See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/232820333

Assessment of teacher motivation

Article  in  School Leadership and Management · November 2010

DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2010.525228

CITATIONS READS

16 7,624

1 author:

Feyyat Gokce
Uludag University
25 PUBLICATIONS   81 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Feyyat Gokce on 09 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [TÜBİTAK EKUAL]
On: 23 November 2010
Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 772815468]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

School Leadership & Management

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713446120

Assessment of teacher motivation

Feyyat Gokcea
a
Education Faculty, Educational Sciences Department, Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey

Online publication date: 20 November 2010

To cite this Article Gokce, Feyyat(2010) 'Assessment of teacher motivation', School Leadership & Management, 30: 5, 487
— 499
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2010.525228
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2010.525228

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 School Leadership and Management
Vol. 30, No. 5, November 2010, 487
499

Assessment of teacher motivation

Feyyat Gokce*

Education Faculty, Educational Sciences Department, Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey

The aim of this study is to contribute to the achievement of educational goals by

determining teachers’ levels of motivation. With this aim in mind, the opinions of
386 teachers employed in primary schools in Tokat province were sought.
According to the findings of the study, the teachers stated that their needs were
not fulfilled according to their expectations. According to the results of the study,
it may be said that teachers occupy a field of motivation which is sufficient to
contribute to the achievement of educational goals at a higher level.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

Keywords: motivation; teachers; primary schools; Turkey

Introduction
In general, all organisations seek to be efficient. This, however, is only possible via
the achievement of organisational goals at a high level (AydIn 1994; Amar 2004).
Furthermore, it may not always be possible to ensure that members of a staff work
toward the benefit of the organisation or to bring continuity to their endeavours
(Eren 1993; Pardee 1990) because in an organisation individuals possess different
aims and expectations (Glynn, Aultman, and Owens 2005).
Recently, there has emerged a widely held and well accepted view concerning the
inability to accomplish educational goals at the desired level (Karip 2007). That
educational goals are not being achieved at the desired level may arise from incorrect
goal-setting, the choice of a structural model unsuited to those goals, inadequacies in
the quality and quantity of input, or poor determination of the criteria for evaluation
(Bursalıoğlu 1991).
According to Brophy (1983), the most important reason for a lack of success in
schools is low motivation among teachers and pupils. Although teachers themselves
state that they contribute sufficiently to their students’ learning, research reveals that
motivation levels, rather than teachers’ professional competence, play the more
important role in student learning (Atkinson 2000; Glynn, Aultman, and Owens
2005). Consequently, in order for educational goals to be accomplished at the highest
level, it is reasonable to ask the question: ‘How may teachers’ and pupils’ motivation
be increased?’
In the process of working to achieve educational goals, it may be observed that
the motivation of teachers is lower and that their stress levels are higher than those
of individuals working in other fields (Jesus and Conboy 2001). This situation may
be explained by the relationship between job satisfaction and the motivation of
teachers. According to Reyes (1990), there is a positive relationship between teachers’

*Email: fgokce@uludag.edu.tr
ISSN 1363-2434 print/ISSN 1364-2626 online
# 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/13632434.2010.525228
http://www.informaworld.com
 488 F. Gokce

motivation and job satisfaction levels. Supporting this idea is research including a
study of 375 teachers in Connecticut, in which Anderson and Iwanicki (1984) deter-
mined a significant correlation between motivational factors such as autonomy,
recognition and job security and the burnout levels of teachers.
Several factors may be mentioned as reasons for a decrease in teacher motivation.
According to Duttweiler (1986), these factors are those that maintain, direct and
stimulate high performance. Henderson-Sparks, in a 1995 investigation carried out
with 135 school directors in California, stated that the factors that decrease the level
of teachers’ performance are absence of motivation, fatigue and personal crises. In
the Arizona Career Ladders Pilot-Test Teacher Incentive Program, a five-year study
that relied on evaluations made in 14 school districts, Packard and Dereshiwsky
(1990) determined motivational factors as adequate professional relations and ties,
professional input, teacher evaluation, leadership and teacher development.
When the situation is assessed from the viewpoint of primary education and
primary schools in Turkey, several factors affecting the motivation of teachers,
principals and students emerge. These may be related to the management of the
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

