Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The effect on teacher career choices: exploring teacher perceptions on the impact of non‐instructional workload on self‐efficacy and self‐determination
(USC Thesis Other)
The effect on teacher career choices: exploring teacher perceptions on the impact of non‐instructional workload on self‐efficacy and self‐determination
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES 1
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES: EXPLORING TEACHER
PERCEPTIONS ON THE IMPACT OF NON-INSTRUCTIONAL WORKLOAD ON SELF-
EFFICACY AND SELF-DETERMINATION
by
David Lewis Emery
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
March 2018
Copyright 2018 David Lewis Emery
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
2
Acknowledgements
A project like this, though a significant dedication of individual time and effort, did not
come about without the influence and help of others. For that reason, I would like to dedicate
this work to the many influential people who played instrumental roles in my life, contributing to
the personal reasons that I undertook this degree and providing support throughout the process.
First, I would like to thank my parents, Ken and Jeanette Emery, and my grandparents,
Otis and Nora Emery and Betty and Albert Rogers. During my youth, they modeled for me what
was possible when you had the ability to read and write and the drive to act on what you could
learn on your own. They provided space for me to experience new things, to get my hands dirty
with dirt and oil, to build with tools, and also to create things with my mind through reading,
imagination, and discussion. They also allowed me the space and freedom to explore on my
own, even when those explorations took me around the world, to new ways of thinking, and to
new places of intellectual investigation.
Second, I would like to thank the inimitable faculty, staff, and administration at John
Tyler Community College. Had they not taken the time to care and see something special in me,
had they not invested their time and energy in their classes and the feedback they provided their
students, and had they not personally involved themselves as advisers and friends in my life, I
would not be where I am today. I owe them a debt that I can only repay by serving as the same
type of example and support to the students now working their way through the educational
system. Thank you, Mikell Brown, Sharon Burnham, Mattie Coll, James Cosby, David Head,
Rena Mallory, Professor Smith, Penny Speidel, Sandy Via, Wendy Weiner, Mary Beth
Wentworth, and all the others there at JTCC who had such a profound impact on my life.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
3
Third, I want to thank Dr. Ron Tanimura, the first colleague I got to know at USC and
someone who always had time to talk as we worked together throughout this program. I want to
thank Dr. Dale Henry for all of his support, guidance, and friendship throughout this process. I
want to thank Bethany Neumann for always being there to hear about what I have been working
on. I also want to thank Johanna Wetmore for making sure that I took mental breaks and
continued to get out of the United States to incorporate new experiences and contexts into my
life and research.
The role of the colleges and universities cannot be forgotten either. I want to thank the
admissions and financial aid departments at John Tyler Community College, The George
Washington University, Boston University, and the University of Southern California for
allowing me to join their esteemed institutions and for finding the funding that I needed to
continue to develop intellectually and academically. Also, I want to thank my dissertation
committee for supporting me as I explored my research interests and for their role in making this
dissertation possible.
Lastly, I must thank my family. Thank you, George and Audrey, for your comfort
through difficult times and for sitting next to me when I needed a break. Thank you, Oliver, for
helping to remind me about real life, for staying up with me late into the night as I read my
articles and books, and for sitting on my lap as I typed each paper and the beginnings of this
dissertation. And thank you, Dr. Susan Chen Emery, for your openness to my never-ending
quest for more knowledge and new experiences, the advice and support you provided throughout
the process and, perhaps most importantly, for keeping everything in our lives running as I
embarked on this journey. I look forward to the next chapters we write together in life.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
4
Table of Contents
List of Tables 8
List of Figures 9
Abstract 10
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 11
Statement of the Problem 11
Overview of the Theoretical Framework 12
Purpose of the Study and Guiding Questions 13
Significance of the Study 14
Overview of the Methodology 15
Assumptions 17
Limitations and Delimitations 17
Definition of Terms 18
Organization of the Study 21
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 22
Conceptual Framework 23
Apple’s Intensification Theory 24
Re-skilling teachers 28
De-skilling teachers 29
Consequences of intensification 29
Critique of Apple’s Model of Intensification 30
Accountability Reforms 31
Alternate view of reforms 32
Psychological Effects of Reforms 33
Increasing Teacher Workloads 34
Research on Work Tasks 35
Non-Instructional Workload 37
Attrition and Burnout 38
Inspection of Burnout 40
Burnout in teachers 41
Inspection of Attrition 43
Alternate Views of Attrition 44
Impact of Teacher Attrition on Students and Schools 45
Intensification’s Connection to Self-Efficacy and Self-Determination 46
Self-Determination and Self-Efficacy 47
Self-Determination Theory 48
Self-Efficacy Theory 51
Theoretical Overlap 53
Summary 54
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 56
Research Design and Methods 58
Study Sample and Population 61
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
5
Research Questions 63
Scales 65
Self-determination scale 65
Self-efficacy scale 67
Data Collection 68
Data Analysis 69
Ethics70
Validity 72
Reflexivity 73
Conclusion 74
