I can’t keep students’ assessment records properly.	05(02)	80(36)	9(04)	114(52)	12(05)
Due to family responsibilities, I can’t commit extra time after work hours even if the job demands	05(02)	49(22)	07(03)	125(57)	34(15)

Table 3 shows that majority of the teachers conceded that they were neither well prepared for the classes (59%) nor had time to check students’ assignments and papers thoroughly (66%). They had no sufficient time at home to prepare a lecture (67%). The teachers maintained that they had difficulty in completing course (61%) or any other job related tasks in time (60%). They had to work extra to create a conducive environment for the students’ learning (65%). Majority of the teachers could not maintain the students’ assessments records properly (57%) or commit extra hours after work even if the job demanded (72%).

 

Table 4. Frequencies and Percentages of the Respondents’ Responses to Contextual Performance

Statements	Participants (n = 220)
	SD(%)	DA(%)	UD(%)	A(%)	SA(%)
Due to family responsibilities, I at times get angry at students	03(01)	86(39)	18(08)	103(47)	10(05)
Due to family responsibilities, I can’t volunteer myself for additional tasks except teaching.	04(02)	69(31)	06(03)	124(56)	17(08)
Due to family responsibilities, I have no time and energy to communicate with co-workers.	07(03)	67(30)	12(05)	126(57)	08(04)
Because of family I come late in morning and depart early from college	05(02)	85(39)	08(04)	100(45)	22(10)
Due to family responsibilities, I usually take leave from work.	07(03)	58(26)	15(07)	137(62)	03(01)
Due to family responsibilities, I usually take half-day leave.	05(02)	66(30)	1(00)	135(61)	13(06)

 

Table 4 shows that majority of the teachers confessed that at times they got angry at the students (52%). They were unwilling to shoulder any additional tasks other than the routine teaching (64%). They lacked time and energy to communicate With their co-workers (61%). Majority of them often reached college late and departed early (55%) and frequently took half-day (67%) or full day (63%) leave from work.

                

Table 5. Frequencies and Percentages of the Respondents’ Responses to Adaptive Performance

Statements	Participants (n = 220)
	SD(%)	DA(%)	UD(%)	A(%)	SA(%)
Due to family responsibilities I don’t have time to study about developments in my field and subject.	04(02)	60(27)	16(07)	132(60)	08(04)
Due to family responsibilities I can’t leave hometown to do job tasks.	04(02)	34(15)	14(06)	99(45)	69(31)
In the morning I’m not enthusiastic for going to work	02(01)	64(29)	15(07)	123(56)	16(07)
Due to family responsibilities I can’t get further professional degrees or attend training sessions	04(02)	56(25)	14(06)	128(58)	18(08)
Due to family responsibilities I don’t welcome change in  my job life.	02(01)	41(19)	14(06)	129(59)	34(15)
Due to family responsibilities I can’t handle stress caused by a new task assigned to me.	04(02)	63(29)	29(13)	108(49)	16(07)

Table 5 indicates that majority of the teachers neither could keep themselves abreast of the new developments in their field and subject (64%) nor go out of home town to perform job tasks (76%). They felt unenthusiastic to go to work in the morning (63%). Majority of teachers couldn’t improve their professional qualifications or participant in training sessions (66%). They were neither ready to accept any change in their routine job life (74%) nor could handle stress triggered by any new assigned task (56%).

 

Table 6. Correlation Analysis between WFC and Teachers’ Job Performance

Job Performance			Work Family Conflict
			r	Sig.
Dimensions  of Job Performance	1	Contextual Performance	.783**	.000
	2	Adaptive Performance	.710**	.000
	3	Task Performance	.792**.	.000
Job Performance			.832**	.000

Table 6 shows significant correlation between WFC and the teachers’ contextual performance (r=0.783, p =.000); adaptive performance (r= 0.710, p=.000); task performance (r= 0.792, p=.000) and the teachers’ Job Performance as whole (r= 0.832, p= .000) respectively.

 

Table 7. Regression Analysis of WFC and Teachers’ Job Performance

Variable	Coefficient	Std.error		t-Statistic	Probability
Constant	0.117	0.148		0.785	0.433
Family Interference With Work	0.969	0.44		22.179	0.000
R-squared			0.693
F-statistic			491.887
Prob(F-statistic)			0.000

Table 7 shows that WFC has a significant impact on the teachers’ job performance. One unit change in WFC mean brings 0.696 units change in job performance.

