Appendices

PRINCIPAL EFFECTIVENESS SCALE (PES)

DIRECTIONS:
This inventory consists of 60 items designed to measure principal’s effectiveness. It may
be defined as the competency with which the principal runs the school.
You are required to give your honest opinion regarding each statement with reference to
your School Principal. Check whether the mentioned characteristic (statement) is present
in your Principal and then mark your answer against each statement in any one of the five
columns.
If you are Strongly Agree put (√) mark in column SA.
If you are Agree put a (√) mark in column A.
If you are Undecided put a (√) mark in column UD.
If you are Disagree put a (√) mark in column DA.
If you are Strongly Disagree put a (√) mark in column SDA.
Please furnish the following information:
Name of School…………………………………………………………….
Gender of respondent.……………………………………………………...
Designation…………………………………………………………………
Age…………………………………………………………………………
Qualification………………………………………………………………..
Number of years in the position held. ……………………………………...

Note: There is no time limit but work as rapidly as you can. The data will be kept
confidential and will be used only for research purpose. Sincere cooperation from the
respondent will enable me to have an authentic and reliable data. I hope to get active
cooperation and support in this regard.
 PLEASE RESPOND TO EVERY ITEM

Strongly Agree = SA, Agree = A, Undecided = UD, Disagree = DA, Strongly Disagree =
SDA

S.No. Statement SA A UD DA SDA

The Principal

1. Possesses high Qualification though less

experience.
2. Gains confidence of teachers by
keeping their shortcomings to himself
and the teacher concerned.
3. Does not involve the parents in school
administration. ®
4. Takes care to be smartly dressed.
5. Remains calm and cool in problematic
situations.
6. Teaches with skill.
7. Always addresses the students himself
whenever a policy announcement is to
be made. ®
8. Predict things before hand. ®
9. Remains open to criticism from teachers
and other school members.
10. Remains secular in taking decisions.
11. Regularly confers with the management
about the program and activities of the
school.
12. Does not bother for a well furnished
library in the school. ®
13. Pays special attention to teachers’
physical comforts. ®
14. Takes decisions strictly on merit.
15. Establishes through extra- curricular
activities a climate which encourages
initiative and originality.
16. Does not yield to pressure groups or
threats from teachers.
17. Takes active interest in the arrangement
of examinations.
18. Takes care to be present in the morning
 assembly.

19. Is handsome.
20. Frequently takes rounds of the school.
®
21. Leaves the children to their parents for
medical check-up. ®
22. Inflicts corporal punishment in order to
maintain proper discipline in school. ®
23. Sees that a well furnished library is
available to the students and teachers.
24. Gives sufficient notice to the teachers
about the business to be conducted in
staff meetings.
25. Keeps him away from the examinations
and lets the teachers carry it. ®
26. Feels responsible for each and every
activity going on in school.
27. Provides proper teaching aid to
teachers.
28. Remains in the good books of higher
authorities.
29. Does not necessarily and actively
participate in the social life of the
community. ®
30. Tries to outsmart his teachers in order to
make his position obvious. ®
31. Gives his independent opinion
regarding the requirements of a specific
appointment in his staff.
32. Sees that the non-teaching staff does not
remain as left outs in various programs.
®
33. Sometimes takes advantage of
supremacy by making the staff do his
personal work. ®
34. Inculcates the feeling of our school
rather than my school by organizing
cooperative activities.
35. Thinks of the present problems only and
leaves the future to fate. ®
36. Present his views regarding general
school problems through articles in
books, magazines and newspapers.
37. Is often simply dressed.
38. Is devoid of any physical disability.

39. Has varied interests in addition to

teaching.
40. Remains satisfied with just the usual
school routine running smoothly.
41. Shows consideration in giving
admissions on the basis of caste and
creed. ®
42. Lets the vice-principal or any other
senior teachers address the students on
his behalf.
43. Sees that medical aid is readily
available in school.
44. Allows his staff members to carry out
their duties without keeping strict
watch.
45. Maintains records of all the school
activities.
46. Remains indifferent with his student
tidiness. ®
47. Provides provision and opportunities for
scholarships and awards for excellence
in academics.
48. Wisely utilizes the community
resources in curriculum.
49. Remains immune to popularity among
higher authorities.
50. Sees that the non-teaching staff is not
equated with teaching staff in co-
curricular activities.
51. Is not conscious of his status in school
all the time. ®
52. Makes it a point to have children
medically examined every year.
53. Only takes official work from teachers.
54. Consults his teachers before making a
change which is going to affect them.
55. Remains satisfied by reading articles in
magazines and newspapers. ®
56. Keeps attending seminars and
conferences at various levels.
57. Lets the vice-principal or any other
senior teacher look after the assembly.
®
58. Provides special coaching facilities for
sportsmen and women.
59. Takes decision independently. ®
60. Never gives corporal punishment®.
 PERSONAL DATA SHEET FOR SCHOOL PRINCIPAL (PDSSP)

Highly Confidential

DIRECTIONS: Please Tick the Appropriate Option to Indicate Your Answer for Each
Question.

What is Your Age ?

1. Age
1.1 Above 45 Years…………………………………………………………………..

1.2 Upto 45 Years…………………………………………………………………

What is Your Gender?

2. Gender
2.1 Male………………………………………………………………………………..

2.2 Female……………………………………………………………………………..

How Many Years Have You Been a Secondary School Principal?

3. Length of Experience:

3.1 Zero to Ten Years (0-10 Years)………………………………………………...

3.2 Eleven to Twenty Years (11-20 Years)…………………………………...........

3.3 Twenty One Years Onwards (21 Years Onwards)…………………………….

Reliability Statistics for Principal Effectiveness Scale (PES)

Cronbach’s Alpha No. of Items

.728 60

Item Total Statistics

Items Cronbach’s Alpha if item Deleted

Item 1 0.744
Item 2 0.722
Item 3 0.743
Item 4 0.719
Item 5 0.713
Item 6 0.715
Item 7 0.749
Item 8 0.738
Item 9 0.717
Item 10 0.721
Item 11 0.721
Item 12 0.716
Item 13 0.746
Item 14 0.714
Item 15 0.716
Item 16 0.719
Item 17 0.718
Item 18 0.724
Item 19 0.721
Item 20 0.742
Item 21 0.719
Item 22 0.726
Item 23 0.708
Item 24 0.711
Item 25 0.722
Item 26 0.714
Item 27 0.718
Item 28 0.725
Item 29 0.727
Item 30 0.734
Item 31 0.726
Item 32 0.740
Item 33 0.714
Item 34 0.712
Item 35 0.720
Item 36 0.723
Item 37 0.726
Item 38 0.733
Item 39 0.710
Item 40 0.735
Item 41 0.723
Item 42 0.735
Item 43 0.720
Item 44 0.738
Item 45 0.713
Item 46 0.735
Item 47 0.713
Item 48 0.715
Item 49 0.732
Item 50 0.728
Item 51 0.732
Item 52 0.715
Item 53 0.721
Item 54 0.714
Item 55 0.729
Item 56 0.718
Item 57 0.739
Item 58 0.724
Item 59 0.736
Item 60 0.747
Construct Validity of Principal Effectiveness Scale

Items Correlation Sig.

