Job Satisfaction for Senior High School Mathematics Teachers

Christine D. Alagasi, Lucile R. Gallibot, Joyce S. Hondos

Abstract

This study was conducted to create a model of job satisfaction of SHS

Mathematics teachers and determine the three factors such as: relationship of teachers
and students, teacher morale and the support from school administration affects the job
satisfaction and which of it affects greatly with the job satisfaction of SHS Mathematics
teachers. The Simulation-based research was used as research design of the study since
we do simulation to get the result. This method used computer software to model the
operation of real-world processes, systems or events. NetLogo software was used to
simulate the real-life interaction of Job Satisfaction of SHS Mathematics Teachers and
have been translated to get the results. The three factors namely: teacher-student
relationship, teacher’s morale and support from school administrators was statistically
significant. The result revealed that the three factors affects the job satisfaction of SHS
Mathematics teachers and among the three factors, the teacher’s morale greatly affects
the teachers’ job satisfaction.

1.0 Introduction

Teaching is one of the professions that is in demand and hard to fill position
nowadays. Teaching plays a very important role in molding the students in the field
of education. Teachers as instrument of sharing knowledge to mold individuals
requires great dedication and job satisfaction to stay and last on their job. Taking
good care of them and seeing them satisfied on their job makes them more effective
and happy on performing their task.

According to Usop A. et. al, 2013, the teachers were contented with their job
satisfaction base on the following factors such as school policies, supervision,
interpersonal relations, opportunities for promotion and growth, working conditions,
recognition, and responsibility. Therefore, if teachers are contented with their job,
 they will develop and maintain high performance. Teaching-learning process make
more efficient and effective that could produce high competitive learners. Teachers
therefore need motivation to enhance their level of job satisfaction in order to
undertake their duty effectively and efficiently, (Ojwang, 2013). According to
Demirtas (2010) teachers with high job satisfaction could bring more enjoyment and
motivation to both schools and students, which resulted in increased student success.

Conceptual Framework

 Work/School
Environment
 Relationship between SHS Mathematics Teacher’s
Teacher and Student Job Satisfaction
 Teacher’s Morale
 Support from the School
Administrators

Figure 1
Factors Associated with Job Satisfaction

The conceptual framework illustrates the factors that affect job satisfaction of
SHS mathematics teachers. In this case, teacher’s job satisfaction depends on the factors
illustrated above.

The study was anchored on Abraham Maslow’s Needs Hierarchy theory.

Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory was developed to explain human motivation in
general. It is applicable to the work settings and have been used to explain job
satisfaction.

Objectives

It sought to answer the following:

1. What are the factors that influence job satisfaction?

2. Which of the factors affects greatly with job satisfaction?
2.0 Brief Literature

Teacher’s Job Satisfaction. Job Satisfaction refers to the degree to which teachers
needs like recognition, appreciation and fulfilment are being met (Evans, 1997). Job
satisfaction is negatively affected by stress (OECD, 2014;Borg, Riding & Falzon, 1991).
Satisfied teachers are more likely to provide higher quality teaching that benefits
student’s success (Collie et al., 2012; Grivaet al., 2012;Demirtas, 2010). The likelihood of
living the profession decreases when employees have high levels of job satisfaction
(Crossman & Harris, 2006; Tye & O’Brien, 2002).
Relationship between teacher ad students. Research shows that teachers experienced
a great satisfaction not from the financial rewards but it is the interpersonal relationships
that they experience with their school administrators, co-teachers and students (Korb &
Akintunde, 2013; Abd – El – Fattah, 2010).
Teacher’s Morale. Teacher’s morale also affects the job satisfaction of the teachers.
High morale can be characterized by interest and enthusiasm of the teacher for their job
(Govindarajan, 2012). It also help teachers remain motivated, committed and satisfied
with the job(Grayson & Alvarez, 2008).
Support of School Administrator. Supportive school management increases teacher
job satisfaction by allowing teachers to participate in decision making process, helping
with discipline issues, organizing workshops, creating trust and collaboration among
teachers (Fantilli & McDougall, 2009; Leithwood, 2006).

