Reform, Standards and Teacher Identity: Challenges of Sustaining Commitment

Teacher commitment has been found to be a critical predictor of teachers’ work performance, absenteeism, retention, burnout and turnover, as well as having an important influence on students’ motivation, achievement, attitudes towards learning and being at school (Firestone (1996). Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(2), 209–235; Graham (1996). Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 67(1), 45–47; Louis (1998). School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(1), 1–27; Tsui & Cheng (1999). Educational Research and Evaluation, 5(3), 249–268). It is also a necessary ingredient to the successful implementation, adaptation or resistance reform agendas. Surprisingly, however, the relationship between teachers’ motivation, efficacy, job satisfaction and commitment, and between commitment and the quality of their work has not been the subject of extensive research. Some literature presents commitment as a feature of being and behaving as a professional (Helsby, Knight, McCulloch, Saunders, & Warburton (1997). A report to participants on the professional cultures of Teachers Research Project, Lancaster University, January). Others suggest that it fluctuates according to personal, institutional and policy contexts (Louis (1998). School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(1), 1–27) and identify different dimensions of commitment which interact and fluctuate (Tyree (1996). Journal of Educational Research, 89(5), 295–304). Others claim that teachers’ commitment tends to decrease progressively over the course of the teaching career (Fraser, Draper, & Taylor (1998). Evaluation and Research in Education, 12 (2), 61–71; Huberman (1993). The lives of teachers. London: Cassell). In this research, experienced teachers in England and Australia were interviewed about their understandings of commitment. The data suggest that commitment may be better understood as a nested phenomena at the centre of which is a set of core, relatively permanent values based upon personal beliefs, images of self, role and identity which are subject to challenge by change which is socio-politically constructed.

Job-demand for Learning and Job-related Learning: The Moderating Effect of Need For Achievement

Purpose – The purpose of the research is to examine whether need for achievement moderates the relationship between job-demand for learning and job-related learning. Design/methodology/approach – Data were obtained from 153 participants full-time. The scales for job-demand for learning and job-related learning were developed for this research, whilst the scale for need for achievement was obtained from an external source. Hierarchical regression analysis was used in testing the hypothesized moderating effects. Findings – It was found that need for achievement moderates the relationship between job-demand for learning and job-related learning. Specifically, although job-demand for learning is correlated positively to job-related learning for both the high and the low need for achievement groups, this correlation is stronger amongst the high group. Research limitations/implications – The use of a cross-sectional design in this study prohibits inferences being drawn regarding the causal relationships between job-demand for learning, need for achievement and job-related learning. Practical implications – Job-related learning can be facilitated through increasing the need for achievement by allowing employees to establish their own learning and performance goals rather than by imposing such goals on them. The redesign of jobs to create challenges for employees is an equally important practical consideration. Originality/value – This research provides a succinct view of the relationship between an external factor, job-demand for learning, and an internal motivator, need for achievement. It emphasizes the degree to which organizations can facilitate learning through design of challenging jobs, to the extent of the individuals’ motivation.