Item 1 -.135 .711
Item 2 .330** .001
Item 3 -.037 .710
Item 4 .404** .000
Item 5 -.529** .000
Item 6 .554** .000
Item 7 -.455** .000
Item 8 -.151 .126
Item 9 .430** .000
Item 10 .341** .000
Item 11 .363** .000
Item 12 .467** .000
Item 13 -.326** .001
Item 14 .498** .000
Item 15 .513** .000
Item 16 .379** .000
Item 17 .472** .000
Item 18 .273** .005
Item 19 .335** .000
Item 20 -.475** .000
Item 21 .391** .000
Item 22 .274** .005
Item 23 .688** .000
Item 24 .643** .000
Item 25 324** .001
Item 26 .590** .000
Item 27 .462** .000
Item 28 .231* .018
Item 29 .205* .037
Item 30 .042 .672
Item 31 .214* .029
Item 32 -.243* .013
Item 33 .485** .000
Item 34 .558** .000
Item 35 .350** .000
Item 36 .309** .001
Item 37 .226* .021
Item 38 .144 .146
Item 39 .621** .000
Item 40 .011 .910
Item 41 .288** .003
Item 42 .035 .725
Item 43 .426** .000
Item 44 .014 .889
Item 45 .638** .000
Item 46 .031 .756
Item 47 .558** .000
Item 48 .511** .000
Item 49 .076 .443
Item 50 .162 .100
Item 51 .112 .260
Item 52 .497** .000
Item 53 .338** .000
Item 54 .525 .000
Item 55 .158 .110
Item 56 .467** .000
Item 57 .181 .067
Item 58 .275** .005
Item 59 .003 .975
Item 60 -.289 .003
*Correlation is significant at .05 level
**Correlation is significant at .001 level
 Publications