education system, schooling rates, regional differences, gender, resources set aside for
education and working conditions. When statistics related to primary education in
Turkey are examined for information about these factors, the following may be stated.
Like all other educational institutions in Turkey, primary educational organisa-
tions feature a centralised management structure. For this reason, it may be said that
the decision-making authority of principals employed in Turkish primary schools is
rather limited (Şekerci and Aypay 2009). According to the data, the schooling rate in
Turkish primary schools in 2005
2006 was 89.77%. Regional differences in schooling
rates may be noted. For example, while the schooling rates in central Anatolia,
the Aegean Region and Istanbul were between 93% and 94%, they were between 77%
and 78% in eastern and south-eastern Anatolia. Moreover, when we compare the
schooling rates in rural areas with those of urban areas, and those of boys with those
of girls, we can note a situation that is unfavourable to those in rural areas and
to girls respectively (Kavak, Ergen, and Gökçe 2007). According to the figures for
2003, while the primary schooling rate in rural areas was 88.8% for boys
and 82.8% for girls, in urban areas these rates were 91.5% and 89.2%, respectively.
When examining literacy rates from a regional perspective, one finds that the average
for Turkey as a whole was 90.6% for boys and 87% for girls at that time. However,
in south-eastern Anatolia, these rates were 85.4% for boys and 70.9% for girls
(MEB 2009a).
According to the statistics for the 2008
2009 academic year, there were 445,452
teachers employed to teach 10,870,570 students in 34,093 schools in Turkey at the
primary level. School numbers are much higher in cities, while, with the exception of
south-eastern Anatolia, school numbers are constantly lower in the other regions,
and some village schools have even closed altogether due to lack of pupils. According
to the 2005
2006 data, the average number of pupils per school was 297. While this
ratio was 1138 for Istanbul, for large cities such as Izmir, Bursa and Adana, it was
between 300 and 400. Examining the situation with regard to the number of pupils in
classrooms, one sees that while the average for the whole of Turkey was 35 pupils per
classroom, this rate was 53 per classroom in Istanbul and 50 per classroom in south-
eastern Anatolia. When we examine the distribution of teachers, we find that there
was one teacher for every 27 pupils in primary schools. Again, we can see regional
 School Leadership and Management 489

differences in this regard. For example, while there were 20
25 pupils per teacher in
the Mediterranean, Marmara, Aegean and central Anatolian regions, this ratio was
33:1 in Istanbul and 37:1 in south-eastern Anatolia (MEB 2009b).
In Turkey, children of primary school age who live in sparsely populated and
scattered settlement areas, in addition to the students in schools which have multi-
grade classrooms, are taken to central schools by means of the ‘Mobile Primary
Education’ programme, which aims to ensure equal opportunity in education. During
the 2008
2009 academic year, 682,130 primary school pupils were transported daily
from 24,158 settlement units to 5848 central schools in 80 provinces (MEB 2009a).
In Turkey, the education budget amounts to 10.64% of the total budget. The
amount of the GNP set aside for education has, however, never exceeded 4%. Accor-
ding to the 2005 OECD data, this percentage was 3.8%. The percentage of the Educa-
tion Ministry’s budget set aside for primary education was 56.68%. When we look at
the expenditure made on each student, we can see that it was $488 according to the
2006 statistics. The average monthly salary for teachers was about $1000 (Tunckaşık
2007).
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

As will be understood from the study results and from the statistics, in the process
of achieving educational goals, dealing with many different matters at the same time
has a negative effect on the level of goal achievement (Nelson and Quick 1997; Daft
1994; Hellriegel, Slocum, and Woodman 2001). For this reason, in this study,
opinions concerning teacher motivation during the process of pursuing educational
goals have been analysed according to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and discussed
from the viewpoint of needs theories of motivation.
In this context, answers to the following questions have been sought:

(1) At what level are teachers’ needs met?

(2) How much importance is given to teachers’ needs?
(3) What are the levels of teachers’ motivational needs?
(4) Is there a significant difference among teachers’ opinions based on their
working conditions and personal characteristics?

Methodology
This is a descriptive study based on the survey method. The sampling population was
comprised of 4310 teachers working at elementary schools in the Tokat province
during the academic year 2008
2009. The reason why teachers in the Tokat province
were selected for the study is that in terms of its population and socio-economic level,
the Tokat province displays a more homogenous structure than do provinces such as
Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir. Also, Tokat is located at the meeting point of the Black
Sea, central Anatolian, and eastern Anatolian regions.
The survey sample consisted of 386 teachers randomly chosen from that
population. The questionnaire that was used to determine the teachers’ motivational
needs was prepared based on the scales developed by Shoura and Singh (1998) and
Everard and Morris (1996). The scale and calculation method used in the study
reveal the importance given to needs by teachers and their views on whether these
needs are being met in the most appropriate way, and the calculation method used
has the quality of displaying the true values of teachers’ opinions in determining their
levels of motivational needs.
 490 F. Gokce

The scale used had 29 items, presented first in terms of the levels at which the
needs have been fulfilled and then in terms of the importance attached to those
needs, as shown in Table 1.
The teachers’ views on the extent to which their needs have been met and the
levels of importance of those needs were graded on a seven-response basis. In order

Table 1. Questionnaire.

