1

British Journal of Educational Psychology (2021)

© 2021 The Authors. British Journal of Educational Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
on behalf of British Psychological Society

www.wileyonlinelibrary.com

Latent motivation profiles for choosing teaching as

a career: How are they linked to self-concept
concerning teaching subjects and emotions during
teacher education training?
Annette Lohbeck*1 and Anne Christiane Frenzel2
1
Department of Educational Sciences, University of Paderborn, Germany
2
Department of Psychology, University of Munich, Germany

Background. Numerous studies have explored pre-service teachers’ motivation for

choosing teaching as a career and the relations of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile
membership to long-term consequences. In contrast, little is still known about certain
predictors and the more proximal consequences of pre-service teachers’ motivation
profile membership.
Aims. Using the conceptualization of motivation proposed by Pohlmann and M€ oller
(2010, Zeitschrift f€ur P€adagogische Psychologie, 24, 73–84), the present study aimed to
identify pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles for choosing teaching as a career and to
explore the relations of those profiles to certain individual characteristics (i.e., gender,
age, specific school type, number of semesters, scholastic grade point average, self-
concept concerning teaching subjects) as predictors and emotions pertaining to the
teacher education programme (i.e., enjoyment, anger, anxiety) as outcomes.
Sample. A total of 559 pre-service teachers from a mid-sized university in the North of
Germany participated in this study.
Methods. To identify pre-service teachers’ motivation profile for choosing teaching as a
career, latent profile analysis (LPA) with one to eight profile solutions was performed.
Furthermore, to explore the specific relations of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile
membership to the predictors and outcomes under study, several multinomial logistic
regression analyses were conducted.
Results. Results of LPA revealed four distinct motivation profiles labelled ‘Educationally
Motivated’ (26.9%), ‘Utility Oriented’ (14.9%), ‘Motivationally Balanced’ (55.4%), and
‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (2.7%). Higher self-concepts concerning teaching subjects
increased almost twice the membership into the ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile relative
to the ‘Utility Oriented’ and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ profiles but decreased the
membership into the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile relative to the ‘Motivationally Balanced’
profile. The ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile showed the highest level of enjoyment and
lowest levels of anxiety and anger, while the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile exhibited the least
enjoyment and highest levels of anxiety and anger.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
*Correspondence should be addressed to Annette Lohbeck, Department of Educational Sciences, University of Paderborn,
Technologiepark 9, 33098 Paderborn, Germany (email: annette.lohbeck@uni-paderborn.de).

DOI:10.1111/bjep.12437
2 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Teacher motivation, defined as the energy or drive that moves a teacher to make a choice
or engage in an action, is an important topic in the teacher education literature (Han & Yin,
2016). Particularly, research on pre-service teachers’ motivation for choosing teaching as
a career has caught considerable interest in both Germany (e.g., K€ onig, Drahmann, &
Rothland, 2018; K€ onig & Rothland, 2012; Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010) and internationally
(e.g., Chin & Young, 2007; Hong, 2012; Richardson & Watt, 2006, 2014; Thomson &
Palermo, 2014; Watt et al., 2012; Watt, Richardson, & Wilkins, 2014). However, while
most of the available research has explored the long-term consequences of pre-service
teachers’ motivation for choosing teaching as a career (e.g., teaching quality during the in-
service phase or probability of dropping out of the teaching career), little is still known
about the more proximal consequences of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile
membership. We believe that it is also essential to understand the potential proximal
consequences of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership regarding their
study experiences during the teacher education programme. Students enter teacher
education programmes with certain ideas about the teaching job and clear expectations
about their programmes. Some students then seem dissatisfied during their studies; others
may be overwhelmed with the demands and experience a misfit between their ideas about
the teaching job and the content covered at university. The question is thus: Do students
with favourable motivation profiles with respect to long-term retention and job
satisfaction emotionally strive already during their teaching degrees? Or may motivation
profiles that appear more maladaptive in the long run even be conducive to pre-service
teachers’ emotional experiences during their studies?
Another shortcoming in previous research exploring pre-service teachers’ motivation
profile membership is the application of variable-centred approaches, which may mask
differences that person-centred approaches can reveal. For instance, one may expect that
intrinsic motivation is positively related to more desirable outcomes, but this effect might
not be evident in the analyses due to complex interactions with other predictors. For
example, intrinsic motivation might only be conducive to certain outcomes if coupled
with a certain level of utility beliefs about the teaching job. Such effects can also be
modelled by variable-centred approaches which include all possible interactions among
multiple predictors. However, variable-centred approaches rarely attend to two- or more-
way interactions between predictors. Furthermore, the fact that two or more variables
interact with each other in their effect on an outcome does not reveal if there is a
substantial number of individuals who show corresponding variable configurations (e.g.,
low on one variable, but high on another). In contrast, person-centred approaches, such
as latent profile analysis (LPA), which was also used in the present study, can
systematically test for the existence and prevalence of qualitatively and quantitatively
distinct profiles of a specific number of persons based on their configuration on a set of
interacting variables, and reveal whether those profiles are related to educational
outcomes (Howard, Gagne, Morin, & Van den Broeck, 2016; Morin, 2016; Vermunt &
Magidson, 2002). LPA is thus a suitable approach to identify pre-service teachers’
motivation profile membership and its relations to educational outcomes.

Conceptual framework
Our conceptual framework for understanding what leads students to choose teaching as a
career was rooted in the expectancy-value theory (EVT; Eccles & Wigfield, 2020). EVT
posits that expectancies and values influence motivation, persistence, and career choices
(Eccles & Wigfield, 2020). Numerous studies have used EVT as an underlying framework
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 3

to explain why students choose teaching as a career (e.g., Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010;
Richardson & Watt, 2006, 2014; Watt et al., 2012, 2014). The reasoning here is that
choosing teaching as a career is driven by expectancies to do well on this job (i.e.,
perceived ability) and by beliefs that the teaching job is worthwhile and valuable in many
respects (i.e., it has intrinsic value because it provides opportunities to work with
children/adolescents, to make a social contribution, and to shape the future). In this
context, Watt and Richardson (2007) developed the ‘Factors Influencing Teaching
Choice’ (FIT-Choice) scales, which have since been used frequently in many studies (e.g.,
Billich-Knapp, K€ unsting, & Lipowsky, 2012; D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich, Biermann, Br€ unken, &
Perels, 2019; K€ onig et al., 2018; K€onig & Rothland, 2012; Watt & Richardson, 2007, 2008;
Watt et al., 2014). Supporting the validity of the FIT-Choice scales, Watt and Richardson
(2007) showed that the stronger those expectancy- and value-driven motives were among
pre- and in-service teachers, the lower were their intentions to quit the teaching job, and
the higher were their teaching engagement and professional development. Parallel to the
development of the FIT-choice scales and based on the reasoning that expectancy- and
value-driven beliefs about teaching shape the selection of this career, Pohlmann and
M€oller (2010) established the FEMOLA (German: Fragebogen zur Erfassung der
Motivation f€ ur die Wahl des Lehramtsstudiums), which was also selected for the present
study. The FEMOLA considers six factors for choosing teaching as a career: two
expectancy-related motivation factors of (1) perceived teaching ability (i.e., ability belief
concerning teaching) and (2) perceived low difficulty of teaching (i.e., perception of easy
tasks), three value-related motivation factors of (3) educational interest (i.e., enthusiasm
for education), (4) subject-specific interest (i.e., enthusiasm for the subjects one will
teach), (5) utility (i.e., tangible rewards of the teaching job such as a high salary), and a
motivation factor of (6) social influences (i.e., persuasion through relevant others that the
teaching job is a good choice). While perceived teaching ability, educational interest, and
subject-specific interest can be considered as more intrinsic drivers, the three factors of
utility, perceived low difficulty of teaching, and social influences can be seen as more
extrinsic drivers for choosing teaching as a career. In the present study, we used these six
factors as a basis for identifying pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership.
Additionally, we sought to explore possible predictor variables of pre-service teachers’
motivation profile membership, selecting the following individual characteristics based
on their salience in the literature: gender, age, number of semesters, school type, and
academic self-concept concerning teaching subjects (e.g., mathematics). In this respect,
we aimed to examine whether males or females, older or younger students, students who
were more or less advanced in their teaching programme, and students who selected
different school types in their university programme had different probabilities of being in
one or the other motivation profile. Furthermore, we attempted to reveal whether
students who were more or less confident that they mastered the academic demands in
their teaching degree (i.e., showed a positive or negative self-concept concerning their
teaching subjects) were over- or underrepresented in certain motivation profiles.1
Finally, the key focus of our present study was on exploring the proximal outcomes of
pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership, that is, their emotional experiences

