THE ADVERSITY QUOTIENT OF THE LECTURER FACULTY OF NURSING, UNIVERSITAS PADJADJARAN IN PANDEMIC COVID-19

The emergence of various obstacles and challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic can affect the performance of lecturers in carrying out their duties. The dversity quotient is one of the factors that supports one's success in improving one's performance, so measuring the adversity quotient is the first step to discover lecturers' ability to face obstacles and challenges. This study aims to describe the level of adversity quotient for lecturers at the Faculty of Nursing, Universitas Padjadjaran during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study uses a quantitative descriptive method. The subjects studied were 39 nursing faculty lecturers. The instrument used is ARP (Adversity Response Profile) Quick Take TM modified with 40 statement items. The results showed that 23 people (59%) were at the camper-to-climber transition level, two people (5%) were at the camper level, and 14 people (36%) were at the climber level. Based on the sub-dimensions, it is known that the dimensions with the lowest and lowest average values are origin and ownership (37.41) and control (42.53). Lecturers must increase the adversity quotient to help control the challenges they face better. Efforts that can be made are by studying and practicing the LEAD method (Listen, Explore, Analyze, Do). With a good level of adversity quotient, it is hoped that lecturers will be more prepared and maximal in completing assignments, especially related to learning.


INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a shift in learning methods, from face-to-face to online learning.These changes have an impact on the learning process that occurs for students and lecturers (Kahveci et al., 2008).In the process, online learning is a method of learning that is carried out in a network, meaning that students and lecturers do not meet face to face, but remotely using technological assistance (Sofyana & Rozaq, 2019).Integrating technology into higher education teaching and learning requires changes in lecturers' knowledge, beliefs and perceptions of educational technology (Blonder et al., 2022).In addition, the COVID-19 outbreak has forced lecturers to switch to online teaching without maximum preparation (Hodges et al., 2020).This is because most lecturers adhere to face-to-face learning methods, and use technology only to support frontal teaching (Feldman-Maggor et al., 2016).Especially in nursing education institutions that are characterized by practical learning in face-to-face learning, changes in online learning methods provide obstacles and challenges for lecturers (Furukawa et al., 2017).Manurung (2021) stated learning using technology can increase the effectiveness of lecturers' performance by facilitating work in an unlimited range of space and time.However, the obstacle is that online learning requires a lot of time and energy from lecturers compared to faceto-face learning (Simamora, R, M et al., 2020).This is related to the lecturer's ability to organize the space and time limit between office work and homework (Katharine Naidu, 2021).In addition, lecturers' skills in using learning technology become an obstacle in providing teaching so that the transfer of knowledge and the relationship between lecturers and students become inadequate as well as other obstacles such as poor internet connections owned by lecturers (Aji et al., 2020;Mishra et al., 2020).
Based on the research conducted by Dewi et al (2019) nursing lecturers have a high mental workload, including 74.4% of lecturers have a high mental workload on education and teaching tasks, 76.7% of lecturers have a high mental workload on research tasks, and 74.4% of lecturers have a high mental workload on community service tasks.The high workload can lead to decreased work productivity in lecturers.In fact, the performance of lecturers in providing good teaching and assessment will support students to achieve more optimal learning outcomes (Shrestha et al., 2019).
Lecturer performance will affect the quality of the learning process provided (Miguel et al., 2021).Lecturers who have good performance will never be satisfied with their achievements and will continue to improve the implementation of their work (Kartikasari & Wiarta, 2021).Ahmad Susanto (2016) stated that there are two factors that affect lecturer performance, namely internal factors and external factors.Internal factors are factors that come from within such as personality, skills, work motivation, experience, and the ability to solve problems or adversity quotient.External factors are factors that come from outside such as salary, facilities and infrastructure, work environment, and leadership.Lecturers' ability to solve problems or adversity quotient is an internal factor that is very important for lecturers to be resilient in facing difficulties, determining the right steps to solve problems and turning obstacles into opportunities (Feldhammer-kahr et al., 2021).In addition, adversity quotient can be used by lecturers to increase endurance and tenacity in the teaching and learning process and also face the changing era of education (Uphill et al., 2019).
AQ of the lecturer' is closely related to motivation and work environment (kumari & Kumar, 2023).However, changes in the teaching and learning system and changes in the work environment during the COVID-19 pandemic from working from the office to working from home have caused a decrease in work motivation due to various obstacles such as inadequate online learning support facilities, low literacy skills, difficult internet access, and lack of ability to master technology (Afriani M, 2021;Rokhani., 2020).In fact, the ability of lecturers to overcome problems, understand the realities that occur to face challenges in carrying out their duties and obligations is needed so that the teaching and learning process can take place smoothly (F.Firmansyah & Bandono, 2022;Mayangsari, 2021).The ability to adapt to various changes is also needed by lecturers in planning, preparing and developing more interesting learning methods (Hodges, 2020).A good level of adversity quotient can help lecturers balance various work activities as lecturers, perform additional non-structural tasks, social and personal activities of the lecturers.Skills in resolving challenges will support the development of effective mechanisms so as to prevent work errors in lecturers (Miguel et al., 2021).In addition, the instrument approach used in this study is a modified instrument adapted to the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic and complements the limited research on AQ in lecturers.Based on that, this study aims to determine the level of adversity quotient of Universitas Padjadjaran nursing faculty lecturers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS Research Design
This research is a quantitative descriptive study with the aim of explaining an event or event that is explained according to the facts that occur.