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS 75
Descriptive Characteristics of Respondents 75
Gender, Age, and Ethnicity 76
Education Level and Teaching Experience 78
School Types, School Level, and Current or Former Teacher 79
Summary of Other Variables 81
Scales 82
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work 82
Teacher Self-Efficacy 83
Analysis of Data 85
Scale and Response Normality 86
Qualitative Analysis 87
Research Question One: Results 87
Quantitative Analysis 87
Intensification: Work that spills into personal time 87
Hypothesis 1.1 91
Qualitative Analysis 92
How often do you arrive early? 92
What tasks did you complete when you arrived early? 92
Lunch and break times 93
Do you perform work tasks during your breaks or lunch periods? 93
How often do you stay late? 94
What tasks do you accomplish when you stay late? 95
Work Demands in the evenings, weekends, and over holidays. 96
Differences in Responses Between School Type 97
Research Question Two: Results 98
Quantitative Analysis 98
Hypothesis 2.1 99
Non-instructional workload on personal and work life 100
Time to be effective 101
Time for colleagues 102
Qualitative Analysis 103
Time before and after 104
Time for colleagues 104
Time to be effective 105
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
6
Research Question Three: Results 107
Quantitative Analysis 107
Hypothesis 3.1 108
Self-Efficacy and non-instructional workload 108
BPNSW –autonomy and non-instructional workload 108
BPNSW – competence and non-instructional workload 109
BPNSW – global score and non-instructional workload 109
BPNSW – relatedness and non-instructional workload 109
Hypothesis 3.2 110
Hypothesis 3.3 112
Qualitative Analysis 113
Self-efficacy – mastery 113
Self-efficacy – competence 114
Self-determination – competence 115
Self-determination – relatedness 116
Self-determination – autonomy 117
Research Question Four: Results 118
Quantitative Analysis 118
Hypothesis 4.1 118
Self-efficacy and work status 118
BPNSW – global score and work status 119
BPNSW – autonomy and work status 119
BPNSW – competence and work status 119
BPNSW – relatedness and work status 120
Significance of self-efficacy and self-determination 120
Self-determination - relatedness and work status 121
Qualitative Analysis 121
Former teachers 123
An Example of Intensification and Non-Instructional Workload in Action 125
Summary 133
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 134
Reasons for Teaching 134
The Challenges 135
The Question of Curriculum 136
Connections to Theory 138
Self-Efficacy 138
Self-Determination 139
Traditional Public, Charter, and Private Schools 140
Key Findings 141
Research Question 1 141
Intensification’s role in non-instructional workload 143
Research Question 2 144
Non-instructional workload in personal and work lives 144
Type of school 145
Research Question 3 146
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
7
Non-instructional workload’s impact on self-efficacy and self-
determination 146
Non-instructional workload correlations with self-efficacy and self-
determination 147
Intensification and non-instructional workload as predictors 147
Research Question 4 148
Trends: the role of decreased self-efficacy and self-determination 148
Implications for Further Research 150
Implications on Practice 152
Limitations 154
Conclusion 154
References 155
Appendices 167
Appendix A 167
Appendix B 169
Track A Survey/Interview (Current Teachers) 170
Track A1 (Current Public) 171
Track A2 (Current Private) 174
Track B Survey/Interview (Former Teachers) 177
Track B1 (Former Public) 178
Track B2 (Former Private) 181
Appendix C 186
Appendix D 188
Appendix E 189
Appendix F 191
Appendix G 192
Appendix H 196
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
8
List of Tables
Table 4.1: Test of Normality – One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov 86
Table 4.2: Percentage of Respondents Who Worked Outside Hours 89
Table 4.3: Hours Worked Outside of Contracted Hours 90
Table 4.4: Correlations Between Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks 92
Table 4.5: Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed Early 93
Table 4.6: Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed During Breaks/Lunch Periods 94
Table 4.7: Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed Late 96
Table 4.8: Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed: Evenings, Weekends, and Holidays 97
Table 4.9: Correlations Between Non-Instructional Work Tasks and Personal/Work Life 100
Table 4.10: Correlations Between Non-Instructional Work Tasks and Self-Efficacy 118
and Self-Determination
Table 4.11: Variance Explained by Intensification and Non-Instructional Work 111
Tasks on Teachers’ Self-Efficacy
Table 4.12: Multiple Linear Regression of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy by Intensification 111
and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Table 4.13: Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients of Teachers’ Self-Efficacy 111
by Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Table 4.14: Variance Explained by Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks 112
on Teachers’ Self-Determination
Table 4.15: Multiple Linear Regression of Teachers’ Self-Determination by 113
Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Table 4.16: Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients of Teachers’ Self-Determination 113
by Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Table 4.17: Cross Tabulation Between Loss of Autonomy and a Teacher’s Decision to 120
Continue in the Teaching Profession
Table 4.18: Frequent Codes for Reasons for Becoming a Teacher 122
Table 4.19: Frequent Codes for Aspects of Teaching that Re-Affirm Teaching as a Career 122
Table 4.20: Frequent Codes for Aspects of Teaching that Cause Teachers to Re-Evaluate 123
Teaching as a Career
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
9
List of Figures
Figure 2.1: Concept Map 25
Figure 3.1: Modified Concept Map 59
Figure 4.1: Gender 76
Figure 4.2: Age Groups 76
Figure 4.3: Race/Ethnicity 77
Figure 4.4: Education Level 78
Figure 4.5: Years of Teaching 79
Figure 4.6: Types of Schools 80
Figure 4.7: Primary or Secondary School 80