1. Shakir, Mohd. Impact of Age, Gender and Length of Experience on the Effectiveness
of Secondary School Principals, Research Analysis and Evaluation-International Indexed
and Refereed Research Journal. Vol. IV (46) ISSN 0975-3486 (print), ISSN 2320-5482
(online). Control from Paris.
2. Parvez, M and Shakir, Mohd. Attitudes of Prospective Teachers Towards Teaching
Profession, Journal of Education and Practice, Vol. 4 No. 10, 2013. ISSN 2222-1735
(paper), ISSN 2222-288X (online).www.iiste.org United States of America (USA).
International Indexed & Refereed Research Journal, ISSN 0975-3486, (Print) E-ISSN-2320-5482, July,2013 VOL-IV *ISSUE- 46
Research Paper—Education
Impact of Age , Gender and Length of Experience on
The Effectiveness of Secondary School Principals
July ,2013 * Mohd Shakir
*Senior Research Fellow, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh-, U.P.
A B S T R A C T
This study was conducted to study the impact of age, gender and length of experience on the effectiveness of secondary
school principals. 500 teachers and 100 principals of secondary school level of Aligarh and Ghaziabad Districts of Uttar
Pradesh, constituted the sample of the study. Purposive-convenient sampling technique was adopted for this purpose. A
Principals Effectiveness Scale (PES) developed by Dr. Shaheen Usmani was used to collect the data. Mean, SD, t-test and
one way ANOVA were used for the analysis of the data. Research findings revealed that principals of above 45 years of
age are more effective than the principals who are upto 45 years of age. Male and female principals do not differ in their
effectiveness. Length of experience has a significant influence on the effectiveness of secondary school principals. Principals
having 11-20 years of experience are more effective than the principals who have 0-10 years of experience. Principals who
have 21 and above years of experience are more effective than the principals having 0-10 years of experience. and principals
having 21 and above years of experience are more effective than the principals having 11-20 years of experience.
Keywords: Principal, age, gender, length of experience and principals' effectiveness.
Introduction: ally. It plays a key role in improving our school out-
The principal, as an educational leader, holds the comes by motivating the teachers, It also helps main-
key position in the school. As an important component tain a better school atmosphere. Effective school lead-
of the school administration he has two important re- ership is essential to improve the efficiency of schools.
sponsibilities-administration of the school and the A school is known by its products and not by its
supervision of the personnel involved in the whole building and infrastructure and the whole credit of
teaching and learning process. Everything in the school products goes to the principal. The principal plays a
including the plant, the teaching and non-teaching very important role in maintaining the efficiency and
staff, the curriculum, methods, and techniques of teach- tone of the school. Either the school is flourishing or
ing, co-curricular activities, etc is organised by him. perishing, the whole credit goes to the principal.
The efficiency of the school depends on the efficiency His role is not only limited with the field of
of a school principal. In other words it depends on the education, but it goes beyond it. He also plays a very
ability and skill, personality, and professional compe- important role in the community also where he resides.
tence of the principal. He may be described as the sun A principal is also a manager because he not only leads
around which educational planets revolve (Kochhar & but manages the whole organisation so that plans set
Jain, 2012). The school principal is the key factor in the for the betterment of the school could be attained. A
development of schools. school is as great as its principal. It is rightly said that
The pivotal and multifaceted role of a school The schools become great not because of their magnifi-
principal in the effectiveness of school is corroborated cent building but because of magnificent principals.
by the findings of several researchers. Studies, Goodlad, He is in the strategic centre of a web of instructional
1976; Austin, 1979; Barth, 1980; Bossert, Dwyer, Rowan, inter-relationships-school-department, staff-manage-
and Lee1982; Patel,1983; Glasman,1984; Cuban, 1986; ment, teacher-inspector, teacher-teacher, teacher-pu-
Sweet,1986; Blank, 1987; Bailey, 1988; Heck, Larsen, pil, teacher-parent, and school community.
and Marcoulides, 1990; Glassman and Heck, 1992; He is the despatching station at the centre of
Leithwood, 1992; Brewer,1993; Lezotte, 1994; Hallinger educational endeavour-planning, organising, direct-
and Heck, 1998; DuFour, 1999; National Association of ing, coordinating and evaluating. The principal is the
Secondary School Principals, 2001; Terozzi, 2001; keystone in the arch of school administration; he is the
Bolman and Deal, 2002; John and Peter, 2006; Mohajeran hub of educational efforts; he is the major component
and Ghaleei. 2008; Clement, 2010; Bush, 2011; Coelli of school administration on whose ability, skills and
and Green, 2012; have shown that effective principals personality the efficiency of the school depends
are a key ingredient to the effective schools. The impor- (Parvez, 2010). The role of a principal today is becoming
tance of the school principal in the effectiveness of increasingly complex. They are bombarded with a myriad
schools is very crucial. School leadership has become of duties and responsibilities. His is an uphill task, and
a priority in education nationally as well as internation-
40 RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
International Indexed & Refereed Research Journal, ISSN 0975-3486, (Print) E-ISSN-2320-5482, July,2013 VOL-IV *ISSUE- 46
only persons with a clear perspective and rare abilities
can succeed (Mukerji, 1963). In spite of insurmount-
able pressures, some principals are highly successful.
They are able to achieve and maintain excellence in
their schools, whereas some of them are not. Here,
question arises. What does make an effective princi-
pal? Why are some principals successful at what they
do while others are not? Is there any impact of age,
gender and length of experience on the effectiveness
of principals? These are some of the questions which
the investigator will try to address in the present study.
Objectives:
1. To find out the difference in principals' effective
ness in relation to age.
2. To find out the difference in principals' effective
ness in relation to gender.
3. To study the effectiveness of principals in relation
to their length of experience.
3.1 To study the difference in the effectiveness of prin
cipals having 0-10 years of experience and 11-20
years of experience.
3.2 To study the difference in the effectiveness of
principals having 0-10 years of experience and 21
and above years of experience.
3.3 To study the difference in the effectiveness of prin
cipals having 11-20 years of experience and 21 and
above years of experience
Hypotheses:
Alternate Hypotheses:
H1. Principals of different age groups differ signifi-
cantly in principals' effectiveness.
H2. Principals of different gender differ significantly in
principals' effectiveness.
H3. There is statistical significant difference in the
principals' effectiveness in relation to their length of
experience.
H.3.1 There is statistical significant difference in the
effectiveness of principals having 0-10 years and 11-20
years of experience.
H.3.2 There is statistical significant difference in the
effectiveness of principals having 0-10 years and 21
and above years of experience.
H.3.3 There is statistical significant difference in the
effectiveness of principals having 11-20 years and 21
and above years of experience.
Null Hypotheses:
Ho1. Principals of different age groups do not differ
significantly in principals' effectiveness.
Ho2. Principals of different gender do not differ signifi-
cantly in principals' effectiveness.
Ho.3.There is no statistical significant difference in the
principals' effectiveness in relation to their length of
experience.
RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
Ho.3.1.There is no statistical significant difference in
the effectiveness of principals having 0-10 years and
11-20 years of experience.
Ho.3.2. There is no statistical significant difference in
the effectiveness of principals having 0-10 years and 21
and above years of experience.
Ho.3.3. There is statistical significant difference in the
effectiveness of principals having 11-20 years and 21
and above years of experience.
Material and Methods:
Methodology: This study falls under the category of
descriptive research. Thus, survey method was adopted
to carry out the research work.
Population: The secondary school principals and teach-
ers from the District Aligarh, and Ghaziabad of Uttar
Pradesh (India) constituted the target population in the
present study.
Sample: 500 teachers and 100 principals of secondary
school level of District Aligarh and Ghaziabad of Uttar
Pradesh, constituted the sample. Purposive-convenient
sampling technique was used for this purpose.
S a mp l e
Number of Number of Number of Schools
Teachers Principals
500 100 100
Research Tools: Principals Effectiveness Scale
(PES) developed by Dr. Shaheen Usmani (1988) was
given to the five teachers of a school to evaluate the
principal of that school. A Personal Data Sheet was
given to the principals in which they were supposed to
provide information regarding their age, gender and
length of experience.
Data Collection: Principals and teachers were contacted
during the working hours of the schools. Hence, 500
teachers evaluated the 100 Principals.
Statistical Techniques: The data were analysed with
the appropriate statistical measures to justify the ob-
jectives. The investigator employed, Mean, Standard
Deviation, t-test and one way ANOVA .
Analysis and Interpretation of Data: The
analysis was done in order to make inferences and
generalizations about the population. Statistical Pack-
age for Social Science (SPSS) Version 16 was used for
the analysis. See Table 1
Table No.1 reveals that the mean value Principals' Ef-
fectiveness Above 45 Years of Age is 158.08 with a
Standard Deviation of 10.53 and the mean value of the
Principals' Effectiveness Upto 45 Years of Age is 150.18
with a Standard Deviation of 14.66. On applying t-test,
a t-ratio of 3.11 is obtained, which is statistically signifi-
cant at .01 level. Therefore, null hypothesis, Ho1: prin-
cipals of different age groups do not differ significantly
in Principals' Effectiveness is rejected and the alterna-
tive hypothesis, H1 is accepted. This means principals
41
International Indexed & Refereed Research Journal, ISSN 0975-3486, (Print) E-ISSN-2320-5482, July,2013 VOL-IV *ISSUE- 46
Table No.1 Showing The Comparison of Principals' Effectiveness of Age Groups Between Principals Above 45
Years and Upto 45 Years
Age of Principals N Mean SD df t-value
Principals' Effectiveness Above 45 Years 52 158.08 10.53 98 3.11**
Principals' Effectiveness Upto 45 Years 48 150.18 14.66
**Significant at 0.01 level
Table No.2 Showing The Comparison Of Principals' Effectiveness On The Basis Of Their Gender.
Gender N Mean SD df t-value
Male Principals' Effectiveness 61 150.79 13.38 98 0.657*
Female Principals' Effectiveness 39 148.92 14.60
*Not significant at .05 level
Table No.3 Showing The Analysis Of Variance One Way ANOVA
Source of Variation Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 13109.449 2 6554.724 83.984 .000
Within Groups 7570.602 97 78.047
Total 20680.050 99
F (2, 99) = 83.984; p < 0 .01