Population and Sample
The population in this study were all lecturers of the Faculty of Nursing, Universitas Padjadjaran, totaling 90 people.The sampling technique used was total sampling so that the entire population was sampled in the study.The sample size in research using online surveys is calculated based on a minimum response rate of 33% (Nulty, 2008).The sample in this study was obtained as many as 39 lecturers (43.4%) of the total population.This study uses an instrument developed by Paul G. Stoltz, Ph.D, namely ARP (Adversity Response Profile) Quick Take TM consisting of 30 events arranged based on adversity quotient subdimensions namely control, origin and ownership, reach, and endurance.Each event has 2 statement items, so there are a total of 60 statement items.Of the 30 events on the instrument, 20 events are events that contain difficulties or obstacles while the other 10 events are distraction events.Of the 20 events, there are 40 statement items that affect the adversity quotient score (Stoltz, 2000).In this study, using 40 statement items that affect the adversity quotient score.The events in the instrument will be modified according to the events faced by lecturers during the COVID-19 pandemic.Each dimension of adversity quotient consists of 10 statement items.Respondents are given five answer options using a Likert scale of 1-5 on each sub-dimension (table 1).Furthermore, respondents can choose the answer according to the statement felt by the respondent.

Instrument
The validity test and reliability test of the instrument have been carried out by Laura dan Sunjoyo ( 2009) with the results of the validity test, which has a Corrected item-total correlation value of 0.4-0.8, it can be concluded that the ARP Quick Response TM instrument is valid, and the reliability test results have a cronbach alpha coefficient value of 0.950 so that the instrument is reliable.Then, the instrument that has been tested for validity and reliability of the modified instrument is adjusted to the setting during the COVID-19 pandemic.The validity test shows a value of 0.439 with a table value of 0.361 so that the instrument is considered valid because the value of r count>r table.The reliability test showed a Cronbach Alpha value of 0.884.

Research Procedure
The data collection procedure was conducted online using Google Forms.In this form, respondents will get an explanation of the purpose and benefits of the study as well as instructions for filling out the questionnaire, then respondents can fill out an informed consent form to state whether or not they agree to participate in the study.For respondents who agree to be involved in the study, they can fill in demographic data and research questionnaires.If the respondents did not understand the statement items on the form, they could ask the researcher through the contact information on the form.Finally, if there are incomplete or unanswered answers, the researcher will return them to the respondents to be completed.Furthermore, the data was processed with stages consisting of editing, coding, data entry, and tabulation.

Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel using the IF formula.The data processed is in the form of numbers that have been coded by scoring 1-5 on each answer.After the data was collected, the data was calculated by summing up all the results to determine the score of the adversity quotient level.Then, the summation results are categorized and interpreted using an ordinal measuring scale.The assessment of the level of adversity quotient is carried out with the category range determined by ARP Quick Take TM , namely 0-59 (Quitter), 60-94 (Quitter to Camper Transition), .
In addition, the data were also analyzed based on sub-dimensions to determine the distribution of average values in each sub-dimension.The analysis was carried out by grouping the research data based on sub dimensions, then the data was summed per sub dimension and the average value in each sub dimension was obtained.The results of this analysis will show the sub dimensions that must be maintained, improved or repaired, so that more specific results will be obtained.

Ethical Clearance
This research has obtained permission from the ethics commission of Universitas Padjadjaran with the number 865/UN6.KEP/EC/2021.