Views on the Views on the importance of

fulfilment of needs needs

Not
Strongly Strongly important
disagree agree at all Very important
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Question Statements
1 I have a job in which I can easily meet all my physiological needs (food, water,
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

sex, etc.)
2 The institution where I work is not exposed to any danger that may cause health
problems.
3 I have job security at the institution where I work.
4 My superiors do not try to block my advancement.
5 My peers do not try to damage my career.
6 I have lots of friends at the institution where I work.
7 The institution where I work contributes to my recognition.
8 My peers help each other in the workplace.
9 I respect myself for having the profession of teaching.
10 People respect me because I am a teacher.
11 I am popular in my institution because of my professional knowledge and
competence.
12 I feel at home in the workplace.
13 I consider myself equipped for teaching.
14 The institution where I work provides me with sufficient resources to do my job
better.
15 Teaching is an ideal job for me.
16 I can use my creativity in the institution where I work.
17 Teaching makes my life more meaningful.
18 My job gives me freedom and power.
19 My job contributes to the development of society and the state.
20 I have a job which is in harmony with the expectations of people.
21 I have opportunities to broaden my professional knowledge.
22 I think I am doing my job properly.
23 The people in my institution know me as a successful worker.
24 The institution where I work aids continuous learning.
25 My institution gives me the opportunity to know whether I do my job well or
not.
26 I hear new ideas in the institution where I work.
27 I have a job which helps me to achieve my goals in life.
28 My institution gives a quality education based on learning.
29 My institution adopts a democratic and participatory approach towards
management and supervision.
 School Leadership and Management 491

to test the validity and reliability of the data, the scale was initially applied to 213
teachers working in some elementary schools in Tokat and Bursa. Then factor
analysis was conducted to determine construct validity. Using Bartlett’s test of
sphericity and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test of sampling adequacy, the
researcher tested whether or not the data provided by the preliminary administration
of the scale were suitable for factor analysis. Bartlett’s test of sphericity suggested
that the data were multivariate and suitable for normal distribution statistics
(x28339.938, p0.00). Because the calculated KMO value of the scale was
0.901, which is greater than the suggested value of 0.60, the conclusion was drawn
that the data were suitable for factor analysis (Albayrak 2006). Varimax rotation,
which was used to determine the absolute factor number, showed that the scale had a
two-factor structure (Büyüköztürk 2005; Albayrak 2006). The 29 questions for the
first factor were regarding the extent to which the needs were satisfied, and the 29
questions for the second factor were about the importance of those needs. The
percentage degree to which the first and second factors explained the variance was
31.9% for the former and 12.2% for the latter. The percentage degree to which the
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

two factors explained the variance together was calculated to be 44.1%. The load
values of the items for the first factor were between 0.376 and 0.819, and those of the
second factor items were between 0.214 and 0.733. These data can be considered to
suggest that the scale had a two-factor structure (Büyüköztürk 2005; Tabachnick and
Fidell 2001). The reliability study intended to determine the internal consistency of
the scale showed that the Cronbach-a coefficients of the first and second factors were
0.950 and 0.956, respectively. The Cronbach-a coefficient of the scale, which consists
of 58 items in total, is 0.98. These results suggest that the scale had high reliability.
The views of the teachers in 386 questionnaires were analysed using the SPSS
programme based on the grouping in Table 1. The views and the relationships
between them were presented with arithmetical averages and correlations. The
differences between the views were analysed with t-test and one-way analyses of
variance.
To determine the level of the teachers’ need for motivation and the importance
they placed on their needs, the researcher used the indexes of need fulfilment (NFI)
and need importance (NII). Through the calculated values of the indexes, the
researcher calculated the values for the ‘need fulfilment levels (NFL)’ or ‘need for
motivation index (NMI)’. The values for the need fulfilment and need importance
indexes are the arithmetical averages of the total points for each need category
according to the theories. The formulas below were used to calculate the values of the
indexes in question:

P
n
SQ
Q¼1 NFIg
NFI ¼ NMIg ¼ k1
n NIIg

(nnumber of the items; SQthe point a person receives from an item in a

particular category; kcoefficient of suitability factor0.70.)
In order to normalise the NFL points between 0 and 100 and compare the need
categories more easily, the value of suitability factor (k1) was determined as 0.70.
 492 F. Gokce

Results
This section presents the findings regarding the personal characteristics of the
teachers and their views in terms of the theories of motivation.