Table No.3.1 Showing The Comparison Of Principals' Effectiveness On The Basis Of Experience
(0-10 Years And 11-20 Years)
Length Of Experience N Mean Sd Df T-value
0-10 Years 38 137.58 10.03 70 5.798**
11-20 Years 34 150.83 9.29
** Significant At 0.01 Level
Table 3.1, reveals that the mean value of ef-
of different age groups differ significantly in their ef- fectiveness of principals having 0-10 years of experi-
fectiveness implying that principals above 45 years of ence is 137.58 with a standard deviation of 10.03 and the
age are more effective than the principals who are upto mean value of the effectiveness of principals having
45 years of age. This finding is inconsistent with the 11-20 years of experience is 150.83 with a standard
finding of Basavaraj (2013) who found that principals deviation of 9.29. On applying t-test, a t-ratio of 5.798
upto 50 years of age are more effective than the 51 plus is obtained, which is statistically significant at .01 level.
years of age. And Usmani (1988) who found that age Therefore, null hypothesis, Ho3.1: there is no statisti-
had no effect on principal effectiveness. cal significant difference in the effectiveness of prin-
See Table 2 cipals having 0-10 years of experience and 11-20 years
Table 2, reveals that the mean value effectiveness of of experience is rejected and alternative hypothesis,
male principals is 150.79 with a standard deviation of H3.1 is accepted. This means there is statistical signifi-
13.38 and the mean value of the effectiveness of female cant difference between the effectiveness of princi-
principals is 148.92 with a standard deviation of 14.60. pals having 0-10 years of experience and 11-20 years of
On applying t-test, a t-ratio of 0.657 is obtained, which experience. Higher mean score of effectiveness of prin-
is statistically not significant at .05 level. Therefore, cipals' having 11-20 years of experience than the prin-
null hypothesis, Ho2: principals of different gender do cipals' effectiveness of 0-10 years of experience is im-
not differ significantly in their effectiveness is accepted plying that principals who have 11-20 years of experi-
and alternative hypothesis, H2 is rejected. This means ence are more effective than the principals who have 0-
there is no statistical significant difference between 10 years of experience. This finding is consistent with
the principals' effectiveness on the basis of their gen- the previous findings of Earley & Weindling (2007),
der (male and female). This is consistent with the pre- Fink & Brayman (2006),Vanderhaar, Munoz & Rodosky
vious finding of Basavaraj (2013) Taj (1995), and Usmani (2006), Thomas & Cheese (2005), Howson (2004),
(1988) who reported that male and female do not differ Oplatka (2004), Kouzes & Posner (2002) and Taj (1992)
significantly in their effectiveness. who reported that experience has a major impact on the
See Table 3 effectiveness of the principals. And contrary to the
F-value is 83.984 which is statistically significant at findings of Walker (2009) and Fidler & Atton (2004)
0.01 level indicating that length of experience has a who found no significant relationship between princi-
significant influence on principals' effectiveness . pals' effectiveness and their length of experience.
In order to examine the significant differences, among
the three groups compared, t-test was applied between
the possible pairs.