RESULT Demographic Characteristics
Demographic data includes age, gender, latest education, length of service, and role.The data is presented as frequencies and percentages.Based on table 2, it can be seen that in the characteristics of age, respondents aged 30-40 years were 12 people (30.8%), while at the age of > 40 years there were 27 people (69.2%).Based on gender characteristics, respondents with male gender were 14 people (35.9%), while in female gender there were 25 people (64.1%).Based on the characteristics of the last education S2 there are 32 people (82.1%), while in the last education S3 there are 7 people (17.9%).Based on the length of work < 5 years there are 5 people (12.8%), the length of work 5 -10 years there are 6 people (15.4%), the length of work 10 -15 years there are 9 people (23.1%), while the length of work > 15 years there are 19 people (48.7%).Based on table 3, it can be seen that the highest percentage of Adversity Quotient levels of Universitas Padjadjaran Faculty of Nursing Lecturers are in the camper to climber transition group, namely 23 people (59%).In addition, the camper group was 2 people (5%), and the climber group was 14 people (36%).Based on table 4, the results of the average distribution of adversity quotient based on its dimensions, there is the highest average result in the Control dimension, which is 42.53.The lowest average result is in the Origin and Ownership dimension, which is 37.41.In addition, the average in the Reach dimension is 38.87 and the average in the Endurance dimension is 40.25.

DISCUSSION Adversity Quotient Level
One of the life challenges faced by lecturers is related to work.During the COVID-19 pandemic, new challenges faced by lecturers in carrying out their roles include challenges in mastering technology in operating distance learning systems, challenges in time management in preparing and evaluating teaching media, challenges in carrying out research and community service during the COVID-19 pandemic (Adiawaty, 2020).In addition, the many system changes that occurred due to adjustments to the situation caused confusion with information about new tasks that felt overwhelming coupled with high expectations from stakeholders that lecturers did not understand.Many lecturers struggled to create boundaries between work and home environments (Blake E. Ashforth, Glen E. Kreiner, 2020).The flexibility of working from home also blurs the boundaries of time and space as it is no longer restricted by standard campus hours and this encourages academics to work according to erratic work schedules, which can be early in the morning, late at night or even take weekends (Derks Daantje, 2012).However, this statement is not in line with Feldhammer-kahr et al (2021) which states that lecturers are satisfied with their work and grow their knowledge and skills.This depends on the lecturer's ability to adjust to new situations and demands, the goals he sets for himself, as well as the resources and environmental support them has (Uphill et al., 2019).
The professionalism of the teaching staff in teaching and learning influences the success of students in achieving their learning goals (Made Umbara, 2019).The professionalism of teaching staff is shown by maximum performance and disciplined behavior (Yudani et al., 2013).Professional lecturers will be able to motivate themselves, develop themselves into better education and work in accordance with professional ethics (Kartikasari & Wiarta, 2021).In addition, a teaching staff must have a strong desire to face difficulties and be able to overcome their difficulties to find the right solution by involving their potential, one of which is adversity quotient (Mayudana, 2020).Cerya (2017) and Sukardewi et al ( 2013) showed a significant relationship between adversity quotient and performance.This means that the better the level of adversity quotient possessed, the teaching staff will be able to show good performance as educators.Conversely, if the teaching staff has a low level of adversity quotient, it tends to form lecturers who easily give up in facing problems, and reduce motivation at work (Santiari et al., 2020).
AQ is a very significant component of assessment to measure a lecturer's level of success and resilience in the face of failure (Wang et al., 2021;Zhao et al., 2022).AQ is the key to a person in dealing with work in an effort to achieve the goals that have been set.In achieving it, obstacles may be found so that high AQ will bring strong self-control and is closely related to one's performance (Ablaña, M. V. B., & Isidro, 2015; Runtu et al., 2019;Hong, 2020).Each person has a different level of AQ.Stoltz (2000) divides AQ into five groups.Quitters are individuals who, when faced with challenges, will resist and avoid challenges, and this group tends to give up easily.The Quitter to Camper transition is individuals who choose not to utilize their potential but still try to fight challenges even though they have not maximized opportunities.Campers are individuals who choose to stop developing their potential because they are comfortable with their current condition and ignore opportunities that may occur and tend to be risk-averse towards new challenges.The Camper to Climber transition is an individual who is able to survive challenges by utilizing most of their potential to develop.Climber is an individual who lives and understands his life with complete passion and interprets the many opportunities that come and is not afraid of the risks of new challenges.
Based on the results of the study, the adversity quotient of UNPAD nursing faculty lecturers is known to be 23 people (59%) in the camper to climber transition group.The high percentage of Adversity Quotient levels in the camper to climber transition group is certainly inseparable from the factors that influence the ability of lecturers to face challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as motivational factors and factors embracing current changes.With strong self-motivation can lead a person to create opportunities in difficulties and solve difficulties by using their abilities (Stoltz, 2000).So that when faced with various challenging tasks during the COVID-19 pandemic, Universitas Padjadjaran Faculty of Nursing Lecturers can handle it well.Furthermore, the factor of embracing change, groups by building a good perception of the changes that occur can respond to change more constructively, this is in line with the conditions of the Universitas Padjadjaran Faculty of Nursing Lecturers who are involved in distance learning to overcome changes in learning methods for students who have difficulty accessing lecture materials.
Then in terms of age, the respondents of this study are at the adult age level.This affects leadership style and behavior.Galanou Ekaterini (2010) stated Younger people are more comfortable in rapidly changing environments and are willing to take risks by considering new approaches.A person of mature age has more energy and greater capacity to tackle problems (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).In addition, the profession of nursing lecturers, which is dominated by women, also affects the way of decision making and problem solving related to values, beliefs, and ways of thinking (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).Finally, the respondents' level of education ranged from master's degrees to doctoral degrees.Tigchelaar & Bekhet (2015) stated higher education will result in better performance and influence one's success in solving certain problems.