Findings about the personal characteristics of the teachers

Among the participants, 46.9% were female and 53.1% were male, 51% were classroom
teachers and 49% were branch teachers, and 67% were under the age of 40 and 33%
were over. The teaching experience of the participants paralleled their ages. Nearly
12% of the participants had had a career of fewer than five years, while 62% had
worked for fewer than 15 years. Those who had enjoyed a teaching career of 25 years
or more constituted only 9%. 64.7% of the teachers were university graduates. The rest
had completed two- or three-year programmes at teacher-training institutions. Nearly
80% stated that they had undergone additional professional training more than once.
Of the teachers, 57% indicated that the school facilities were inadequate. Another
striking finding is that 19% of the teachers mentioned that their level of income was
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

low, 60% indicated that it was moderate and 20% stated that it was good.
According to the results of the analyses conducted to see if there were any
differences between the teachers’ views according to their experience, educational
background, school facilities and levels of income, a significant difference of
pB0.0001 was found between the views of the classroom teachers and those of the
branch teachers. No other significant difference was found based on the other
teacher characteristics and their views. This finding suggests that teacher position
affected views on to what extent their needs were met, while the other characteristics
did not. No significant difference was found between the importance they placed on
their needs and their genders, posts, education levels, experience in professional
courses, ages, school facilities or levels of income.

Findings about the teachers’ views in terms of Maslow’s theory

In terms of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, this section notes findings related to the
teachers’ views on the extent to which their needs have been met and the importance
of those needs.
The views of teachers are shown in Table 2 in relation to the need categories of
Maslow’s theory.
It was found that the needs of the teachers were fulfilled at the 5.04 level,
although they were given importance at the 6.18 level. Considering fulfilment and
importance levels in terms of the need categories, the teachers were found to regard
their physical needs to be the most important, while those needs were fulfilled at the
lowest level (46%). The need found to be fulfilled at the highest level was esteem
(63.3%). The analysis indicated that there was a close inverse relationship between
the levels of need fulfilment and importance.

Discussion
A great deal of research has revealed that when teachers are granted the right to
individual choice, allowed to choose teaching materials and programmes, and given
 School Leadership and Management 493

Table 2. The teachers’ views and motivation levels in terms of Maslow’s theory.

Need levels NFI (X) NII (X) NFL/NMI (%)

Physical 4.11 6.34 46

Security 5.08 6.20 58
Social 5.31 6.01 63
Respect 5.53 6.14 63
Self-actualisation 5.16 6.19 58
Average 5.04 6.18 58
Standard deviation 0.71 0.60 0.09
Notes. Correlations (r): NFI-NII   0.81, NFI-NFL/NMI  0.99, NII-NFL/NMI   0.89.

the opportunity to determine classroom organisation and discipline and apply their
own teaching methods, their teaching is greatly enriched and their motivation and
performance levels increase (Kaiser 1981). In contrast, badly planned timetables,
inadequate teaching materials, unsuitable working conditions and a large number of
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

demands all hinder work and may result in dissatisfaction at work (Rowley 1996).
In terms of the efforts to achieve educational goals in Turkey, it may be stated
that there are continuing problems in the areas of physical environment, timetables,
the management of teaching-learning processes, and learning outputs. For example,
if national and international examinations are assessed as an indicator of effective-
ness, we must note that thousands of students did not answer a single question
correctly or earn a single point on the university entrance examinations (29,927
in 2009) and that the same is true for the examinations given as placement tests in
primary schools (c.11,000 in 2009) (Tekisik 2009). The situation does not appear to
be any different in international examinations. Among students from 40 countries,
the students from Turkey participating in the 2003 PISA examination came in only
34th in mathematics, 33rd in reading success, and 40th in science subjects, while
those participating in the 2000 TIMSS exams ranked only 32nd out of 38 countries
(Karip 2007).
This situation may be regarded as clear evidence that educational goals in primary
education are not being achieved at the desired level as inequality between rural and
urban areas and between different regions in terms of benefiting from educational
facilities still prevails. For example, in 97% of the schools in eastern and south-eastern
Anatolia, conditions are inadequate for education. 9.64% of approximately 11 million
pupils in primary schools are taught in multi-grade classes, and a high percentage of
these students are in the eastern and south-east Anatolian regions (Tekışık 2009).
When we examine the number of students per teacher in primary education, we find
that while the average for the OECD countries is 17, this ratio is 26 in Turkey. If we
look at the number of net teaching hours, Turkey, with an annual figure of 639 hours,
comes in almost last among the OECD countries. As for teachers’ annual salaries,
whereas the OECD average salary for first-year teachers is $27,723, the figure for
those in Turkey is merely $17,909 (Tunçkaşık 2007). Furthermore, while the OECD
average annual expenditure per student in primary education is $4819, this amount is
only $498 for Turkey (Kavak, Ergen, and Gökçe 2007).
When the profile of teachers in the primary school education system is examined,
one can see that a large proportion of the 76,000 teachers that were trained in a
 494 F. Gokce