3.0 Methodology

The research design used in the study was the Simulation-Based research in
which simulation can be defined as a method for using computer software to model the
operation of real-world processes, systems or events (Davis et. al. (2007)).
Our study utilized computer software to simulate the real-life interaction and
translate the parameters of our model, we used the NetLogo software platform and
choose AIDS Model which can be seen in the models library since it will be fitted in our
model. Particularly, we will translate the virus as the workload of math teachers and the
infection caused by the virus produced by the job satisfaction of SHS math teachers.
AIDS model fits the study in various ways. The complete description are presented
below in the following table:

AIDS Model
Mathematics Teachers job
1. Number of People Satisfaction Model
2. Average Coupling
Tendency 1. Work/School Environment
3. Average Commitment a. Teacher’s Workload
4. Average Condom Used includes Teaching and
Non-teaching loads
5. Tendency to get tested
2. Relationship between
for HIV
teachers, students
3. Teacher’s Morale
4. Support from School
Administrators
5. Job Satisfaction Indicator

Figure 2. Translation of Parameters of AIDS Model to Mathematics Teachers

Job Satisfaction

Table 1

Job Satisfaction Model for

AIDS Model of the NetLogo
Mathematics Teachers
- Number of People. In the - Working/School Environment.
Netlogo, the couples represent The “couples” of our model are
two people engaged in sexual the teachers workload both
relation. With this behavior, it is teaching and non-teaching and
possible to transmit the deadly their job satisfaction. We assume
HIV. The presence of the HIV is independence for all individuals
represented by a color: Green are in the population. The red are
the healthy ones, Blue are the those math teachers who are
infected ones but their infection satisfied on their teaching job. The
is not known, and Red are the blue are those teachers who
infected ones where their doesn’t care about their job
infection is known. satisfaction. The green are those
- Interaction across individuals. math teachers who are not
A couple’s sexual lifestyle could satisfied on their job.
either be faithful or unfaithful. - Assumptions.
The faithful ones are less likely  The population in the model
be infected with HIV. The constitutes the Mathematics
unfaithful ones more likely be teachers and their teaching and
infected with HIV. non-teaching load.
 Teaching and non-teaching load
(as the HIV) who couples with the
job satisfaction.
 We define job satisfaction as a
pleasurable or positive emotional
state resulting from an appraisal
of one’s job or job experience
(Locke, 1976)
- The initial number of people set is
to 200 mathematics teachers.
Average coupling tendency. The -Relationship between Teachers and
tendency for individuals to be Student. We assume that the
involved in sexual couples. It is the teacher and student relationship is
same as the average number of a factor of teacher’s job satisfaction.
sexual partners. In this model, it is set Satisfied teaching and good
into a maximum of 10 sexual relationship with the students are
partners. more likely when students are
engaged with the teachers, and
hence would tend to receive high
learning. In this model, for a
maximum of 10 satisfied teachers
-Low - 1 – 5
-High - 6 – 10
Average commitment. The length of - Teacher’s Morale.it can be viewed
time (in weeks) individuals stay as as teachers striving to achieve
couple. The longer they stay as their individual goals and their
couple (e.g., in exclusivity), the less perception of satisfaction
likely for them to be infected by HIV. (Govindarajan, 2012). Low teacher
morale has been linked to lack of
recognition (Huysmann,
2008;Mackenzie, 2007;Reed, 2010).
The higher teacher’s morale,
themore job satisfaction they get
and the longer they stay and
committed on their job. In this
model, the higher the teacher’s
morale represents contact time on
teacher’s workload. And so, 100
weeks or less is considered low.
- Low- 1 to 100 weeks
- High – 101 - 200 weeks
Average condom use. The tendency - Support of School Administrators.
of the individual to practice safe sex. The non-support of the
The use of condom assumes 100% administrators such as
protection from HIV. A value of 0 department heads, principal, and
indicates no condom used during supervisors affects the job
sex. satisfaction of SHS Math teachers.
Job satisfaction is likewise low if
the administrators will not
support the teacher’s need. In this
model, the tendency for a math
teacher to be satisfied and so 5
below is considered low.
- Low – 1 - 5 (has willingness to
support)
- High – 6 - 10 (unwillingness to
support)
Frequency of Testing (per year). The - Job Satisfaction Indicator. The
average frequency an individual will average frequency of a math
 check their HIV status in a year. teacher to get job satisfaction base
on their work load. In this model,
the value is set to 1.00time per
year (i.e. once a year only)

4.0 Results and Discussion

The factors are defined as follows:

Factor F1 – Relationship between teachers and Student

Factor F2 – Teacher’s Morale
Factor F3 – Support from School Administrators
Factor F1F2 – Relationship between Teacher and Student and Teacher’s Morale
Factor F1F3 – Relationship between teachers and Student and Support from School
Administrators
Factor F2F3 – Teacher’s Morale and Support from School Administrators
Factor F1F2F3 – Relationship between Teacher and Student, Teacher’s Morale and
Support from School

Table 2. The Analysis of Variance Tests of Between-Subjects Effects

Mean
Source Sum of Squares df Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 26922.486a 7 3846.069 16.081 .000