1
It is worth noting that we used one sort of ability belief (i.e., academic self-concept concerning teaching subjects) as predictor of
the motivation profiles, while another sort of self-concept (i.e., teaching self-efficacy or self-concept) was part of the motivation
profile solution. We are confident that these two concepts are sufficiently differentiable from each other, though (cf. literature on
pedagogical content knowledge as opposed to knowledge of the subject matter per se, as originally proposed by Shulman in the
1980s).
4 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

during the teacher education programme. In doing so, we selected three emotions that
have been found most frequently in the teacher education literature (Frenzel, 2014),
namely, enjoyment, anger, and anxiety. Considering study emotions as outcomes of
student teachers’ motivation profiles bears various promises. Students’ emotional
experiences are relevant for their well-being all through this typically 5-year-long phase
of life, and they make a difference to those who offer teaching programmes and the
corresponding educating institutions. By better understanding the motives of pre-service
teachers, and how they are linked to their study experiences, teacher training institutions
can potentially adapt their teaching foci to better fit the needs of their students or inform
more precisely beforehand to achieve better-fitting self-selection. We argue that a good fit
between student job motivation and study programme offerings would optimize study
programme learning commitment, and thus can have indirect positive consequences for
long-term career success, job satisfaction, and retention within the study programme.
Furthermore, if certain motivation profiles that have been shown to be negative for in-
service success and satisfaction also proved to be related to negative outcomes already
during the study phase, those negative emotions could be effectively used as ‘early signs’
of misfit between these individuals and the teaching career, and corresponding career
counselling offers could be set in place to support students in redirecting their career early
on. Finally, insights into pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership allow
teacher education programmes to design interventions targeted at optimizing pre-service
teachers’ training experiences and living up to the motives and goals that took them on the
teaching track.

Empirical findings on motivation profiles for choosing teaching as a career

In comparison with the large amount of variable-centred research in this field (e.g., K€onig
et al., 2018; K€
onig & Rothland, 2012; Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010; Richardson & Watt, 2006,
2014; Thomson & Palermo, 2014; Watt et al., 2012, 2014), only Billich-Knapp et al. (2012),
Biermann et al. (2019), and D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019) have used LPA and the
FEMOLA to identify pre-service teachers’ motivation for choosing teaching as a career:
Billich-Knapp et al. (2012) found three latent motivation profiles among 209 pre-service
teachers, which they labelled utility-oriented-pragmatic (10.8%), motivationally balanced
(58.2%), and educationally motivated (31.0%). Biermann et al. (2019) also identified three
motivation profiles among 801 pre-service teachers, which they labelled primarily
intrinsically motivated (18%), primarily extrinsically motivated (23.2%), and balanced
(58.8%). Finally, D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019) observed four motivation profiles
among 312 pre-service teachers, which they labelled intrinsically motivated (n = 52),
extrinsically motivated (n = 49), highly motivated (n = 162), and less motivated balanced
(n = 49).
In sum, both Billich-Knapp et al. (2012) and Biermann et al. (2019) found a profile
characterized by high intrinsic motivation and low levels of extrinsic motivation, a profile
with opposite characteristics, and a balanced profile with moderate to high levels of all six
motivation types. In contrast, D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019) observed a balanced
profile with low levels on all six motivation types. The intrinsically motivated profiles
were similar to the educationally motivated profile obtained by Billich-Knapp et al. (2012),
and the extrinsically motivated profiles were similar to the utility-oriented profile
observed by Billich-Knapp et al. (2012), while a motivationally balanced profile was found
in all three studies.
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 5

Predictors of pre-service teachers’ motivation

There are several potential precursors of pre-service teachers’ motivation. For instance,
pre-service teachers’ motivation has been found to be significantly influenced by their
demographic characteristics (Retelsdorf & M€ oller, 2012; Richardson & Watt, 2006), level
of teaching (Book & Freeman, 1986), expectations about teaching (Brookhart & Freeman,
1992), prior teaching experiences (Richardson & Watt, 2006; Watt & Richardson, 2007),
and social context (Kyriacou & Kobori, 1998; Watt & Richardson, 2008). Regarding
gender, some studies have shown that male students were less likely to choose teaching as
a career (e.g., Cramer, 2016; Renger, Renger, K€ oller, & M€
oller, 2020; Richardson & Watt,
2016) and more likely to drop out during the teacher education programme than female
students (Destatis, 2016, 2020). By implication, male students may be less favourably
motivated for choosing teaching as a career than female students. In addition, due to the
frequently observed drop-out of students during the university programme, it is possible
that pre-service teachers’ motivation for the teacher profession changes during the
teacher education programme (K€ onig, Rothland, Tachtsoglou, Klemenz, & R€ omer, 2016;
Sinclair, 2008). However, in terms of school students’ latent motivation profiles, various
studies have indicated similarity across age and gender groups (e.g., Gillet, Berjot,
Vallerand, Amoura, & Rosnet, 2012; Morin, Meyer, Creusier, & Bietry, 2016; Retelsdorf &
M€oller, 2012; Ullrich-French, Cox, & Cooper, 2016). In support of this research, several
studies based on cluster analyses have not provided evidence for motivation profile
differences across gender, age, subjects, or the number of semesters of pre-service
teachers (Berger & D’Ascoli, 2012; Kunter & Klusmann, 2010; Thomson, Turner, &
Nietfield, 2012). In contrast, regarding school type, there is a more consistent pattern:
While elementary pre-service teachers have been found to be more educationally
motivated than secondary pre-service teachers, the latter have been found to be more
subject-specifically oriented and more extrinsically motivated than elementary pre-
service teachers (Brookhart & Freeman, 1992; Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010; Retelsdorf &
M€oller, 2012). Furthermore, there is also evidence (e.g., Klusmann, Trautwein, L€ udtke,
Kunter, & Baumert, 2009; Retelsdorf & M€ oller, 2012) that pre-service teachers with a
poorer scholastic grade point average (GPA) are more likely to choose teaching as a career
for elementary school rather than for secondary school. By implication, students’
scholastic GPA may affect their choice of the teacher education programme. Finally,
Biermann et al. (2019) considered different facets of pre-service teachers’ self-concepts as
predictors of their motivation profile membership and showed that pre-service teachers
of the primarily intrinsically motivated and balanced profiles were more likely to perceive
higher skills of lesson planning, teaching, and diagnostics than pre-service teachers of the
extrinsically motivated profile.
To support and add to this research, we aimed to consider all those individual
characteristics (i.e., gender, age, number of semesters, school type, scholastic GPA, and
self-concept concerning teaching subjects) as predictors of pre-service teachers’
motivation profile membership. According to this framework reviewed, we assumed
that pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership would be predicted by the
specific school type of the teacher education programme, scholastic GPA, and self-
concept concerning teaching subjects. However, due to the tentative and mixed results in
previous research, we did not propose specific hypotheses for gender- and age-related
differences in pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership.
6 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Outcomes of (pre-service) teachers’ motivation

Pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership can be linked to several educational
outcomes. For instance, Billich-Knapp et al. (2012) showed that the motivationally
balanced profile exhibited the highest levels of willingness to learn, satisfaction, and
conscientiousness. Similarly, D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019) reported that both the
intrinsically motivated and highly motivated balanced profiles showed higher levels of
teaching self-efficacy and instructional quality in class than the extrinsically motivated and
less motivated balanced profiles. The intrinsically motivated profile also demonstrated
better self-regulatory skills than the extrinsically motivated and less motivated balanced
profiles, while the highly motivated balanced profile showed significantly higher self-
regulatory skills than the less motivated balanced profile. Following up on this research,
we had reasons to speculate that pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership
would also be linked to their emotions pertaining to the teacher education programme.
Our theoretical reasoning that there may be links of pre-service teachers’ motivation
profile membership to their study emotions was based on control-value theory (CVT,
Pekrun, 2006). According to this theory, intrinsic motivation is positively related to
positive emotions but negatively related to negative emotions. In addition, CVT proposes
that emotions are an outcome of expectancy (Pekrun, Hall, Goetz, & Perry, 2014; Pekrun,
Lichtenfeld, Marsh, Murayama, & Goetz, 2017; Postareff, Mattsson, Lindblom-Yl€anne, &
Hailikari, 2017; Tze, Daniels, & Klassen, 2016). By implication, pre-service teachers’
motivation profile membership may be a predictor of their study emotions (Pohlmann &
M€oller, 2010), already during the study phase. For this reason, we assumed that pre-service
teachers with more favourable motivation profiles characterized by high intrinsic
motivation and high expectancies would report more enjoyment and less anger and
anxiety during their study programme than pre-service teachers with a more extrinsically
motivated profile.

Objectives and hypotheses

The objectives of the present study were threefold: First (research question 1), due to the
scarcity of person-centred research, we aimed to use LPA to examine whether the three
motivation profiles observed most frequently in the literature (Biermann et al., 2019;
Billich-Knapp et al., 2012; D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al., 2019) can be replicated when
measuring the six motivation factors of the FEMOLA (i.e., perceived teaching ability,
perceived low difficulty of teaching, educational interest, subject-specific interest, utility,
social influences). Second (research question 2), to increase knowledge about the
underlying processes that may determine pre-service teachers’ motivation profile
membership, we sought to explore whether pre-service teachers in different motivation
profiles differ by their individual characteristics (i.e., gender, age, specific school type,
number of semesters, scholastic GPA, self-concept concerning teaching subjects). Finally,
third (research question 3), to expand prior research on the outcomes of pre-service
teachers’ motivation profile membership that may affect their long-term career satisfac-
tion and retention within the career, we strived to reveal whether pre-service teachers’
motivation profile membership is linked to their emotions pertaining to the teacher
education programme.

Hypothesis 1. In line with the results by Billich-Knapp et al. (2012), Biermann et al. (2019),
and D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019), we expected at least three motivation
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 7

profiles: a utility-oriented-pragmatic profile, a motivationally balanced

profile, and an educationally motivated profile.

Hypothesis 2. We hypothesized that elementary pre-service teachers would show more

favourable motivation profiles than secondary pre-service teachers, because
elementary pre-service teachers have been found to be more educationally
motivated than secondary pre-service teachers, while the latter have been
found to be more extrinsically motivated (Brookhart & Freeman, 1992;
Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010; Retelsdorf & M€oller, 2012).

Hypothesis 3. We expected that more favourable motivation profiles would be positively

related to pre-service teachers’ scholastic GPA (Klusmann et al., 2009;
Retelsdorf & M€oller, 2012).

Hypothesis 4. We assumed that more favourable motivation profiles characterized by high

levels of intrinsic motivation would be positively related to self-concept
concerning teaching subjects, while more unfavourable motivation profiles
characterized by high levels of extrinsic motivation would be negatively
linked to self-concept concerning teaching subjects (Biermann et al., 2019).

Hypothesis 5. We suggested that more favourable motivation profiles characterized by high

levels of intrinsic motivation would be positively related to enjoyment but
negatively related to anger and anxiety, while more unfavourable motivation
profiles characterized by high levels of extrinsic motivation would be
negatively related to enjoyment but positively related to anger and anxiety
(Billich-Knapp et al., 2012; Ullrich-French & Cox, 2009; Vansteenkiste,
Sierens, Soenens, Luyckx, & Lens, 2009).

Method
Sample and procedure
The sample consisted of 559 pre-service teachers from a mid-sized university in the North
of Germany, where a total of 9,595 students (females: 61.3%) started their university
programme. In the sample of this study, 477 participants were female students (85.3%).
Most participants were in the third year of their university programme (60.5%, n = 338),
while the other participants were in the first year (21.6%, n = 121), second year (1.1%,
n = 6), fourth year (0.7%, n = 4), fifth year (1.1%, n = 6), sixth year (12.2%, n = 68), and
seventh year (2.0%, n = 11) of their teacher education programme (5 missing values).
Their average ages ranged from 19 to 38 years (M = 22.91, SD = 3.34). In the German
university system, pre-service teachers can choose either an elementary or a secondary
school education programme. In the present study, 72.8% (n = 312) of the participants
selected elementary school education, while 27.2% (n = 247) of the participants selected
secondary school education. Their main subjects were German, mathematics, and
English. All participants filled out the questionnaires voluntarily during the first lecture of
the term and were informed that their data would be treated anonymously. Data collection
took place in October 2017 and March 2018, shortly after (the start of) the semester
because German university programmes usually start in October and end in February.
Information about the return rate was not available.
8 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Measures
Motivation factors for building the profiles
To measure pre-service teachers’ motivation for choosing teaching as a career, the
FEMOLA developed by Pohlmann and M€ oller (2010) was used. This questionnaire assesses
two expectancy-related motivation types (i.e., perceived teaching ability, perceived low
difficulty of teaching), three value-related motivation types (i.e., educational interest,
subject-specific interest, utility), and a motivation type related to social influences. All
participants were asked to evaluate 33 statements on a 4-point rating scale ranging from 1
(not at all true) to 4 (completely true). At the beginning of this questionnaire, there was a
stem (‘I have chosen to become a teacher because. . .’) that was placed in bold on each
page. Sample items were as follows: ‘I think that I will become a good teacher’ for
perceived teaching ability; ‘I think teacher education is easy’ for perceived low difficulty
of teaching; ‘I like to work with children and adolescents’ for educational interest; ‘I like to
learn a lot in my subjects’ for subject-specific interest; ‘I will get a good salary’ for utility; ‘I
think my family and friends consider teacher education suitable for me’ for social
influences. Results of CFA provided good support for the superiority of the presumed 6-
factor model (v2 = 752.663, df = 407, CFI = 0.924, TLI = 0.914, RMSEA = 0.039,
CI = 0.035–0.043, SRMR = 0.054) when compared to a 1-factor model and a 2-factor
model with one factor for the three intrinsic motivation types and a second factor for the
three extrinsic motivation types. Fit statistics of all three CFA models tested in this study
are provided in Table S1 in the supplementary materials.

Profile predictors: Self-concept concerning teaching subjects and demographics

Pre-service teachers’ self-concept concerning teaching subjects was measured with five
items of a scale developed by Klostermann, H€ offler, Bernholt, Busker, and Parchmann
(2014). A sample item was: ‘I think my teaching subjects are easy for me.’ All items were
evaluated on a 6-point rating scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly
agree). In addition, all participants were requested to report their gender, age, and
scholastic GPA (i.e., their final ‘Abitur’ grade), which is the general university entry
certificate in Germany.

Profile outcomes: Emotions pertaining to the teacher education programme

To measure the three emotions pertaining to the teacher education programme (i.e.,
enjoyment, anxiety, anger), the Teacher Emotion Scales (TES; Frenzel et al., 2016) were
applied. Each emotion was measured with four items, all contextualized to the teacher
training programme. Sample items were as follows: ‘In general, I enjoy studying’ for
enjoyment, ‘I feel tense and nervous in my studies’ for anxiety, and ‘I often feel annoyed in
my studies’ for anger. All responses were made on a 4-point rating scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree).
The reliability of all measures was satisfactory. Descriptive, reliability, and correlation
results are presented in Table S2 in the supplementary materials.