40-day programme in 1978 are still in service. In Turkey, while there are 29 students
for each professor in agriculture faculties and 24 for each in veterinary faculties, the
figure for education faculties is 408 students per professor. Physics and chemistry
laboratories are absent from 38 education faculties and biology laboratories from 35.
There are no language laboratories in 17 education faculties and no libraries in 25.
Additionally, in education faculties, there are 170
200 students per classroom, while
the teaching staffs in these faculties serve an average of 41
56 hours of classes per
week (Tekışık 2009).
As can be understood from the above assessments, there are various factors that
may negatively affect the accomplishment of educational goals. When the problems
are examined, it becomes clear that resources and working conditions are generally
inadequate.
When we look at the problem from the viewpoint of needs-based theories of
motivation, unfulfilled needs may have a direct adverse effect on motivation or may
indirectly cause a loss of motivation. In this respect, whatever the reasons for
unfulfilled needs are, we can say that they cause a loss of motivation in principals,
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

teachers and students as their results are reflected in teaching
learning processes.

With regard to the common features of needs-based theories, it is true that the
efforts of individuals in an organisation to carry out the organisational goals are in
fact shaped by their behaviours aimed at meeting their own needs. These theories are
in general derived from Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Nelson and Quick 1997; Daft
1994; Hellriegel, Slocum, and Woodman 2001).
It is clear that the findings of this study cannot be evaluated according to
Maslow’s theory alone. The most important point of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is
that the motivational strength of an unfulfilled higher-level need depends on the
fulfilment of a lower-level need (Eren 1993), whereas the findings of this study do not
reflect this hierarchical ranking. For this reason, the results of the study are also
discussed with regard to other motivation theories derived from Maslow’s theory,
shown in Figure 1.

Maslow’s theory of Alderfer’s ERG Herzberg’s two McClelland’s

hierarchy of needs theory factor theory achievement
motivation theory
Self- Motivators
actualisation *Promotion
*Growth
*Achievement Achievement
Growth *Interest in work
Esteem *Recognition
*Responsibility

Power
Social
Relatedness Hygiene factors
* Job security
* Pay
Security * Status
* Supervision
* Working conditions Affiliation
Existence * Organisational
policy and
Physiological management
* Interpersonal
relationships

Figure 1. The relationships between the theories of motivation.

 School Leadership and Management 495

When the teachers’ motivational needs are evaluated from a theoretical

perspective, they may be judged as below. As will be understood from the study
findings, the teachers’ needs are not being met at a very high level. For this reason, it
may be said that the teachers’ motivation is low. The findings of the study may be
considered important because they are supported by the findings of other researchers,
such as: Taş, whose 2004 study conducted with 259 primary school teachers in the
Adana province revealed that being obstructed in working environments led to a
decrease in motivation; Peterson and Quintanilla (2003), who showed that social
values and norms increased performance at work; and Mani (2002), who demon-
strated that working environment and colleagues affected staff motivation.
When the results of the study are assessed according to Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy
of needs, it emerges that the teachers’ physiological needs are not being adequately
met. In Özatay’s 2006 research conducted with nine principals and 169 teachers in
Istanbul’s primary and secondary schools to determine the relationship between
organisational behaviour and motivation, it was revealed that teachers who know
that their basic needs will be met possess increased motivation.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