Adveristy Quotient Based on Sub-dimensions Sub-dimension: Control
Control is the degree of control an individual feels over adverse events.The key to this subdimension is "to feel", which questions the extent to which a person can feel that they are able to overcome the obstacles that prevent them from achieving their goals (Stoltz, 2000).The control sub-dimension of AQ reflects that a person can partially control adverse events depending on the complexity of the difficulties they may face.People do not give up easily in the face of adversity but may find it difficult to be in control if the situation worsens (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).The indicators used in determining the control sub-dimension are problem focus, maintaining attitudes, and support from others, such as being able to control yourself in problems, accepting all the risks that occur in life, and trying to care about the problems that occur (Ng, 2013).A person who has higher AQ simply perceives greater control over life events than those with lower AQ.As a result, they take more actions that result in more control (Widodo et al., 2022).The more one feels in control of a difficult situation, the more one feels able to cope with it (Stoltz, 2000).Someone who has a good level of control will not be easily influenced and is always confident in making decisions (A.H. Firmansyah et al., 2016).

Sub-dimension: Origin and Ownership
Origin and ownership are self-recognition of the difficulties faced.This sub-dimension measures the extent to which a person takes responsibility for the adversity and the contribution required to improve the situation.This suggests that a person has a tendency to focus on aspects of adversity that they believe to be the direct cause but may not be willing to take part in the larger aspects, thereby contributing to improving the problem (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).A person who has a high level of origin tends to recognize their mistakes, does not exaggerate their mistakes and has a tendency to consider internal and external sources of difficulties into perspective (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).On the other hand, someone who has low origin tends to feel afraid of facing obstacles, which lowers their work performance (Stoltz, 2000).
Another thing that often appears in someone who has a high level of origin is that they tend to have high feelings of guilt.These feelings of guilt have good and bad functions, good functions can help individuals to learn and reflect and adjust behavior for self-improvement, while the bad function of this guilt can also cause regret which ultimately weakens one's self (Cerya, 2017).Someone who has a high origin value is characterized by thinking about their future, maintaining and improving their progress, and always trying to find the best solution in every problem they face (Ng, 2013).
In line with origin, the ownership sub-dimension explains how much a person is willing to take responsibility for a problem to improve the situation (Hutagalung et al., 2018).The higher a person's ownership score, the more they own the outcome to detach from the cause.However, the lower the ownership indicates that many individuals are not responsible for their problems.With lecturers interpreting that every faculty task is part of themselves will make themselves psychologically connected to the faculty so that interpreting the success of the faculty will determine their success (Dávila dan Jiménez Garcia, 2012).This is of course also related to support from the faculty.The extent to which the faculty values lecturers' contributions and cares about their well-being, for example by providing resources, information, and showing appreciation, can influence lecturers' sense of belonging and responsibility to the faculty (Stayhorn, 2019).