42 RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

International Indexed & Refereed Research Journal, ISSN 0975-3486, (Print) E-ISSN-2320-5482, July,2013 VOL-IV *ISSUE- 46
Table No. 3.2 Showing The Comparison Of Principals' Effectiveness On The Basis Of Experience
(0-10 Years And 21 and Above Years Of Experience)
Length of Experience N Mean Sd Df T-value
0-10 Years 38 137.58 10.03 64 13.31**
21 And Above Years 28 166.06 6.10
Table No. 3.3 Showing The Comparison Of Principals' Effectiveness On The Basis Of Experience (11-20 Years
And 21 And Above Years)
Length of Experience N Mean SD df t-value
11-20 Years 34 150.84 9.29 60 7.447**
21 and Above Years 28 166.06 6.10
** Significant at .01 level .01 level. Therefore, null hypothesis, Ho3.3: there is no
Table 3.2, reveals that the mean value of effectiveness statistical significant difference in the effectiveness of
of principals having 0-10 years of experience is 137.58 principals having 11-20 years of experience and 21 and
with a standard deviation of 10.03 and the mean value above years of experience is rejected and the alterna-
of the effectiveness of principals having 21 and above tive hypothesis, H3.3 is accepted. This means there is
years of experience is 166.06 with a standard deviation statistical significant difference between the effective-
of 6.10. On applying t-test, a t-ratio of 13.31 is obtained, ness of principals having 11-20 years of experience and
which is statistically significant at .01 level. Therefore, 21 and above years of experience. Higher mean score
null hypothesis, Ho3.2: there is no statistical signifi- of effectiveness of principals who have 21 and above
cant difference in the effectiveness of principals hav- years of experience than the effectiveness of principals
ing 0-10 years of experience and 21 and above years of having of 11-20 years of experience is implying that the
experience is rejected and the alternative hypothesis, principals who have 21 and above years of experience
H3.2 is accepted. This means there is statistical signifi- are more effective than the principals having 11-20
cant difference between the effectiveness of princi- years of experience.
pals having 0-10 years of experience and 21 and above Findings:
years of experience. Higher mean score of effective- 1. Principals of above 45 years of age are more effec
ness of principals' having 21 and above years of expe- tive than the principals who are upto 45 years of age.
rience than the effectiveness of principals who have 2. There is no significant difference between the prin
0-10 years of experience is implying that principals cipals' effectiveness on the basis of their gender.
having 21 and above years of experience are more 3. Length of experience has a significant influence on
effective than the principals having 0-10 years of expe- the effectiveness of secondary school principals.
rience. See Table 3.3 4. Principals having 11-20 years of experience are more
Table 3.3, reveals that the mean value of ef- effective than the principals who have 0-10 years of
fectiveness of principals having 11-20 years of expe- experience.
rience is 150.84 with a standard deviation of 9.29 and 5. Principals who have 21 and above years of experi
the mean value of the effectiveness of principals who ence are more effective than the principals having
have 21 and above years of experience is 166.06 with a 0-10 years of experience.
standard deviation of 6.10. On applying 't' test, a t-ratio 6. Principals having 21 and above years of experience
of 7.447 is obtained, which is statistically significant at are more effective than the principals who have 11-
20 years of experience.
R E F E R E N C E
1 Austin, G.R. (1979). Exemplary Schools and the Search for Effectiveness, Educational Leadership, 37(1), 10-14.
2 Bailey, S.S. (1988). The Relationship Between Leadership Styles of High School Principals and School Climate as Perceived
by Teachers, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, West Virginia University, Morgantown.
3 Barth, R. (1980). Reflections on the Principalship, Thrust for Educational Leadership, 9(5), 4-6.
4 Basavaraj, M.H. (2013). A Study of Administrative Behaviour and Job Satisfaction of Secondary School Heads of North
Karnataka, International Journal of Research Analysis and Evaluation, Vol. 4(40), 28-30.
5 Blank, R.K. (1987). The Role of Principal as Leader: Analysis of Variation in Leadership of Urban High Schools, Journal
of Educational Research, 81(2), 69-80.
6 Bolman, L., and Deal, T. (2002). Leading With Soul and Spirit, The School Administrator, 59(2), 21-26.
7 Bossert, S.T., Dwyer, D.C., Rowan, B., and Lee, G.V. (1982). The Instructional Management Role of the Principal,
Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 34-63.
8 Brewer, D.J. (1993). Principals and Student Outcomes: Evidence from U.S. High Schools, Economics of Education Review,
12(4), 281-293.
RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 43
International Indexed & Refereed Research Journal, ISSN 0975-3486, (Print) E-ISSN-2320-5482, July,2013 VOL-IV *ISSUE- 46
9 Bush, T. (2011). Becoming a School Principal: Exciting Opportunity or Daunting Challenge? Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 39(5), 514-515.
1 0 Clement, K.A. (2010). Female Leadership and School Effectiveness in Junior High Schools in Ghana, Journal of Educational
Administration, Vol. 48(6), 689 -703.
1 1 Coelli, M., and Green, D.A. (2012). Leadership Effects: School Principals and Student Outcomes, Economics of Education
Review 31, 92-109.
1 2 Cuban, L. (1986). Persistence of the Inevitable: The Teacher-Centered Classroom. Education and Urban Society, 13(1),
26-41.
1 3 DuFour, R. (1999). Challenging Role: Playing the Part of Principal Stretches One's Talent, Journal of Staff Development,
20(4), 88-91.
1 4 Earley, P., & Weindling, D. (2007). Do School Leaders Have a Shelf life? Career Stages and Head Teacher Performance,
Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 35(1), 73-88.
1 5 Fidler, B., & Atton, T. (2004). The Headship Game: The Challenges of Contemporary School Leadership, London:
Routledge Falmer.
1 6 Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School Leadership Succession and the Challenges of Change, Educational Leadership
Quarterly, 42(1), 62-89.
1 7 Glasman, M.S. (1984). Student Achievement and the Principal, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6(3), 283-
297.
1 8 Glassman, N.S., and Heck, R. (1992).The Changing Leadership Role of the Principal: Implications for Principals'
Assessment, Peabody Journal of Education, 68(1), 5-24.
1 9 Goodlad, J. (1976). Principals Are The Key to Change, Education Digest, 42, 2-35.
2 0 Hallinger, P., and Heck, R.H. (1998). Exploring the Principal's Contribution to School Effectiveness: 1980-1995, School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(2), 157-191.
2 1 Heck, R.H., Larsen, T.J., and Marcoulides, G.A. (1990). Instructional Leadership and School Achievement: Validation of
a Causal Model, Educational Administration Quarterly, 26(2) 94-125.
2 2 Howson, J. (2004). Contemporary School Leadership. London: Routledge Falmer.
2 3 John, A.R., and Peter, G. (2006). School Leadership and Student Achievement: The Mediating Effects of Teacher Beliefs,
Canadian Journal of Education,Vol.29(3), 798-822
2 4 Kochhar, S.K., & Jain, P.B. (2012). School Administration and Management, New Delhi, Sterling Publishers Private
Limited, pp.156-175.
2 5 Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2002). Leadership Practices Inventory: Theory and Evidence Behind the Five Practices
of Exemplary Leadership. Retrieved from, http://media.wiley.com/assets/463/74/lc_jb_appendix.pdf
2 6 Leithwood, L.A. (1992). The Move to Toward Transformational Leadership, Educational Leadership, 49(5), 8-11.
2 7 Lezotte, L. (1994). The Nexus of Instructional Leadership and Effective Schools, School Administrator, 51(6), 20-23.
2 8 Mohajeran, B., and Ghaleei, A. (2008). Principal Role and School Structure, International Journal of Human and Social
Sciences, 3(1), 52-61.
2 9 Mukerji, S.N. (1963). School Administration and Functions in India, Baroda, Acharya Book Depot, pp.38-42.
3 0 National Association of Secondary School Principals (2001). Priorities and Barriers in High School Leadership: A Summary
of Findings, Principal Leadership, 2(4), Reston, VA: NASSP.
3 1 Oplatka, I. (2004). The Principal's Career Stage: An Absent Element in Leadership Perspectives, International Journal
of Leadership in Education, 7(1), 43-55.
3 2 Parvez, M. (2010). School Administration, Aligarh, Kitab Ghar, pp.35-42.
3 3 Patel, R.M. (1983). A Study of the Leadership Behaviour of Principals of Higher Secondary Schools of Gujarat State. PhD
Thesis, Education.SPU, Cited in MB. Buch Fourth Survey of Research in Education (Vol. II) NCERT, New Delhi.p.1107.
3 4 Sweet, M.S. (1986). Principal Effectiveness and School Quality in Wisconsin Public Elementary Schools, Unpublished PhD,
The University of Wisconsin -Madison.
3 5 Taj, H. (1992). Social-Psychological and Situational Correlates of the Administrative Behaviour of Secondary School Heads,
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Education. Bangalore University Cited in MB. Buch Fifth Survey of Educational Research (Vol.
II) NCERT, New Delhi.pp.1852-1853.
3 6 Terozzi, G.N. (2001). The Artistry of Leadership: The Evolving Role of the Secondary School Principal, Phi Delta Kappan,
82(6), 434-435.
3 7 Usmani, Shaheen (1988). A Study of Principal Effectiveness in Relation to Professional Attainment, Socio-Economic
Background, Values of Life and Attitude Towards Teaching, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis (Education), Aligarh Muslim
University, Aligarh.
" Vanderhaar, J.E., Munoz, M.A., & Rodosky, R.J. (2006). Leadership as Accountability for Learning: The Effects of School
Poverty, Teacher Experience, Previous Achievement, and Principal Preparation Programs on Student Achievement, Journal
of Personnel Evaluation in Education,19, 17-33.
" Walker, N.J. (2009). The Relationship Between Principal Longevity and School Performance in a Large Urban School
District. PhD Dissertation, Retrieved from Pro Quest Digital Dissertation database. (AAT 3374137).