 

Table 8. Comparison of the Participants’ Demographic Groups Regarding WFC

Respondents’ Demographics		N	Mean	Std. Dev.	Std. Error	T	Df	Sig.
Marital Status	Single	43	2.42	.384	.059	-23.20	218	.000
	Married	177	3.58	.270	.020
Family Structure	Joint	129	3.20	.640	.056	-5.34	218	.000
	Nucleus	91	3.58	.258	.027
Academic Qualifications	M.A/M.Sc	213	3.39	.522	.036	4.99	218	.000
	M.S/M.Phil	7	2.39	.505	.191
Teaching Workload Per Day	2-3	121	3.34	.551	.050	-.374	218	.709
	4-5	99	3.37	.550	.055

Table 8 illustrates that there is a significant difference among the respondents’ groups in terms of family structure, marital status and academic qualifications as t = -23.20, p = .000, t = - 5.34, p = .000 and t = .499, p = .000) respectively; however, in case of teaching work-load the difference is insignificant as t = -.374, p = .709.

 

Table 9. Comparison of the Participants’ Demographic Groups Regarding WFC

Factor	Groups	Sum of Squares	Df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Age	Between Groups	.603	2	.301	.998	.370
	Within Groups	65.544	217	.302
	Total	66.147	219
No. of Children	Between Groups	15.944	2	7.972	34.46	.000
	Within Groups	50.203	217	.231
	Total	66.147	219
Professional Qualifications	Between Groups	15.469	2	7.734	33.12	.000
	Within Groups	50.678	217	.234
	Total	66.147	219
Class Size	Between Groups	4.679	2	2.340	8.259	.000
	Within Groups	61.468	217	.283
	Total	66.147	219
Post Hoc (LSD)
Factor	(I)	(J) Respondents Group	Mean Difference (I-J)	Std. Error	Sig.	95% Confidence Interval
						Lower Bound	Upper Bound
Age	25-35	36-45	-.131	.115	.256	-.36	.10
		46 & Above	-.283	.320	.377	-.91	.35
No. of Children	0-1	2-3	-.536*	.066	.000	-.67	-.41
		4-5	-.631*	.177	.000	-.98	-.28
Professional Qualifications	B.Ed	M.Ed	-.702*	.103	.000	-.91	-.50
		Other	-.845*	.104	.000	-1.05	-.64
Class Size	2-23	24-45	-.319*	.114	.006	-.55	-.09
		46-67	-.501*	.124	.000	-.75	-.025

 

Table 9 shows that the difference among different demographic groups based on number of dependent children, professional qualifications and class size is significant, however, regarding age there is an insignificant difference. 

Discussion on Findings

The prime objectives of the study were to examine FIW conflict among the FEF lecturers of KPK and to find out the impact of FIW conflict on the female lecturers’ job performance. 

 Studies have shown that children and elders’ care responsibility (Greenhaus, et al., 2000), academic and professional qualification (Lloyd et al., 2002), marital status (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985; Saher, et al.,2013), age (Netemeyer, et al., 1996), class size and workload are the main factors causing WFC (Cinamon, et Al., 2011; Ross, 1998). This study confirmed the previous studies’ findings and a significant difference among the groups was found based on academic and professional qualifications, number of dependent children, number of students in the class, marital status and family structure. However, in terms of Age and the number of classes they take per day the difference between the groups was insignificant. The married women have more family responsibilities and Accordingly they face greater WFC as compared to unmarried women and the same was confirmed by the study. In conservative environment where socio-cultural and gender role based value are deep rooted, the women have to fulfil dual responsibilities of work and home single-handedly and it is very stressful to strike a balance between the two over a long period. Wedlock and motherhood bring further home related responsibilities which demand more time and results in escalated conflict. The study showed that the married female teachers suffer higher conflict than unmarried. Similarly, the study found that the number of dependent children at home chip in to the conflict intensification which confirms the findings of a study that the number of dependent children and elder care responsibilities is considered women’s department (Netemeyer, et al., 1996, Cinamon, et al., 2011) and adds to the WFC. Academic and professional qualifications not only boost job prospects but also bring financial prosperity and lower WFC. Like other studies (Cinamon, et al., 2011), the study showed that the size of a class matters and adds to WFC. Large classes not only create discipline problems but also adversely affect a teacher’s performance as they cannot concentrate on the individual student’s needs in the class. It takes more time to check a large class assignments and keeping record which ultimately worsens WFC. The findings of the study revealed that the teachers’ age and teaching workload were not making any difference among the participants regarding WFC. It may be because with age women’s family responsibilities decrease and their management skills improve which enables them to move efficiently at home as well as work. Similarly, they teach specific subjects over a period of time to the students of same education level. They deliver the same lecture again and again and do not have to prepare afresh, so the number of classes they take per day does not add to WFC.