 Intercept 19702.502 1 19702.502 82.379 .000

F1 6331.514 1 6331.514 26.473 .000

F2 9067.627 1 9067.627 37.913 .000

F3 2171.939 1 2171.939 9.081 .003

F1 * F2 5516.627 1 5516.627 23.066 .000

F1 * F3 914.414 1 914.414 3.823 .052

F2 * F3 2048.477 1 2048.477 8.565 .004

F1 * F2 * F3 871.889 1 871.889 3.645 .058

Error 36353.762 152 239.169

Total 82978.750 160

Corrected Total 63276.248 159

a. R2 = .425 (Adjusted R2= .399)

The table 2 shows the data of the Analysis of Variance to test the influence of the
different indicators on Job Satisfaction of Mathematics Teachers in Senior High School.
As shown in the table, the computed R squared is 0.425 which gives an adjusted R-
squared of 0.399. Thus, the variance of the indicators such as: relationship between
teachers and students, teacher morale and support from school administrator could
explain the variance of job satisfaction by 42.5 %. The compliment which is 57.5% could
be explained by other factors not included as indicators.

The data also shows that relationship between teachers and students, teacher morale,

support from school administrators and the interaction of factor 1&2 and interaction of factor 2

& 3 have p-value less than 0.05 then it is statistically significant which means that the

null hypothesis is rejected. On the other hand, the interaction of factor 1 & 3 and the

interaction of three factors has p-value greater than 0.051 or non-significant, hence, the

null hypothesis is not rejected since the three factors are not dependent to each other.

Moreover, the result of this ANOVA shows that the teacher’s morale has F value of 37.91
and the biggest among other indicators, which make it the best predictor and greatly

affect the job satisfaction.

Table 3 Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

1 (Constant) 16.019 2.706 5.919 .000

Teacher-students
12.581 2.706 .316 4.649 .000
relationship

teachers morale -15.056 2.706 -.379 -5.563 .000

support from admin -7.369 2.706 -.185 -2.723 .007

a. Dependent Variable: satisfaction

As shown in Table 3, the unstandardized coefficients gives the value of Constant

B0 = 16.019, B1 = 12.581 represented by teacher – students relationship, B 2 = -15. 056 the
represented by teacher’s morale and B 3 = -7.369 represented by the support of school
administration represent. This gives us the general linear model represented by the
equation
y=16.019+12.581 F1 −15.056 F 2−7.369 F 3
Job Satisfaction for SHS Mathematics Teachers Model

6.0 Conclusion
Based on the gathered findings, the following conclusions were drawn:
1. Teacher-student relationship, teacher’s morale and support from school
administration influence the job satisfaction of SHS Mathematics Teacher.
2. Among the three factors, teacher’ morale greatly affects the job satisfaction
with the highest f-value.

7.0 References
Abd-El-Fattah, S. (2010). Longitudinal effects of pay increase on teachers’job
satisfaction: A motivational perspective. The journal of International Social
Research, 3, 11-21.
Borg, M. G., Riding, R. J. & Falzon, J.M. (1991). Stress in teaching: a study of
occupational stress and its determinants, job satisfaction and career
commitment among primary school teachers. Educational Psychology, 2, 59.75
Collie, R.J., Shapka, J.D. & Perry, N.E. (2012). School climate and social-emotional
learning: predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction and teaching efficacy.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 104 (4), 1189-1204 doi: 10.1037/90029356
Davis, J.P., Eisenhardt, K. M. and Bingham, C. B. (2007). “Developing theory
through simulation methods’, Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 480-
499.
Demirtas, Z. (2010). Teachers’ job satisfaction levels. Procedia-Social and
Behavioural Sciences,9 1069-1073
Durr, T., Chang, M., & Carson, R.L. (2014). Curbing teacher burnout: the
transactional factors of teacher efficacy and emotional management. In H.
Watt, S. Karabenick & P. Richardson (Eds), Teacher Motivation: theory &
practice (pp. 198-213). New York NY: Routledge
Fantilli, R.D. & McDougall, D.E. (2009). A syudy of novice teachers: Challenges and
supports in the first years. Teaching and Teacher Education 25(6), 81425.
Griva, E., Panitsidou, E. & Chostelidou, D. (2012). Identifying factors of job
motivation and satisfaction of foreign language teachers Research Project
design
OECD (2014). TALIS 2013 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching &
Learning OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/9789264196261
Ojwang, R. O (2013). Factors Influencing Job Satisfaction Among Public Secondary
School Teachers.
Usop, A. M. (2013). Work Performance and Job Satisfaction Among Teachers.
Tye, B. B & O’Brien, L. (2002). Why are experienced teachers leaving the profession?
Phi Delta Kappan, 84(1). 24-32