Data analysis
Data analyses were performed with SPSS and Mplus 8.6 (Muthen & Muthen, 1998-2021)
using the maximum likelihood estimator within latent variable mixture modelling. When
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 9

testing our first research question, we estimated one to eight profile solutions in which the
mean levels and variances of the six motivation factors were freely estimated. To find the
best solution, we considered the substantive meaning, theoretical conformity, and
statistical adequacy of the profile solutions, as well as various statistical indicators, namely,
the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), the Consistent AIC (CAIC), the Bayesian
Information Criterion (BIC), the sample-size adjusted BIC (ABIC), the Bootstrap
Likelihood Ratio Test (BLRT), the Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood Ratio Test
(VLMRT), and the entropy as an indicator of classification accuracy. Lower values of the
AIC, CAIC, BIC, and ABIC indicate a better model fit, and entropy values > .70 reflect a
good classification accuracy. However, since the entropy values should not be used for the
selection of the best solution (Lubke and Muthen, 2005; Peugh & Fan, 2015), we relied on
the VLMRT and BLRT as the main criteria for the selection of the best solution, as also
recommended by Nylund, Asparouhov, and Muthen (2007). A significant p-value of the
BLRT, which compares a k-class model with a k-1-class model, indicates that the k-class
model shows a better fit to the data than a k-1-class model. For all LPA, we used 5,000
random sets of start values, 1,000 iterations, and retained the 200 best solutions for final
stage optimization to avoid local maximum.
To find answers to our second and third research questions, we performed several
multinomial logistic regression analyses. More specifically, when testing our second
research question, we estimated a multinomial logistic regression model with the retained
profile solution in which pre-service teachers’ profile membership was regressed on the
predictors selected for this study (i.e., gender, age, number of semesters, specific school
type of the teacher education programme, scholastic GPA, self-concept concerning
teaching subjects). In these analyses, each predictor was related to k-1 (with k being the
number of profiles) coefficients associated with the pairwise comparisons of a profile to
another (referent) profile. These regression coefficients represent the predictor effects on
the log-odds of the outcomes (i.e., the pairwise probability of membership in one profile
vs. another profile) which result when the predictor increases by oneunit. For easier
interpretation, we also calculated odds ratios (OR) reflecting the likelihood of member-
ship in a profile as opposed to a referent profile for each unit increase in the predictors. For
instance, an OR of 2 suggests that pre-service teachers from the target profile are two-
times more likely than others to be members of the target profile (vs. the referent profile).
Finally, when investigating our third research question, we directly included the three
emotion outcomes into the retained profile solution while controlling for the predictor
variables under study (Asparouhov & Muthén, 2014; Morin & Wang, 2016). More
precisely, we explored the profile group differences in the emotions while controlling for
gender, age, number of semesters, specific school type of the teacher education
programme, scholastic GPA, and self-concept concerning teaching subjects. We believe
that controlling for these variables is important because especially self-concept
concerning teaching subjects (being a key indicator of control during the study
programme, cf. CVT, Pekrun, 2006) is likely an important direct predictor of pre-service
teachers’ emotions during their studies, but our aim was to quantify the effects of
motivation profile membership on the three emotions selected for this study. To test for
mean level differences between the profiles, we used the ‘model constraint’ option in
Mplus. In all LPA and multinomial logistic regression analyses, the multiple item
predictors (e.g., gender or self-concept) and outcomes (e.g., enjoyment or anger) were
modelled with factor scores estimated with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 to
provide a partial control for measurement errors (Morin et al., 2016).
10 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Results
Identifying pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles
Fit criteria for the LPA models estimated in this study with one to eight latent profile
solutions for pre-service teachers’ motivation are provided in Table 1. The criteria values
(AIC, BIC, SABIC) of the first four profile solutions continued to decrease, while those of
the solutions with a higher number of profiles were rather inconsistent: Both the VLMRT
and BLRT indicated that the 4-profile solution showed a significantly better fit to the data
than the 3-profile solution. In contrast, only the BLRT suggested that the 5-profile solution
showed a significantly better fit than the 4-profile solution. However, in the 4-profile
solution, there was another well-defined qualitatively distinct and theoretically meaning-
ful profile which was not evident in the 3-profile solution but also observed by Billich-
Knapp et al. (2012), Biermann et al. (2019), and D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019): a
motivationally balanced profile. Conversely, moving from the 4- to the 5-profile solution
resulted in an arbitrary division of one of the existing profiles into two profiles differing
only quantitatively from one another. Because the frequency of the participants in the fifth
profile was very low (only 2%) and the 4-profile solution was quite similar to that observed
by D€orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019), the more parsimonious 4-profile solution was finally
selected for further analyses. This solution also had a sufficient entropy (.708), with
average posterior probabilities of class membership into the target profile ranging from
0.792 to 0.938 and low cross-probabilities ranging from 0.000 to 0.177. Latent means of
the six motivation factors in the 4-profile solution are reported in Table 2. Profile 1 was
labelled ‘Educationally Motivated’ because this profile showed the highest level of
educational interest and low to moderate levels of all other motivation factors. This profile
comprised 26.9% of the participants (n = 150). Profile 2 was labelled ‘Utility Oriented’
because this profile exhibited the highest levels of utility and moderate levels of perceived
low difficulty of teaching, accompanied with low levels of the other four motivation
factors. This profile consisted of 14.9% of the participants (n = 83). Profile 3 was
characterized by moderate levels of all six motivation types and labelled ‘Motivationally
Balanced’. This profile was the largest, including 55.4% of the participants (n = 309).
Finally, Profile 4 was labelled ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ because this profile showed (very)
high levels of all three extrinsic motivation types and (very) low levels of educational
interest and subject-specific interest, accompanied with a moderate level of ability beliefs.

Table 1. Results from the latent profile analyses

No. of No. of free Log

Profiles parameters likelihood AIC BIC SABIC pVLMRT pBLRT Entropy

1 12 4,739.090 9502.180 9554.041 9515.957 – – –

2 19 4,652.029 9342.058 9424.187 9363.872 .0724 <.001 .818
3 26 4,597.963 9247.925 9360.312 9277.776 .1830 <.001 .833
4 33 4,553.269 9172.538 9315.183 9210.425 .0033 <.001 .708
5 40 4,513.836 9107.671 9280.574 9153.595 .2329 <.001 .765
6 47 4,511.667 9117.333 9320.494 9171.294 .6187 n. s. .769
7 54 4,468.690 9045.380 9278.798 9107.377 .2188 <.001 .760
8 61 4,452.521 9027.041 9290.718 9097.075 .3632 <.001 .777
AIC = Akaike information criterion; BIC = Bayesian information criterion; LL = model log likelihood;
pBLRT = p-value of the bootstrap likelihood ratio test; pVLMRT = p-value of the Vuong-Lo-Mendell-
Rubin likelihood ratio test; SABIC = sample adjusted BIC.
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 11

Table 2. Adjusted standardized means and standard errors (in parentheses) of the four motivation
profiles under study

Profile 1: Profile 2 Profile 3 Profile 4

Educationally Utility Motivationally Extrinsically
Motivated Oriented Balanced Motivated

Ability beliefs 0.129 (0.136) 0.598 (0.184) 0.227 (0.073) 0.311 (0.136)
Low difficulty of 0.828 (0.122) 0.223 (0.210) 0.154 (0.128) 4.080 (0.518)
teaching
Educational interest 0.438 (0.145) 2.341 (0.213) 0.503 (0.153) 1.021 (0.510)
Subject specific 0.005 (0.125) 0.743 (0.213) 0.225 (0.073) 0.196 (0.225)
interest
Utility 0.902 (0.222) 0.303 (0.173) 0.348 (0.118) 0.962 (0.286)
Social influences 0.789 (0.181) 0.239 (0.159) 0.432 (0.133) 1.194 (0.288)
Enjoyment 0.424 (0.196) 1.035 (0.216) 0.070 (0.134) 0.039 (0.231)
Anxiety 0.441 (0.190) 0.461 (0.222) 0.103 (0.128) 0.068 (0.269)
Anger 0.291 (0.180) 0.590 (0.280) 0.001 (0.136) 0.168 (0.218)

Note. Indicators are estimated from factor scores with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.