According to the study findings, high-level needs such as respect and self-
actualisation are more often met among the teachers. Based on Maslow’s theory, we
would expect that their other (i.e., their non-physiological) needs are met less often or
not met at all. However, the teachers did not state an opinion that conforms to the
expectations associated with the theory. This result, even if it does not conform to
Maslow’s theory, may be understood according to the distribution of the teachers’
needs among different categories: in needs categories other than that of physiological
needs, teachers possess fewer motivational needs, as shown in Figure 2.
According to the needs-based motivational theories of Herzberg (1966); such
factors as organisational management, supervision, relationships with supervisors,
working conditions, salary, relationships with peers, private life, relationships with

100
Need Importance Level %

90

80 M o t i v a t i o n A r e a
70 45 31 23 25 30

60

50

40
Need Fulfilment Rate %

30 46 58 63 63 59

20

10

Physiological Security Social Esteem Self-

actualisation
NEED

Figure 2. The categories of teachers’ needs for motivation according to Maslow’s theory.
 496 F. Gokce

subordinates, status and security (Tietjen and Myers 1998), which may all lead to
dissatisfaction in the work environment although they are not directly related to the
work itself, are mainly related to some concrete situations in the workplace and their
real function is to prepare an environment that motivates the staff by preventing
individual dissatisfaction (Jones and Lloyd 2005). Because motivational factors help
individuals in self-actualisation, Herzberg evaluates these factors as the true
motivators (Everard and Morris 1996). These factors, which help people to gain
satisfaction from their work and are directly related to the work content, are defined
by Herzberg as recognition, respect, the job itself, responsibility, advancement and
achievement (Hampton, Summer, and Webber 1978). In this study, because the
teachers affirmed that their physiological, social and safety needs, which are related
to fields defined by Maslow, are satisfied at an above-average level, we may state that
according to Herzberg’s theory, the teachers are situated in a field of motivation that
will increase their performance, and efforts to increase their motivation would work.
Like Herzberg (1966) and Maslow (1943), Alderfer (1972) proposed that there is
a basic difference between low and high-level needs (Hellriegel, Slocum, and
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

Woodman 2001). In his studies based on Maslow’s theory, Alderfer separated needs
into three categories: existence, relatedness and growth (Daft 1994). According to his
ERG theory, there is no question of a hierarchical structure between needs (Nelson
and Quick 1997), but what matters is the proportion or strength of needs (Daft
1994). In terms of Alderfer’s theory of motivation, the teachers stated that their need
for existence was met at the lowest level while their need for relatedness was satisfied
at the highest. This finding conflicts with Maslow’s theory and is in accord with
Alderfer’s, which would not necessarily mean that the latter is stronger than the
former. However, based on the studies of Mehta, Dubinsky, and Anderson (2003)
and Ahmad and Singh (2001), it can be concluded that motivation is a process
affected by needs and cultural differences (Islam and Ismail 2008; Herbig and
Genestre 1997).
Another theory of needs is McClelland’s ‘achievement needs’ theory. Unlike
Maslow and Herzberg, McClelland states that people are motivated according to
their different needs and how far they are fulfilled (Hellriegel, Slocum, and
Woodman 2001). McClelland (1961), seeking to understand the phenomenon of
motivation, separated the basic motivational factors into three groups: the need for
power, the need for affiliation and the need for achievement (Hampton, Summer, and
Webber 1978). This theory assumes that determining the competences needed in an
organisation and placing suitable people in suitable positions in it can make a great
contribution to the achievement of organisational goals (Eren 1993). However, as
Tekışık also stated in 2009, there exist a number of problems related to the training of
teachers in Turkey. The results of this study show that the teachers’ affiliation needs
are met to a greater degree than their needs for achievement or power. For this
reason, it may be concluded that it would not be easy to motivate teachers by
meeting their needs for achievement and power.
According to the findings of the study, a significant and high negative correlation
exists between the extent to which a need is met and the level of importance given to
that need. Therefore, the level of importance of an unfulfilled need can be considered
higher than that of a fulfilled one.
Moreover, it can be observed from this study that the teachers’ opinions on their
levels of motivation as related to gender, age, educational level, seniority, involvement
 School Leadership and Management 497

in training courses, school facilities and income levels have not changed, while their
opinions have changed according to the positions they occupy in the teaching
profession. It is significant that this result resembles the results of the study carried
out with 369 teachers by Baygut (2007) during the 2005
2006 academic year in the
Izmir province with the aim of revealing the contribution of school principals to
teacher motivation. It seems that the attitudes of teachers regarding the level of
fulfilment of their needs vary according to their position in the profession and the
other features do not affect their attitudes.