Conclusions

The study revealed that the female teachers faced FIW conflict and had an adverse effect on their work domain. Significance difference was found based on demographic factors that is marital status, family structure, academic and professional qualifications, class size and the number of young children at home while regarding teaching workload and age no significant difference was found among them. Accordingly, the following propositions were rejected or accepted. 

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the marital status of the female teachers. (Rejected)

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on family structure and support. (Rejected)

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the female teachers’ academic qualifications. (Rejected)

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the female teachers’ teaching workload per day. (Accepted)

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the female teachers’ age. (Accepted)

H0 There is no significant difference in magnitude of WFC among female teachers based on the number of dependent children at home. (Rejected)

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC based on the teachers’ professional qualifications. (Rejected)

H0 There is no significant difference in the magnitude of WFC among the female teachers based on the class size they teach. (Rejected)

The study showed strong significant correlation between WFC and job performance. Moreover, WFC had an adverse impact on all the three aspects of teachers’ performance i.e. adaptive, task and contextual performance and also the teachers’ over-all job performance. Hence the following proposition is rejected: 

H0 Work-family conflict has no significance impact upon the female teachers’ job performance.

Recommendations

The study may be replicated by adding a comparative dimensions on provincial, gender and locality bases. Since the study was unidirectional of FIW, another study may be conducted bi-directionally by including WIF along FIW. Similarly, a study with qualitative approach investigating WFC among female academicians in KPK will provide rich data for deeper insight into the factors causing WFC. 

References

• Achour, M., Grine, F., & Roslan Mohd Nor, M. (2014). Work-family conflict and coping strategies: Qualitative study of Muslim female academicians in Malaysia. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 17(10), 1002-1014.
• Ahmad, A. (2008). Direct and Indirect Effects of Work-Family Conflict on Job Performance, The Journal of International Management Studies, 3,176- 180.
• Ahmad, M. S. & Masood, M. T. (2011). Work Family Conflict among Women University teachers: A case from Pakistan, European Journal of Social Sciences, 23, 119-130.
• Akintayo, D. I. (2010). Work-family conflict and organization commitment among industrial work-ers in Nigeria, Journal of Psychology and counseling, 2, 1-8.
• Ashraf, A., Nadeem, S., Zaman, K., & Malik, I. A. (2011). Work Family Conflict and Organizational Commitment: A case study of Higher Education Institutes of Pakistan, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 2, 372-392.
• Cai, Y., & Lin (2006). Theory and practice on teacher performance evaluation, Frontiers of Education in China, 1, 29-39.
• Cinamon, R. G. & Rich, Y. (2005). Work-family conflict among female teachers, Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 365-378.
• Cinamon, R. G., Rich, Y. & Mina, W. (2011). Teachers' occupation-specific Work Family Conflict, Journal of Career Development Quarterly, 55, 156-173
• Fatima, N. & Sahibzada, A. S. (2012). An Empirical Analysis of Factors Affecting Work Life Bal-ance among University Teachers: the case of Pakistan, Journal of International Academic Re-search,12, 16-29.
• Frone, M. R., Yardley, J. K. & Markel, K. S. (1997). Developing and testing an integrative model of the work-family interface, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 50, 145-167.
• Gay, L. R. (1992). Educational Research (4th Ed.), New York: Merrill Publishing Company.
• Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles, Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.
• Greenhaus, J. H., Callanan, G. A., & Godshalk, V. M. (2000). Career management