44 RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION

Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

Attitudes of Prospective Teachers towards Teaching Profession

Mohammad Parvez1 and Mohd Shakir2*

1. Associate Professor, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.202002, U.P.(INDIA)

Email:mparvez9@yahoo.co.in
2. Research Scholar, Department of Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. 202002. U.P. (INDIA).
*Email of the corresponding author: aligarhshakir@gmail.com
Abstract
The progress of a country depends upon the quality of its teachers. They are called nation builders.A good principal,
magnificent building, sound infrastructure and good curriculum are useless, if the teachers in any institution are not
with positive attitude towards teaching. Teaching is a very respectable profession but even then not all the teachers
who are in this pious profession like it.Many prospective teachers join this profession not by choice but by chance or
due to other reasons. They are disinterested towards teaching profession. They just take admission in B.Ed course as
second choice,if they fail to seek admission in first choice like M.B.A., or any other courses according to their liking
and they are generally dissatisfied throughout the training period.This study was conducted to study the attitudes of
prospective-teachers towards teaching profession. A sample of 180 prospective teachers, 90 from private and 90
from publicinstitutions was taken through purposive convenient sampling method. “Teacher Attitude Inventory
(TAI)” by Dr. S.P. Ahluwalia was used to collect the data. Mean, SD and t-test were used for the analysis of the
data. Research findings revealed that there is a significant difference in the attitudes of prospective teachers studying
in private and public B.Ed institutions. There is no significant difference in the attitudes of female and male, Muslim
and Non-Muslim, science and social sciences prospective teachers towards teaching profession.
Keywords:Attitude, Prospective Teachers, Teaching Profession, Privateand Public Institutions.

Introduction
Education gives us comfortable and dignified life. It is responsible for the holistic development of
individualand society. Education means to lead out hidden talent of a child. It is an activity which helps students in
attaining needed information, ability, attitude, perception (Mirunalini and Anandan, 2012).The quality of a nation
depends upon the quality of its citizens. The quality of the citizens depends upon the quality of education system and
the quality of education depends upon the combined efforts planners, educationists and administration, however, the
most significant factor is the quality of the teachers. It means excellent and efficient teachers can change the fate of
the nation.It is in the schools,colleges and universities that the development of the attitudes and dispositions
necessary for the progressive life in a societytakes place.Education is imparted by teachers. If the teacher is capable,
energetic, mentally healthy and havingpositive attitude, it is well and good for the school.A teacher helps a child in
bringing out the hidden capabilities. He/she unfolds what is within, hidden and untapped. He/she makes explicit
what is implicit in the students. So teachers’ importance in teaching-learning process is very much. The Secondary
Education Commission (1952-1953) report stated,“We are convinced that the most important factor in the
contemplated educational reconstruction is the teacher, his personal qualities, his educational qualifications,
his professional training and the place that he occupies in the community.”It is very right that,“no people can
rise above the level of its teachers.”(NPE, 1986).The Teacher is the real and dynamic force of any institution. The
school without him/her is a sole less body. Without good, devoted and competent teachers, even the best system is
bound to fail. A good teacher can certainly give best result out of the worst system (Parvez, 2010). He/she is a
powerful and abiding influence in the formation of character; the influence of a great teacher indirectly extends over
many generations. The pivot upon which an educational system moves is the personality of the teacher. Teaching is
often called a calling, not a profession or a trade or simply a job. This means that a teacher should regard
himself/herself as one specially called to do this work, not so much for the pecuniary benefits which he/she may
derive from it as for the love of it (Mohiyuddin, 1943).The strength of the schools depends upon the attitudes ofthe
teachers.For qualitative improvement in secondary education of our country, the selection of right type of
prospective-teachers is a must. This require not only improving the knowledge and teaching competence of
prospective-teachers but also to inculcate in them healthy professional attitudes and desirable teacher like qualities.
Therefore, securing the right type of prospective-teachers for training is very important. Unless such prospective-

172
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

teachers are found our secondary schools cannot deliver as per our expectations. Therefore, for the professional
preparation of prospective-teachers, the study of attitudes held by them is very important. A positive favourable
attitude makes the work not only easier but also more satisfying and professionally rewarding. A negative or
unfavourable attitude makes the teaching task harder, more tedious and unpleasant. Thus, effective and productive
learning on the part of the pupils can be achieved by employing teachers with desirable attitudes towards teaching
profession.
Prospective-Teacher
Prospective-teachers are those who are getting training or studying in B.Ed course to become teachers and they
are known by different names like’ would be teachers’, ‘pupil-teachers’, ‘student-teachers’ and ‘future-teachers’. As
and when their training period is over, they join the coveted profession of teaching and become full-fledged
teachers.
Attitude
The most important factor in the teaching-learning process is the teacher. A good education system can flourish if
two conditions are satisfied. First is the constant updating and refinement in knowledge and skills of existing/serving
teachers and second one is equipping upcoming/prospective-teachers with positive attitude towards their profession.
Attitudes towards profession are usually related with enjoying the profession, complete dedication to their
profession, and being aware that profession is socially useful and believing that they need to improve the profession.
C.V. Good (1973) define attitude as, “the predisposition or tendency to react specifically towards an object,
situation, or value; usually accompanied by feelings and emotions” According to Thurstone (1946) attitude is, “the
degree of positive or negative effect associated with some psychological object. By psychological object, Thurstone
means any symbol, phrase, slogan, person, institution, ideal or idea towards which people can differ with respect to
positive or negative effect.” Allport (1935) prefers to treat attitude as, “a mental and neural state of readiness,
organized through experience, exerting a directive or dynamic influence upon the individuals response to all objects
and situations with which it is related.” According to Katz (1959) “an attitude is a tendency or disposition to
evaluate an object or the symbol of that object in a certain way. An attitude is an important concept to understand
human behaviour. As behaviour is composed of many attributes and one of these important attributes is attitude.
Ones behaviour to a great extent depends upon one’s attitude towards the things, idea, person, object in his/her
environment (Mangal, 2009). In this way attitudes are to a great extent responsible for a particular behaviour of a
person. In simple words, attitudes are “pre-dispositions” to behave in a certain way. Attitude is defined as preference
along a dimension of favorableness and unfavorableness to a particular group, institution, concept, or object. A
person with a favorable attitude toward something is likely rate favorable and an unfavorable attitude presumes a
tendency to reject something (Sax, 1974). An individual’s attitude towards his/her occupation may affect the end-
product. Someone who does not enjoy his/her occupation will not be able to succeed in that occupation. A good
teacher with proper attitude, behaviour and personality traits can motivate, inspire and make students lost in his/her
teaching. A teacher with a positive attitude towards teaching is considered better and becomes popular figure among
students. Therefore, it is very important to study the attitudes of the prospective-teachers who are going to serve this
noble profession of teaching. Positive attitudes not only promote learning but also create the climate which
stimulates effective learning. Therefore, prospective-teachers must develop proper and positive attitudes towards
their profession so that they can bring about a positive change in the life of their students.
Review of Related Literature
Osunde& Izevbigie (2006) revealed that teachers are not well financially remunerated and they are looked down
upon because of delay in payment of salaries and allowances, thereby having a lost of sense of belonging. This
situation has resulted in the low esteem and status of the teachers and the teaching profession in the society. Poor
conditions of service, wider negative influence and teacher’s negative personal and professional behavior are critical
factors responsible for teachers’ low status. Guneyli& Aslan (2009) found a significant difference in favour of
female prospective teachers in relation to the gender. No significant difference between attitude scores was observed
in relation to the effects of class and socio-economic level. Baloglu & Karadag (n.d) showed that there was a
noticeable statistical meaningful relationship between student teachers’ attitudes toward the teaching profession and
some of their preferred coping strategies with stress. Arif et al., (2012) found that the ratio of four personality traits
(extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism) was nearly same, but the ratio of openness
personality trait is greater which means that the openness personality trait of prospective teachers is more dominant
as compared to remaining four big personality traits. There was a significant difference between male and female