Conclusion
According to the results of this study, the teachers give importance to the needs that
will increase their performance during teaching
learning processes, but those needs
are not in fact being adequately met. For this reason, it may be stated that in the
primary schools in which the study was conducted, there exists a field of motivation
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

suitable for teachers to contribute to the accomplishment of educational goals at the

desired level. On the other hand, there is no single theory of motivation that can
clearly explain the attitudes of teachers regarding the relationship between the level
of satisfaction of their needs and the level of importance they give to those needs.
From this it follows that motivation is a complex issue that cannot be explained by a
single theory.
In terms of the needs-based theories of motivation, the study findings show that
for the teachers’ educational goals to be realised at the highest level, their needs
must be fulfilled in a short time through analysis. Additionally, if the teachers
possess sufficient knowledge and skill regarding performance management and
motivation, students’ performance will improve; teachers who do not have adequate
knowledge of the subject of motivation and who are not motivated themselves will
have difficulty motivating their students to learn. For this reason, a training
programme should be designed and provided to fulfil the needs of pre-service and
in-service teachers in a way that can increase their motivation. In this way,
considerate teachers who have sufficient knowledge of and skill in the subject of
motivation can, by increasing students’ motivation during learning processes,
contribute more to the achievement of educational goals.

Notes on contributor
Feyyat Gokce, PhD, is an academician in the Faculty of Education, Uludag University.
Dr Gokce received his graduate degrees from Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. Feyyat
has authored three books on educational administration in Turkey. The first, The Relationship
Between States’ Powers (Political, Economic, Ideological) and the Aims of Education Systems in
the Change Process, deals with the relations between governments and education systems in
theory, while the second, Looking for Resources in Compulsory Education in Turkey, explores
how primary schools deal with limited funds in Turkey. The other is Primary Education in
Turkey: Basic Problems and Solutions. His research and teaching interests focus on educational
management theories. Feyyat is a consultant for The Turkish Elementary School Supervisors
Union, and is a member of the editorial boards of the educational administration journals
Theory and Practice, Contemporary Education (educational administration journals in Turkey)
and e-International Journal of Educational Research.
 498 F. Gokce

References
Ahmad, K., and S. Singh. 2001. Leading and motivating a Malaysian workforce. In
Understanding the Malaysian workforce, ed. A. Abdullah and A.H.M. Low, 4
60. Kuala
Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of Management.
Albayrak, A.S. 2006. Applied multivariate analysis techniques. Ankara: Asil Yayin Dag ˘ ıtım.
Alderfer, C.P. 1972. Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organisational settings.
New York: Free Press.
Amar, A.D. 2004. Motivating knowledge workers to innovate: A model integrating motivation
dynamics and antecedents. European Journal of Innovation Management 7, no. 2: 89
101.
Anderson, M.B., and E.F. Iwanicki. 1984. Teacher motivation and its relationship to burnout.
Educational Administration Quarterly 20, no. 2: 94
132.
Atkinson, E.S. 2000. An investigation into the relationship between teacher motivation and
pupil motivation. Educational Psychology 20, no. 1: 45
57.
Aydın, M. 1994. Educational management. Ankara: Hatipog ˘ lu Yayınevi.
Baygut, T. 2007. Views of teachers on the extent to which school principals carry out the role
of motivating teachers in Gaziemir district of İzmir. Masters diss., Dokuz Eylül University.
Brophy, J. 1983. Classroom organisation and management. Elementary School Journal 83, no.
4: 265
85.
Bursalıoğlu, Z. 1991. New structure and behaviour in school management. Ankara: Pegem
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