This profile was the smallest, involving 2.7% of the participants (n = 15). Figure 1
provides a visual depiction of the 4-profile solution under investigation.

Predictors of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile

Results from the multinomial logistic regression analyses exploring the cross-sectional
relations between the likelihood of membership into the profiles and predictors selected

Profile 1: Profile 2: Profile 3: Profile 4:

Educationally Utility Oriented Motivationally Extrinsically
4.5 Motivated (14.9%) Balanced Motivated
4 (26.9%) (55.4%) (2.7%)
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
Ability beliefs Perceived low difficulty Educational interest
-3
Subject-specific interest Utility Social influences
Figure 1. Final 4-profile solution of this study. Note. The profile indicators are estimated from factor
scores with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.
12 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

for this study (i.e., gender, age, number of semesters, specific school type, scholastic GPA,
self-concept concerning teaching subjects) are presented in Table 3.
While there were no significant gender- and age-related differences between the four
profiles, results revealed some significant profile differences in terms of pre-service
teachers’ individual characteristics: Secondary pre-service teachers were three-times
more likely to be members of the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile (Profile 2) relative to the
‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile (Profile 3) than elementary pre-service teachers. In
contrast, pre-service teachers in a lower semester were more likely to be members of the
‘Educationally Motivated’ profile (Profile 1) relative to the ‘Utility Oriented’ (Profile 2) and
‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (Profile 4) profiles than pre-service teachers in a higher semester.
Furthermore, higher levels of self-concept concerning teaching subjects increased almost
twice the likelihood of membership into the ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile (Profile 1)
relative to the ‘Utility Oriented’ (Profile 2) and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (Profile 4) profiles
as well as decreased the probability of belonging to the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile (Profile 2)
relative to the ‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile (Profile 3).

Outcomes of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile

Latent means of the three emotion outcomes and the statistical significance for each
pairwise comparison of outcome levels across the four profiles are graphically depicted in
Figure 2, and the exact latent means of the three emotion outcomes are included in
Table 2.

Table 3. Predictors of the four motivation profiles under investigation

P1 vs. P2 P1 vs. P3 P1 vs. P4

Coeff. SE OR Coeff. SE OR Coeff. SE OR

Gender 0.289 0.547 1.335 0.054 0.493 1.056 0.050 1.062 1.051
Age 0.008 0.069 1.008 0.045 0.047 1.046 0.020 0.109 1.020
School type 0.418 0.433 0.658 0.743 0.375 2.102 0.319 0.821 0.727
Semester 0.401 0.204 0.669 0.258 0.181 0.772 0.467* 0.200 0.627
GPA 0.208 0.207 1.232 0.085 0.154 1.089 0.216 0.361 0.806
Self-concept 0.674** 0.203 1.963 0.042 0.163 0.959 0.746* 0.345 2.109

P2 vs. P3 P2 vs. P4 P3 vs. P4

Coeff. SE OR Coeff. SE OR Coeff. SE OR

Gender 0.235 0.501 0.791 0.239 1.094 0.787 0.005 1.057 0.996
Age 0.036 0.072 1.037 0.012 0.122 1.012 0.024 0.111 0.976
School type 1.161** 0.417 3.193 0.099 0.861 1.104 1.062 0.818 0.346
Semester 0.143 0.127 1.232 0.066 0.171 0.936 0.209 0.142 0.811
GPA 0.123 0.217 1.352 0.425 0.393 0.654 0.301 0.360 0.740
Self-concept 0.716*** 0.202 0.455 0.071 0.336 1.074 0.787 0.355 2.197
SE = standard error of the coefficient; OR = odds ratio; the coefficients and odd ratios reflects the
effects of the predictors on the likelihood of membership into the first listed profile relative to the second
listed profile. P: Profile; Profile 1: Educationally Motivated; Profile 2: Utility Oriented; Profile 3:
Motivationally Balanced; Profile 4: Extrinsically Motivated; GPA = scholastic grade point average.
*p < .05.
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 13

Profile 1: Profile 2: Profile 3: Profile 4:

Educationally Utility Oriented Motivationally Extrinsically
0.8
Motivated (14.9%) Balanced Motivated
0.6 (26.9%) (55.4%) (2.7%)

0.4

0.2

0.0

-0.2

-0.4
Enjoyment 1 > 2***, 2 < 3***/< 4**
-0.6
Anxiety 1 < 2**/< 3+
-0.8
Anger 1 < 2**, 2 > 4*
-1.0

-1.2
Figure 2. Outcome levels in the final 4-profile solution. Note. Indicators of outcome variables are
estimated from factor scores with a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1; other indicators have been
standardized for this figure. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, +p < .06.

The ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile (Profile 1) showed a significantly higher

enjoyment and significantly lower levels of anxiety and anger than the ‘Utility Oriented’
profile (Profile 2), while the latter exhibited a significantly lower enjoyment than the
‘Motivationally Balanced’ (Profile 3) and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (Profile 4) profiles but a
significantly higher level of anger than the ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ profile (Profile 4). In
contrast, the ‘Motivationally Balanced’ (Profile 3) and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (Profile 4)
profiles did not substantially differ from one another in all three emotions.

Discussion
The present study offers new insights into pre-service teachers’ motivation for choosing
teaching as a career by (1) modelling the complexity of pre-service teachers’ motivation
for teaching as a career using state-of-the art methodology (i.e., LPA); (2) accounting for
the six motivation factors of the FEMOLA (Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010); (3) considering the
role of numerous potential predictors of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile
membership (i.e., gender, age, number of semesters, specific school type, scholastic
GPA, self-concept concerning teaching subjects); and (4) illustrating the relevance of pre-
service teachers’ profile membership for more short-term outcomes, namely, pre-service
teachers’ emotions pertaining to the teacher education programme.

Research question 1: Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles

Results of LPA revealed four distinct motivation profiles, labelled the ‘Educationally
Motivated’, the ‘Utility Oriented’, the ‘Motivationally Balanced’, and the ‘Extrinsically
14 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Motivated’ profiles. All four profiles were similar to those observed by Billich-Knapp et al.
(2012), Biermann et al. (2019), and D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019) who also used LPA
and the FEMOLA to identify pre-service teachers’ motivation for choosing teaching as a
career. More specifically, our ‘Utility Oriented’ profile (Profile 2) was similar to the utility-
oriented-pragmatic profile observed by Billich-Knapp et al. (2012), our ‘Educationally
Motivated’ profile was similar to the educationally motivated profile obtained by Billich-
Knapp et al. (2012), our ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ profile (Profile 4) was similar to the
extrinsically motivated profiles observed by Biermann et al. (2019) and D€ orrenb€acher-
Ulrich et al. (2019), and our ‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile (Profile 3) was similar to the
balanced profiles observed in all these three studies. These results provide support for
Hypothesis 1 stating that there would be at least three profiles. However, in contrast to
the three studies by Billich-Knapp et al. (2012), Biermann et al. (2019), and D€ orrenb€acher-
Ulrich et al. (2019), the motivationally balanced profile was only evident in the 4-profile
solution but not in the 3-profile solution, and when considering the 3-profile solution, the
highest proportion of pre-service teachers was found for the ‘Educationally Motivated’
profile (Profile 1). Overall, these results suggest that when using the FEMOLA, a 4-profile
solution allows for better insight because it provides a greater level of precision and more
consistency with prior research.