173
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

prospective teachers on their big five personality traits. Female prospective teachers got greater score on their big
five personality trait instrument as compared to male prospective teachers. Kareem et al., (2012) reported that
students enrolled in regular programmes show high levels of professionalism as compared to distance education
students. Similarly B.Ed students enrolled in regular programmes showed the highest levels of professional attitude.
Sharma & Dhaiya (2012) found that (1) no significant difference between attitude of male and female B.Ed.
students towards teaching profession, (2) Arts and Science B.Ed. students do not differ significantly in attitudes
towards teaching, and (3) female B.Ed. Students were found to have most favourable towards teaching profession.
Shah & Thoker (2013) reported that there is significant difference between teaching attitude of government and
private secondary school teachers, and government secondary school teachers have higher teaching attitude towards
their teaching profession as compared to private secondary school teachers.
The perusal of above mentioned literature related to attitudes of prospective teachers towards teaching profession
suggest that a lot of research has been conducted to investigate the attitudes of prospective teachers towards teaching
profession, but unfortunately no specific research has been conducted in Aligarh District of Uttar Pradesh.
Especially no study has been conducted to study the attitudes of prospective teachers towards teaching profession in
which independent variables like type of institution, gender, religion, and choice of stream has been included. This
study is a humble attempt to fill research gap in this specific area. The investigators strongly believe that a study of
attitudes of prospective-teachers and its correlations will be much helpful in identifying those factors that govern the
behaviour of the prospective-teachers. It will also be useful in developing the predictive measures to be employed in
selection of candidates for teacher training programme. The present study would bring about a substantial change in
the attitudes of prospective-teachers community towards teaching. Therefore, this study is justified.
Objectives: following were the objectives of the study

1. To compare the attitudes of prospective teachers studying in private and public B.Ed institutions towards
teaching profession.
2. To compare the attitudes of female and male prospective teachers towards teaching profession.
3. To compare the attitudes of Muslim and Non-Muslim prospective teachers towards teaching profession.
4. To compare the attitudes of science and social science prospective teachers towards teaching profession.

Hypotheses: following hypotheses were formulated in null form:

1. There is no statistical significant difference in the attitudes of prospective teachers studying in private and
public B.Ed institutions towards teaching profession.
2. There is no statistical significant difference in the attitudes of female and male prospective teachers towards
teaching profession.
3. There is no statistical significant difference in the attitudes of Muslim and Non-Muslim prospective teachers
towards teaching profession.
4. There is no statistical significant difference in the attitudes of science and social science prospective teachers
towards teaching profession.
Material and Methods

Methodology: This study falls under the category of descriptive research. Thus, survey method was adopted to carry
out the research work.
Population: In the present study the prospective teachers studying in private and public institutions of Aligarh
District constitute the target population.
Sample: In the present study, sample consisted of 180 prospective teachers, 90 from private and 90 from public
institutions through purposive convenient sampling method.
Research Tools Employed: For data collection “Teacher Attitude Inventory (TAI)”by Dr. S.P. Ahluwalia (2007)
was used to measure the attitudes of prospective teachers. The Inventory consists of 90 statements. Responses were
made on a five point scale and the response categories were assigned weights from 0 to 4.
Data Collection: The investigators visited the selected institutions personally and administered the Teacher Attitude
Inventory (TAI) to a total of 320 prospective-teachers studying in Department of Education of Aligarh Muslim
University, Al-Barkaat Educational Society and A.C.N Group of Institutions of Aligarh District of Uttar Pradesh.

174
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

Investigators also gave full freedom to the prospective-teachers to ask the meaning of words/sentences which were
beyond their understanding. Respondents were given enough time. Partially filled inventories were discarded.
Finally investigators could get data from180 respondents.
Total Number of Number of Prospective
S. No. Institutions Prospective Teachers Teachers Responded
Private
Al- Barkaat Institute of Education
1 Al-Barkaat Educational Society, 100 50
Aligarh.
Department of Education
2 100 40
A.C.N. Group of Institutions, Aligarh.
Public
Department of Education
1 120 90
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh.

Statistical Techniques Used: The data were analyzed with the appropriate statistical measures to justify the
objectives of the present study. The investigators employed Mean, Standard Deviation and t-test for the analysis of
the data.
Data Analysis, Interpretation and Discussion of Results:The analysis of data collected by the investigators was
done in order to make inferences and generalizations about the population. Statistical Package for Social Science
(SPSS) Version 20 was used for the analysis of data.

TABLE 1 SHOWING THE COMPARISON OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS TEACHING PROFESSION OF

PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS STUDYING IN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC B.ED INSTITUTIONS

Basis N Mean Standard Deviation t-value

Prospective Teachers of Private

90 269.58 30.23
B.Ed Institutions
3.021*
Prospective Teachers of Public
90 257.19 24.48
B.Ed Institution

* Significant at .05 level

Table No. 1 shows that the calculated valueof‘t’3.021is greater than the tabulated value of ‘t’ 1.96,which is
statistically significant at .05 level. This means there is a significant difference in the attitudes of prospective
teachers studying in private and public B.Ed institutions towards teaching profession. Therefore, the null hypothesis
that, there is no statistical significant difference in the attitudes of prospective teachers studying in private and public
B.Ed institutions towards teaching profession is rejected. Higher mean score of prospective teachers of private B.Ed
institutions than the prospective teachers of public B.Ed institutions indicate that prospective teachers of private
B.Ed institutions had a more favourable attitude towards teaching as compared to prospective teachers of public
B.Ed institutions. This is contrary to the study of Shah & Thoker (2013) who reported that there is significant
difference between teaching attitude of government and private secondary school teachers, and government
secondary school teachers have higher teaching attitude towards their teaching profession as compared to private
secondary school teachers.