Sub-dimension: Reach
Firmansyah et al ( 2016) states that reach measures how far a difficulty can affect their lives.Reach determines how much a person considers the problem at which level.The bigger the problem that arises, the more it will increase the potential for fear, helplessness, apathy, and inaction so that a high reach score can effectively limit the range of difficulties so that a person feels more empowered and less overwhelmed (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).Low reach will form problems as obstacles, they do not have calmness in thinking, on the other hand, high reach will make someone focus on achieving their goals and not easily give up if they face failure (Stoltz, 2000).This dimension describes the extent of the impact of challenges experienced by individuals on their lives.Expanding the impact of adverse events is caused by a person's low reach.While limiting the impact of adverse events is caused by a person's high reach (Cerya, 2017).
Someone who has a low AQ will find it difficult to limit the difficulties faced so that it has an impact on their other lives.In fact, the ability to limit problems can be a means for someone to be able to think clearly and make decisions wisely, because if the problem is allowed to continue to spread, it will make someone lose their foundation (Ng, 2013).

Sub-dimension: Endurance
Endurance is defined as a person's perception to endure both good and bad events (Stoltz, 2000).Endurance will measure how much hope or strong optimism in facing a problem.Someone who has a high endurance score, will consider difficulties and their causes as something fleeting and temporary so that they will focus on achieving their goals.However, people who have a low endurance score will view difficulties as permanent and difficult to overcome (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).Individuals with low endurance will blame themselves and find it difficult to persevere compared to those who attribute failure to their efforts (Cerya, 2017).
By assessing endurance, it will be known how long the problem and its causes will last and the extent of a person's speed and accuracy in overcoming difficulties.This relates to expectations about the good and bad of one's future condition (Tigchelaar & Bekhet, 2015).The higher the endurance, the higher the ability to deal with these difficulties, so to get it one needs to have high motivation, perseverance, persistence, and self-confidence (Ng, 2013).LEAD (Listen, Explore, Analyze, Do) or its acronym in LEAD is one of the techniques that can be used to increase a person's Adversity Quotient level.Paul Stoltz, Ph.D. Listen (L) means to listen to our response when facing challenges.Evaluate what things can be done for ourselves to reduce the difficulties we are experiencing, making sure that this is an excellent opportunity for self-growth, competency improvement, and satisfaction with one's performance.When lecturers can assess difficulties as challenges, lecturers can focus on contributing themselves to problemsolving and will take action to overcome difficulties (Hase et al., 2019).Explore (E) Exploration of self-ability as much as possible regarding experience, knowledge, and other self-competencies.The better the self-exploration, the greater the desire to improve the difficulties encountered (Saragih et al., 2021).Analyze (A) for lecturers means analyzing evidence if the lecturer feels difficulties with the obstacles they face.This stage can help the lecturer analyze which things are facts and which are only negative images.Do (D) for lecturers means doing something that can be done after going through the previous stages.After listening, exploring, and analyzing abilities, do something systematically and with careful planning.To increase the Adversity Quotient of Lecturers of the Faculty of Nursing, Universitas Padjadjaran, it is necessary to increase the dimensions of origin and ownership.This problem can be done using Peer Group Discussions between lecturers.Sharing teaching problems, finding solutions, and creating innovations that build hopes for health education in the future, so that the information gathered during COVID-19 becomes material for shaping the future of health education (Cleland et al., 2020).

CONCLUSION
This study shows that the level of AQ among nursing lecturers during the COVID-19 pandemic is at the camper to climber transition level.This indicates that during the COVID-19 pandemic lecturers can survive challenges related to learning and teaching activities by using their potential.However, improving some aspects of its adversity quotient is still necessary to increase its effectiveness in facing challenges.The adversity quotient aspect that needs to be improved is the control aspect, where the average dimension is the lowest compared to other dimensions.This dimension can be improved with clear and transparent communication between lecturers to get complete information.Besides that, online teaching training is needed, such as how to use a digital platform, video conference system, or other online teaching features so that lecturers feel helped when delivering teaching material.However, in this study there are limitations because the population used is still on a small scale so that the results do not represent AQ in nursing lecturers in general, and other unmeasured factors related to AQ such as work motivation, environmental conditions, willpower, talents and hobbies, intellectual, education, self-efficacy and individual health.It is recommended for future researchers to conduct correlational research between AQ and the factors that influence it.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Thanks to all lecturers willing to participate in this research by filling out the questionnaire honestly.