Research question 2: Predictors of pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles

When testing our second research question, results from our multinomial logistic
regression analyses revealed only few significant relations between pre-service teachers’
profile membership and individual characteristics. More precisely, in support of
Hypothesis 2, secondary pre-service teachers were three-times more likely to be
members of the least favourable ‘Utility Oriented’ profile (Profile 2) relative to the
‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile (Profile 3) than elementary pre-service teachers. This
result is also consistent with previous research (e.g., Brookhart & Freeman, 1992;
Pohlmann & M€ oller, 2010; Retelsdorf & M€ oller, 2012), indicating that secondary pre-
service teachers are more extrinsically motivated and more subject-specific oriented than
elementary pre-service teachers. In addition, pre-service teachers in a lower semester
were more likely to be members of the ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile (Profile 1) relative
to the ‘Utility Oriented’ (Profile 2) and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (Profile 4) profiles than
pre-service teachers in a higher semester. This is a novel finding which has not been found
in previous research and may result from a decline of university students’ intrinsic
motivation during the study programme (Pan & Gauvain, 2012; Young, Wendel, Esson, &
Plank, 2018). Furthermore, contrary to Hypothesis 3 and previous literature (e.g.,
Klusmann et al., 2009; Retelsdorf & M€ oller, 2012), in our data, pre-service teachers’
scholastic GPA did not play a significant role in predicting their motivation profile
membership.
In contrast, in accordance with Hypothesis 4, results yielded some systematic profile
differences in terms of pre-service teachers’ self-concept concerning their teaching
subjects: Higher levels of self-concept concerning teaching subjects almost doubled the
probabiltiy for membership into the ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile (Profile 1) relative to
the ‘Utility Oriented’ (Profile 2) and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ (Profile 4) profiles as well as
decreased the probability for membership into the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile (Profile 2)
relative to the ‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile (Profile 3). These results also extend our
knowledge about the key variables that determine pre-service teachers’ reasons for
choosing teaching as a career, because until now, no other studies so far have explored
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 15

pre-service teachers’ self-concept concerning their teaching subjects as a predictor of

their motivation profile membership. Only Biermann et al. (2019) considered certain self-
concept facets as predictors and found that pre-service teachers of the intrinsically
motivated profile showed significantly higher self-concepts of lesson preparation,
teaching, and diagnostics than pre-service teachers of the extrinsically motivated profile.
Similarly, D€
orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al. (2019) reported that the highly motivated balanced
profile exhibited a significantly higher self-efficacy than the extrinsically motivated and
the less motivated balanced profiles.

Research question 3: Emotions as outcomes of pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles

When testing our third research question, results from the multinomial logistic regression
analyses also provided evidence for some systematic differences between the four profiles
in the three emotions as outcomes. The most striking result was that the ‘Educationally
Motivated’ profile showed a significantly higher enjoyment and lower levels of anxiety and
anger than the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile, while the latter also exhibited less enjoyment
than the ‘Motivationally Balanced’ and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ profiles but a significantly
higher anger than the ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ profile. Pre-service teachers of the
‘Educationally Motivated’ profile thus seem more advantaged than those of the other
profiles because a higher level of enjoyment can positively influence academic outcomes
(e.g., Frenzel, 2014). In contrast, pre-service teachers of the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile seem
at risk because this profile demonstrated the least enjoyment and highest levels of anxiety
and anger, which can negatively influence achievement-related outcomes (e.g.,
Hagenauer, Gl€aser-Zikuda, & Moschner, 2018; Mega, Ronconi, & De Beni, 2014; Trigwell,
Ellis, & Han, 2012). These findings also confirm Hypothesis 5 stating that more favourable
motivation profiles would be positively related to enjoyment and negatively related to
anger and anxiety. This research also goes beyond prior work on the outcomes of
motivation profiles because it is the first study to consider these three emotions as
outcomes of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership.

Limitations
Some limitations warrant attention when interpreting the results. The first limitation
concerns the sample including only pre-service teachers from a single university in
Germany. In addition, most participants were female students (85.3%), which may
confound the proportions of likelihood into profile membership. Further studies must
show whether the same profiles emerge in teacher student samples from different
universities or other cultural backgrounds. The cross-sectional design is also of great
concern, which does not justify any causal inferences about the relations reported in this
study. Longitudinal studies are therefore needed to support the present findings. Further
longitudinal research should also examine whether pre-service teachers’ profile mem-
bership changes during the teacher education programme (K€ onig et al., 2016; Sinclair,
2008) or whether extrinsic motivation gains in importance with an increasing number of
semesters. As reflected by the significant differences of profile membership between pre-
service teachers in lower and advanced semesters, it seems that some pre-service teachers
may shift from more educationally motivated profiles early in their teaching degree to
more utility-oriented profiles later in their degree. However, due to the cross-sectional
data of our study, it is still unclear whether those are cohort or truly developmental effects.
Finally, our results were only based on self-reports, which may be biased by social
16 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

desirability, and only few predictor and outcome variables were taken into consideration.
Further studies should use more objective measures and consider other possible predictor
and outcome variables of pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership, such as
their self-regulation or prior practical experiences (cf., Biermann et al., 2019;
D€orrenb€acher-Ulrich et al., 2019).

Conclusions
Results of our study revealed a total set of four motivation profiles among pre-service
teachers, with the highest proportion of the ‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile, followed by
the ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile, which showed the highest level of enjoyment and
lowest levels of anxiety and anger. This research allows us to conclude that most pre-
service teachers have a rather favourable motivation profile and experience considerable
enjoyment and little anger or anxiety in their teacher education programme. More
specifically, our results suggest that a moderate level of educational interest, accompanied
with low extrinsic motivation factors, is most beneficial for pre-service teachers’ emotions
pertaining to the teacher education programme, even more than a combination of
moderate levels of all six motivation factors. However, it must be kept in mind that the
‘Educationally Motivated’ and ‘Motivationally Balanced’ profiles did not substantially
differ by the predictors selected for this study, and the ‘Motivationally Balanced’ profile
was only evident in the 4-profile solution but not in the 3-profile solution in which the
‘Educationally Motivated’ profile was the largest group. In contrast, a very low level of
educational interest, as shown by the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile, seems to be rather
detrimental, because this profile exhibited the least enjoyment and highest levels of
anxiety and anger. Fortunately, this profile was the smallest group in this study.

Implications
Our findings call for the need of contextualized teacher selection procedures based on
theory and research (Klassen et al., 2018, see https://www.teacherselect.org/). Most
importantly, in light of the severe teacher shortage in many countries (UNESCO, 2012,
2015), the central questions for teacher selection procedures are: How can we recruit
enough appropriately qualified pre-service teachers who can be expected to not only
savour their teaching degree time (i.e., experience predominantly positive study
emotions) but also persist through many years of their teacher education programme?
Does knowledge about pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership prove
helpful to identify the most promising teaching candidates? Or to put it differently, might
self-reported motivation for teaching of pre-service teachers be informative for teacher
candidate selection?
Additionally, might insights into the self-reported motivation for teaching of pre-
service teachers inform teacher education programmes how they can support their
students in developing more favourable motivation profiles during the teacher education
programme? Results of our study suggest that pre-service teachers’ motivation profile
membership differ by their number of semesters, self-concept concerning teaching
subjects, and specific school type selected for the teacher education programme. More
precisely, our results showed that pre-service teachers were more likely to be members of
the most favourable ‘Educationally Motivated’ profile relative to the most unfavourable
‘Utility Oriented’ and ‘Extrinsically Motivated’ profiles when they were in a lower
semester and had a higher self-concept concerning their teaching subjects. The fact that
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 17

pre-service teachers’ motivation profile membership differed as a function of the semester