Yayınları.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. 2005. Data analysis handbook for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
Daft, R.L. 1994. Management. Fort Worth, TX: The Dryden Press.
Duttweiler, P.C. 1986. Educational excellence and motivating teachers. Clearinghouse 59, no. 8:
371
4.
Eren, E. 1993. Management and organisation. 2nd ed. Istanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dag ˘ ıtım.
Everard, K.B., and G. Morris. 1996. Effective school management. London: Paul Chapman.
Glynn, S.M., L.P. Aultman, and A.M. Owens. 2005. Motivation to learn in general education
programs. The Journal of General Education 54, no. 2: 150
70.
Hampton, D.R., C.E. Summer, and R.A. Webber. 1978. Organisational behaviour and the
practice of management. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foreman and Company.
Hellriegel, D., J.W. Slocum, and R.W. Woodman. 2001. Organisational behaviour. Cincinnati,
OH: South-Western College Publishing.
Henderson-Sparks, J.C. 1995. Managing your marginal teachers. Principal 74, no. 4: 32
5.
Herbig, P., and A. Genestre. 1997. International motivational differences. Management
Decision 35, no. 7: 562
7.
Herzberg, F. 1966. Motivation-hygiene theory. In Organisation theory, ed. D. Pugh, 71
91.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Islam, R., and A.Z.H. Ismail. 2008. Employee motivation: A Malaysian perspective.
International Journal of Commerce and Management 18, no. 4: 344
62.
Jesus, S.N., and J. Conboy. 2001. A stress management course to prevent teacher distress. The
International Journal of Educational Management 15, no. 3: 131
7.
Jones, N.B., and G.C. Lloyd. 2005. Does Herzberg’s motivation theory have staying power?
Journal of Management Development 24, no. 10: 929
43.
Kaiser, J.S. 1981. Motivation deprivation: No reason to stay. Clearing-House 55, no. 1: 35
8.
Karip, E. 2007. Quality in primary education: An evaluation of quality within the framework
of the European Union quality indicators. In Quality in primary education: Pre-school
education and the primary education system in Turkey, fundamental problems and
recommendations for solutions, ed. E. Karip, 211
307. Ankara: TED Publications.
Kavak, Y., H. Ergen, and F. Gökçe. 2007. Primary education in Turkey: A situation analysis.
In Quality in primary education: Pre-school education and the primary education system in
Turkey, fundamental problems and recommendations for solutions, ed. E. Karip, 72
113.
Ankara: TED Publications.
Mani, B.G. 2002. Performance appraisal systems, productivity, and motivation: A case study.
Public Personnel Management 31, no. 2: 141
59.
Maslow, A. 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50, no. 4: 370
96.
McClelland, D.J. 1961. The achieving society. Princeton, NJ: D.Van Nostmand Co.
 School Leadership and Management 499

MEB (Ministry of Education). 2009a. 2009 Budget report of Ministry of Education. Ankara:
Department of Strategic Development, Ministry of Education.
MEB (Ministry of Education). 2009b. National education statistics: Formal education
2008
2009. Ankara: Department of Strategic Development, Ministry of Education.
Mehta, R., A.J. Dubinsky, and R.F. Anderson. 2003. Leadership style, motivation and
performance in international marketing channels: An empirical investigation of the USA,
Finland, and Poland. European Journal of Marketing 37, nos. 1/2: 50
85.
Nelson, D.I., and J. Quick. 1997. Organisational behaviour, foundations. North Central
Association Quarterly 42: 59
66.
Özatay, F.E. 2006. Management of human resources in educational organisations and the
effect of corporate culture on teacher motivation. Master diss., Yeditepe University.
Packard, R.D., and M. Dereshiwsky. 1990. Teacher motivation tied to factors within the
organisational readiness assessment model. Elements of motivation/demotivation related to
conditions within school. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University, Center for Excellence
in Education.
Pardee, R.L. 1990. Motivation theories of Maslow, Herzberg, McGregor and McClelland. A
literature review of selected theories dealing with job satisfaction and motivation. US
Department of Education. Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC).
Peterson, M.F., and S.A.R. Quintanilla. 2003. Cultural socialisation as a source of intrinsic
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 08:01 23 November 2010

work motivation. Group & Organisation Management 28, no. 2: 188
216.

Reyes, P. 1990. Individual work orientation and teacher outcomes. Journal of Educational
Research 83, no. 6: 327
35.
Rowley, J. 1996. Motivation and academic staff in higher education. Quality Assurance in
Higher Education 4, no. 3: 11
6.
Shoura, M., and A. Singh. 1998. Motivation parameters for engineering managers using
Maslow’s theory. Journal of Management in Engineering 15, no. 5: 44
55.
Şekerci, M., and A. Aypay. 2009. The relationship between management skills and group
effectiveness of primary school principals. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice
15, no. 57: 133
60.
Tabachnick, B.G., and L.S. Fidel. 2001. Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Tekışık, H.H. 2009. An open letter to Nimet Çubukçu, Minister of Education. Çağda Eğitim
34, no. 366: 1
24.
Tietjen, M.A., and R.M. Myers. 1998. Motivation and satisfaction. Management Decision 36,
no. 4: 226
31.
Tunçkaşık, H. 2007. Teachers’ salaries in Turkey and various countries. Ankara: Research
Centre of Turkish Grand National Assembly.

View publication stats