175
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

TABLE 2 SHOWING THE COMPARISON OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS TEACHING PROFESSION OF

FEMALE AND MALE PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS

Basis N Mean Standard Deviation t-value

Female Prospective Teachers 100 262.93 27.98

1.913*
Male Prospective Teachers 80 255.13 26.18

* Not significant at .05 level

Table No. 2 reveals that the calculated valueof‘t’1.913is less than the tabulated value‘t’ 1.96, which is
statistically not significant at .05 level. This means there is no significant difference in the attitudes of female and
male prospective teachers towards teaching profession. Therefore, the null hypothesis that, there is no statistical
significant difference in the attitudes of female and male prospective teachers towards teaching profession is
accepted. It can be said that, there really exists no difference in the attitudes of female and male prospective teachers
towards teaching profession. This is contrary to the findings of Guneyli & Aslan (2009) and Sharma & Dhaiya
(2012) who reported that female prospective teachers have more positive attitudes when compared to male
prospective teachers.

TABLE 3 SHOWING THE COMPARISON OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS TEACHING PROFESSION OF

MUSLIM AND NON-MUSLIM PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS

Basis N Mean Standard Deviation t-value

Muslim Prospective Teachers 100 262.92 24.34

0.807*
Non-Muslim Prospective Teachers 80 259.56 31.49

* Not significant at .05 level

Table No. 3 shows that the calculated value of ‘t’ 0.807 is less than the tabulated value of ‘t’ 1.96, which is
statistically not significant at .05 level. This means there is no significant difference in the attitudes of Muslim
prospective teachers and Non-Muslim prospective teachers towards teaching profession. Therefore, the null
hypothesis that, there is no statistical significant difference in the attitudes of Muslim and Non-Muslim prospective
teachers towards teaching profession is accepted. It can be claimed that, there really exists no difference in the
attitudes of Muslim and Non-Muslim prospective teachers towards teaching profession.

176
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

TABLE 4 SHOWING THE COMPARISON OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS TEACHING PROFESSION OF

SCIENCE AND SOCIAL SCIENCE PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS

Basis N Mean Standard Deviation t-value

Science Prospective Teachers 67 264.42 22.93

1.478*
Social Science Prospective
113 258.36 28.50
Teachers

* Not significant at .05 level

Table No. 4 shows that the calculated value of ‘t’ 1.478 is less than the tabulated value of ‘t’ 1.96, which is
statistically not significant at .05 level. This means there is no significant difference in the attitudes of science and
social science prospective teachers towards teaching profession. Therefore, the null hypothesis that, there is no
statistical significant difference in the attitudes of science and social science prospective teachers towards teaching
profession is accepted. It can be said that, there really exists no difference in the attitudes of science and social
science prospective teachers towards teaching profession. This is corroborated by the finding of the study conducted
by Sharma & Dhaiya (2012) who revealed that Arts and Science B.Ed. students do not differ significantly in
attitudes towards teaching profession but, contrary to the finding of Pehlivan (2010) who reported that there is a
difference between the attitude of science and social science prospective teachers.
Findings of the study

1. There is a significant difference in the attitudes of prospective teachers studying in private and public B.Ed
institutions towards teaching profession. It means that types of institution i.e., private and public influences the
attitudes of prospective teachers towards teaching profession.
2. There is no significant difference in the attitudes of female and male prospective teachers towards teaching
profession. It means that attitudes of female and male prospective teachers is not affected or determined by their
gender.
3. There is no significant difference in the attitudes of Muslim and Non-Muslim prospective teachers towards
teaching profession. It means that attitudes of Muslim and Non-Muslim prospective teachers is not affected or
determined by their religion.
4. There is no significant difference in the attitudes of science and social science prospective teachers towards
teaching profession. It means that attitudes of science and social science prospective teachers is not affected or
determined by their choice of streams.

REFERENCES
· Ahluwalia, S.P. (2007). Manual for Teacher Attitude Inventory (TAI), Agra, National Psychological
Corporation, pp.1-15.

· Arif, M.I., Rashid, A., Tahira, S.S., & Akhter, M. (2012) Personality and Teaching: An Investigation into
Prospective Teachers’ Personality, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, Vol. 2 (17), 161-
171.
· Baloglu, N., Karadag, E. (n.d). A Study of the Relationship between the Prospective Teachers’ Attitudes toward
the Teaching Profession and their Preferred Coping Strategies with Stress, the New Educational Review.
· Good, C.V. (1973). Dictionary of Education. New York, McGraw- Hill Book Company, p.49.
· Government of India (1986). National Policy on Education1986, Department of Education, Ministry of Human
Resource Development, New Delhi, pp31-32.
· Government of India (1953). Report of the Secondary Education Commission1952-53, Ministry of Education,
New Delhi, p.155.
· Guneyli, A., & Aslan, C. (2009). Evaluation of Turkish Prospective Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Teaching
Profession (Near East University case), Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1, 313-319.

177
Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online)
Vol.4, No.10, 2013

· Kareem, U., Jamil, A., Atta, M.A., Khan, M.Y., & Jan, T. (2012). Comparative Study of the Professional
Attitudes of Prospective Teachers Recruited in Regular and Distance Education Programmes, International
Journal of Learning & Development, Vol. 2 (5), 182-189.
· Mangal, S.K. (2009). Essentials of Educational Psychology, New Delhi, PHI Learning Private Limited, pp.328-
338.
· Mirunalini, M., and Anandan, K. (2012). Teacher Professional Perception of B.Ed Student Teachers, Journal of
Community Guidance and Research, Vol. 29 (3), 473-480.
· Mohiyuddin, S. (1943). School Organization and Management, Bombay, (Mumbai), Universal Book
Corporation, pp.395-418.
· Osunde, A. U., Izevbigie, T. I. (2006),An Assessment of Teachers’ Attitude Towards Teaching Profession in
Midwestern Nigeria, Education Spring, Vol. 126 (3), p.462
· Parvez, M. (2010). School Administration, Aligarh, Kitab Ghar, pp.58-59.
· Pehlivan, K.B. (2010). A Study on Prospective Teachers’ Learning Styles and Their Attitudes Toward Teaching
Profession, Elementary Education Online, 9 (2), 749-763.
· Sax, G. (1974). Principles of Educational Measurement and Evaluation, California, Wadsworth Publishing
Company, pp.397-443.
· Sharma, S., & Dhaiya, P. (2012). Comparative Study of Attitude towards Teaching of Science and Arts of B.Ed.
Students, Bhartiyam International Journal of Education & Research, Vol.1 (2), 2277-1255.
· Shah, S.I.A., & Thoker, A.A. (2013). A Comparative Study of Government and Private Secondary School
Teachers towards their Teaching Profession, Journal of Education and Practice, Vol.4 (1), 118-121.
· Thurstone, L. L. (1946). Comment, American Journal of Sociology, 52, 39-50.

178