indicates that some pre-service teachers do change their minds about why they chose
teaching as a career. Unfortunately, our study shows that any such shifts tend to be
negative. Nevertheless, these findings imply that there is room for change regarding
teaching motives, and thus, interventions could be set in place to ideally change pre-
service teachers’ motivation profiles for the better. Teacher education programmes
should especially support pre-service teachers in a higher semester who have a negative
self-concept concerning their teaching subjects. Such support measures may imply, for
instance, providing them with alternative and varying forms of tests and exams in which
they can succeed and make emotionally rewarding mastery experiences.
Furthermore, results yielded a three-times greater likelihood of profile membership
into the most unfavourable ‘Utility Oriented’ profile as opposed to the ‘Motivationally
Balanced’ profile of secondary pre-service teachers and pre-service teachers with a lower
self-concept concerning their teaching subjects. Teacher selection procedures may
therefore implement initial self-report batteries measuring students’ motives for choosing
teaching as a career and include preliminary discussions with students about their
competence beliefs concerning their teaching subjects. Finally, in line with previous
research showing that unfavourable profiles are very detrimental for the later teaching
career (e.g., burnout and less favourable teaching methods; Watt & Richardson, 2007), our
results propose that those profiles, such as the ‘Utility Oriented’ profile, are also linked to
higher levels of anger and anxiety already during times of their teacher education
programme, indicating a real ‘misfit’. Students with such a profile should thus perhaps
interpret their negative emotions as ‘early signs’ and sooner rather than later leave the
teaching career path. However, great care is also needed when using self-report intra-
psychic measures as screening tools in teacher selection procedures. Pre-service teacher
education can also be considered as the means to educate and move trainees into more
adaptive profiles if they happen to commence their studies with a maladaptive profile. An
alternative practical implication from our study would be to identify student motivation
profile membership early on in their teaching degrees and to encourage them to be aware
of their own potential negative emotions while studying rather than ignoring them, to
then develop trainees with problematic motivation profiles and alarming negative study
emotions, rather than screening them out, which also aligns with the central objective of
teacher education policy (Renger et al., 2020).

Conflicts of interest
All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding
author.

References
Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. O. (2014). Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: Three-step
approaches using Mplus. Structural Equation Modeling, 21, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10705511.2014.915181
18 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Berger, J. L., & D’Ascoli, Y. (2012). Motivations to become vocational education and training
educators: A person-oriented approach. Vocations and Learning, 5(3), 225–249. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12186-012-9075-z
Biermann, A., D€ orrenb€acher-Ulrich, L., Grassme, I., Perels, F., Gl€aser-Zikuda, M., & Br€
unken, R.
(2019). Hoch motiviert, engagiert und kompetent: Eine profilanalytische Untersuchung zur
Studien- und Berufswahlmotivation von Lehramtsstudierenden [Highly motivated, active, and
competent: A person-centered investigation into career choice motivation of pre-service
teachers, the use of opportunities to learn and teaching skills in field experiences]. Zeitschrift
€ P€
fur adagogische Psychologie, 33, 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/a000242
Billich-Knapp, M., K€ unsting, J., & Lipowsky, F. (2012). Profile der Studienwahlmotivation bei
Grundschullehramtsstudierenden [Motivation profiles in the selection of courses of study
among students training to become elementary school teachers]. Zeitschrift fur € Padagogik,
€ 56,
696–719.
Book, C. L., & Freeman, D. J. (1986). Differences in entry characteristics of elementary and
secondary teacher candidates. Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 47–51. https://doi.org/10.
1177/002248718603700209
Brookhart, S. M., & Freeman, D. J. (1992). Characteristics of entering teacher candidates. Review of
Educational Research, 62(1), 37–60. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062001037
Chin, E., & Young, J. W. (2007). A person-oriented approach to characterizing beginning teachers in
alternative certification programs. Educational Researcher, 36, 74–83. https://doi.org/10.
3102/0013189X07299192
Cramer, C. (2016). Berufswahl Lehramt. Wer entscheidet sich warum? [Career choice teaching:
Who chooses it why?].. M€ unster: Waxmann.
Destatis. (2016). Schulen auf einen Blick: Ausgabe 2016 [Schools at a glance: Edition 2016].
Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt [Federal Office of Statistics].
Destatis. (2020). Lehrkrafte€ an allgemeinbildenden und beruflichen Schulen insgesamt sowie
€
Anteil der weiblichen Lehrkrafte. [Teachers at general and vocational schools in general and
proportion of female teachers.] (Statistisches Bundesamt. [Federal Office of Statistics]).
Retrieved from https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Bildung-Forsc
hung-Kultur/Schulen/Tabellen/allgemeinbildende-beruflicheschulenlehrkraefte.html
D€orrenb€acher-Ulrich, L., Biermann, A., Br€ unken, R., & Perels, F. (2019). Studienwahlmotivation von
Lehramtsstudierenden und Aspekte ihrer professionellen Kompetenz [Career choice motivation
of student teachers and components of professional teaching competence: A person-centered
approach]. Zeitschrift fur€ Entwicklungspsychologie und Padagogische
€ Psychologie, 51(1),
45–61. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000208
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2020). From expectancy-value theory to situated expectancy-value
theory: A developmental, social cognitive, and sociocultural perspective on motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.
2020.101859
Frenzel, A. C. (2014). Teacher emotions. In E. A. Linnenbrink-Garcia & R. Pekrun (Eds.),
International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 494–519). New York, NY: Routledge.
Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Daniels, L. M., Durksen, T. L., Becker-Kurz, B., & Klassen, R. M.
(2016). Measuring teachers’ enjoyment, anger, and anxiety: The teacher emotions scales (TES).
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 148–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.
2016.05.003
Gillet, N., Berjot, S., Vallerand, R. J., Amoura, S., & Rosnet, E. (2012). Examining the motivation-
performance relationship in competitive sport: A cluster-analytic approach. International
Journal of Sport Psychology, 43, 79–102.
Hagenauer, G., Gl€aser-Zikuda, M., & Moschner, B. (2018). University students’ emotions, life-
satisfaction and study commitment: A self-determination theoretical perspective. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 42, 808–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.
1323189
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 19

Han, J., & Yin, H. (2016). Teacher motivation: Definition, research development and implications for
teachers. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1217819. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1217819
Hong, J. Y. (2012). Why do some beginning teachers leave the school, and others stay?
Understanding teacher resilience through psychological lenses. Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice, 18, 417–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2012.696044
Howard, J., Gagne, M., Morin, A. J. S., & Van den Broeck, A. (2016). Motivation profiles at work: A
self-determination theory approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 95–96, 74–89. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.07.004
Klassen, R. M., Durksen, T. L., Al Hashmi, W., Kim, L. E., Longden, K., Mets€apelto, R.-L., . . . Gy€
ori, J.
G. (2018). National context and teacher characteristics: Exploring the critical non-cognitive
attributes of novice teachers in four countries. Teaching and Teacher Education, 72, 64–74.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.001
Klostermann, M., H€ offler, T., Bernholt, A., Busker, M., & Parchmann, I. (2014). Erfassung und
Charakterisierung kognitiver und affektiver Merkmale von Studienanf€angern im Fach Chemie
[Characteristics of cognitive and affective attributes of chemistry students at the beginning of
€ die Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 20(1), 101–113.
their university studies]. Zeitschrift fur
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40573-014-0011-7
Klusmann, U., Trautwein, U., L€ udtke, O., Kunter, M., & Baumert, J. (2009).
Eingangsvoraussetzungen beim Studienbeginn: Werden die Lehramtskandidaten untersch€atzt?
[Cognitive and psychosocial characteristics upon entry into teacher training: Are teacher
candidates underestimated?]. Zeitschrift fur € Padagogische
€ Psychologie, 23, 265–278. https://
doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.23.34.265
K€
onig, J., Drahmann, M., & Rothland, M. (2018). Motivprofile von Studierenden zu Beginn der
Lehrerbildung [Motivation profiles of students at the beginning of their teacher training].
€ Bildungsforschung, 8(2), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s35834-018-0212-0
Zeitschrift fur
K€
onig, J., & Rothland, M. (2012). Motivations for choosing teaching as a career: Effects on general
pedagogical knowledge during initial teacher education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 40, 289–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2012.700045
K€
onig, J., Rothland, M., Tachtsoglou, S., Klemenz, S., & R€ omer, J. (2016). Der Einfluss
schulpraktischer Lerngelegenheiten auf die Ver€anderung der Berufswahlmotivation von
Lehramtsstudierenden in Deutschland, Osterreich€ und der Schweiz [The influence of
practical school learning opportunities on the change in motivation for choosing a teaching
as career among teacher training students in Germany, Austria and Switzerland]. In J. Kosinar
(Ed.), Professionalisierungsprozesse angehender Lehrpersonen in den berufspraktischen
Studien [Professionalisation processes of prospective teachers in practical professional
studies] (pp. 65–84). M€ unster: Waxmann.
Kunter, M., & Klusmann, U. (2010). Die Suche nach dem kompetenten Lehrer – ein
personenzentrierter Ansatz [The search for the competent teacher – A person-centered
approach]. In W. Bos, E. Klieme & O. K€ oller (Eds.), Schulische Lerngelegenheiten und
Kompetenzentwicklung: Festschrift fur € Jurgen
€ Baumert [School learning opportunities and
€
skills development: Festschrift for Jurgen Baumert] (pp. 207–230). M€ unster: Waxmann.
Kyriacou, C., & Kobori, M. (1998). Motivation to learn and teach English in Slovenia. Educational
Studies, 24, 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569980240307
Lubke, G. H., & Muthen, B. (2005). Investigating population heterogeneity with factor mixture
models. Psychological Methods, 10(1), 21–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.10.1.21
Mega, C., Ronconi, L., & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-
regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033546
Morin, A. J. S. (2016). Person-centered research strategies in commitment research. In J. P. Meyer
(Ed.), Handbook of employee commitment. Part VII, Chapter 35: Methodological issues (pp.
490–508). London, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
20 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Morin, A. J. S., Meyer, J. P., Creusier, J., & Bietry, F. (2016). Multiple-group analysis of similarity in
latent profile solutions. Organizational Research Methods, 19, 231–254. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1094428115621148
Morin, A. J. S., & Wang, J. C. K. (2016). A gentle introduction to mixture modeling using physical
fitness data. In N. Ntoumanis & N. Myers (Eds.), An introduction to intermediate and advanced
statistical analyses for sport and exercise scientists (pp. 183–210). London, UK: Wiley.
Muthen, B., & Muthen, L. K. (1998–2021). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen &
Muthen.
Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent
class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural
Equation Modeling, 14, 535–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396
Pan, Y., & Gauvain, M. (2012). The continuity of college students’ autonomous learning motivation
and its predictors: A three-year longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1),
92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.010
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and
implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4),
315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648006-9029-9
Pekrun, R., Hall, N. C., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2014). Boredom and academic achievement: Testing
a model of reciprocal causation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 696–710. https://doi.
org/10.1037/a0036006
Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H. W., Murayama, K., & Goetz, T. (2017). Achievement emotions
and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development, 88,
1653–1670. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12704
Peugh, J., & Fan, X. (2015). Enumeration index performance in generalized growth mixture models:
A Monte Carlo Test of Muthen’s (2003) hypothesis. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(1), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.919823
Pohlmann, B., & M€ oller, J. (2010). Fragebogen zur Erfassung der Motivation f€ ur die Wahl des
Lehramtsstudiums (FEMOLA) [Motivation for choosing teacher education questionnaire].
Zeitschrift fur€ Padagogische
€ Psychologie, 24(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/
a000005
Postareff, L., Mattsson, M., Lindblom-Yl€anne, S., & Hailikari, T. (2017). The complex relationship
between emotions, approaches to learning, study success and study progress during the
transition to university. Higher Education, 73, 441–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-
0096-7
Renger, D., Renger, S., K€ oller, M. M., & M€ oller, J. (2020). Teachers of tomorrow: How gender
framings of the teaching profession affect students’ intention to teach. Zeitschrift fur €
P€adagogische Psychologie, , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/a000287
Retelsdorf, J., & M€oller, J. (2012). Grundschule oder Gymnasium? Zur Motivation ein Lehramt zu
studieren [Primary or secondary school? On the motivation for choosing teacher education].
Zeitschrift fur€ Padagogische
€ Psychologie, 26(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652/
a000056
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2006). Who choose teaching and why? Profiling characteristics
and motivations across three Australian universities. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,
34(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660500480290
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2014). Why people choose teaching as a career. An expectancy-
value approach to understanding teacher motivation. In P. W. Richardson, S. A. Karabenick & H.
M. G. Watt (Eds.), Teacher motivation. Theory and practice (pp. 3–19). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2016). Factors influencing teaching choice: Why do future
teachers choose the career? In J. Loughran & M. L. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of
teacher education (pp. 275–304). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
 Pre-service teachers’ motivation profiles 21

Sinclair, C. (2008). Initial and changing student teacher motivation and commitment to teaching.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13598660801971658
Thomson, M. M., & Palermo, C. (2014). Preservice teachers’ understanding of their professional
goals: Case studies from three different typologies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 44, 56–
68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.08.002
Thomson, M. M., Turner, J. E., & Nietfield, J. L. (2012). A typological approach to investigate the
teacher career decision: Motivations and beliefs about teaching of prospective teacher
candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 324–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.
2011.10.007
Trigwell, K., Ellis, R. A., & Han, F. (2012). Relations between students’ approaches to learning,
experienced emotions and outcomes of learning. Studies in Higher Education, 37, 811–824.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.549220
Tze, V. M. C., Daniels, L. M., & Klassen, R. M. (2016). Evaluating the relationship between boredom
and academic outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 119–144.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9301-y
Ullrich-French, S., & Cox, A. (2009). Using cluster analysis to examine the combinations of
motivation regulations of physical education students. Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, 31, 358–379. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.31.3.358
Ullrich-French, S., Cox, A. E., & Cooper, B. R. (2016). Examining combinations of social physique
anxiety and motivation regulations using latent profile analysis. Measurement in Physical
Education and Exercise Science, 20(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2015.
1107571
UNESCO (2012). The global demand for primary teachers: 2012 update. Montreal, QC: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2015). The challenge of teacher shortage and quality: Have we succeeded in getting
enough quality teachers into classrooms? (Education for all global monitoring report). Paris,
France: UNESCO.
Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Soenens, B., Luyckx, K., & Lens, W. (2009). Motivation profiles from a
self-determination perspective: The quality of motivation matters. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 101, 671–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/a001508
Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2002). Latent class cluster analysis. In J. Hagenaars & A. McCutcheon
(Eds.), Applied latent class models (pp. 89–106). New York, NY: Cambridge.
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2007). Motivational factors influencing teaching as a career
choice: Development and validation of the FIT-choice scale. Journal of Experimental
Education, 75, 167–202. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.75.3.167-202
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Motivations, perceptions, and aspirations concerning
teaching as a career for different types of beginning teachers. Learning and Instruction, 18(5),
408–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.002
Watt, H. M. G., Richardson, P. W., Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Beyer, B., Trautwein, U., & Baumert, J.
(2012). Motivations for choosing teaching as a career: An international comparison using the FIT-
Choice scale. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(6), 791–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ta
te.2012.03.003
Watt, H. M. G., Richardson, P. W., & Wilkins, K. (2014). Profiles of professional engagement and
career development aspirations among USA preservice teachers. International Journal of
Educational Research, 65, 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.09.00
Young, A. M., Wendel, P. J., Esson, J. M., & Plank, K. M. (2018). Motivational decline and recovery in
higher education STEM courses. International Journal of Science Education, 40, 1016–1033.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1460773

Received 3 September 2020; revised version received 5 June 2021

22 Annette Lohbeck and Anne Christiane Frenzel

Supporting Information
The following supporting information may be found in the online edition of the article:
Table S1. Goodness-of-fit-summary for the three CFA models based on the FEMOLA
Table S2. Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s a) and (latent
factor) correlations