Figure 4.8: Current or Former Teacher 81
Figure 4.9: Cronbach Alphas for All, Current, Former, Public, Charter, and Private 83
Respondents – Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work Scale
Figure 4.10: Cronbach Alphas for All, Current, Former, Public, Charter, and Private 84
Respondents: Teacher Self Efficacy Scale
Figure 4.11: Respondents Who Work Over Breaks and/or Lunch Periods 91
Figure 4.12: Time for Colleagues 103
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
10
Abstract
This study explored the gap between Apple’s theory of intensification, the source of
significant changes in the way that teachers work, and the theories of self-efficacy and self-
determination, which have been linked to teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition. Understanding
the connections between these theories is important because attrition rates have remained at
nearly 50% for teachers with 0-5 years of teaching experience, negatively influencing students
and schools. The study design utilized a mixed-methods approach, using both closed and open-
ended questions, and two previously validated scales. As a multiple case-study and retrospective
look at the perceptions of 67 current and former teachers, study participants provided data on
how they perceive intensification on their non-instructional workload and how that workload
impacts their personal and work lives, including whether a perceived loss of self-efficacy and
self-determination plays a role in their decision to continue in the teaching profession.
Qualitative and quantitative findings indicated that current and former teachers perceive a
significant impact from intensification on their non-instructional workload, and they feel the
effects of that workload on the personal time they have available and the way in which they
work. Further, the qualitative and quantitative findings indicated that intensification’s non-
instructional workload negatively impacts a teacher’s self-efficacy and self-determination,
indicating strong connections between the theories, the source of the non-instructional workload
and the relationship that workload has to high levels of teacher attrition through perceived self-
efficacy and self-determination. The findings describe only this study sample and do not
indicate causal relationships in other populations.
Keywords: Teacher attrition, non-instructional workload, intensification, self-efficacy,
self-determination
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
11
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Rates of teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition have remained high for over 30 years.
Recent literature on the subject indicates that approximately 50% of teachers leave the profession
within five years of beginning work (Gray & Taie, 2015; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003) and that they
endure high levels of stress leading to burnout (Sugden, 2010). While the literature documents
several factors for sustained high rates of burnout, turnover, and attrition, little attention is paid
to non-instructional workload and its source. The focus of this study aims to provide background
on the source of the non-instructional workload and how it filters down through the teaching
experience and ultimately culminates in high levels of burnout, turnover, and attrition.
Statement of the Problem
Teachers increasingly find themselves caught in a storm of mandates, initiatives, and
growing numbers of non-instructional work tasks that take them away from their primary task,
teaching students. These new and frequently changing tasks are added to the teacher’s workload
without the removal of other tasks. These non-instructional tasks require teachers to allocate
significant time during scheduled breaks and time outside of their contracted hours to complete
the required tasks (Apple, 1986, 2000). Additionally, because these tasks change frequently and
often arrive as tasks connected to pre-constructed curriculum or data collection related to
accountability and testing measures, teachers have lost the ability to teach content in the way
most beneficial to the students in their classroom, a loss of autonomy and control (Larrivee,
2012).
In order to better understand teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition, and how to reduce
the effects they have on education, it is necessary to look more closely at the non-instructional
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
12
aspects of teaching. By closing the gap between the source of non-instructional workload, the
resulting stress on teachers, and the effects that teachers face because of non-instructional
workload, researchers and practitioners will be better equipped to deal with the problem of
burnout, turnover, and attrition.
Overview of the Theoretical Framework
An adaptation of Michael Apple’s work on intensification theory will be used to
understand teacher burnout and attrition and provide a basis to understand the reason that non-
instructional workloads have increased since the 1980s. The theory posits that teachers will
suffer from chronic work overload and a series of pressures that both de-skill them in their ability
to do their job and re-skill them in other tasks, decreasing their autonomy in their teaching
domains.
Apple argued in his landmark analysis Teachers & Texts that the policies related to
accountability enacted at the federal, state, and district levels have significantly impacted the
ability of teachers to focus on their primary task of teaching students. Although Apple wrote this
book over 30 years ago, policymakers are still using the same policies and economic levers,
incorrectly, in their quest to improve student outcomes and hold educators accountable for
student outcomes. These measures have largely increased the middle management at schools
and in districts while reducing the numbers of specialized, on-site staff. This increases the
amount of non-instructional, administrative work tasks that teachers must accomplish to do their
jobs. These tasks relate to the pre-packaged curriculums, maintaining records of student
progress through pre-determined knowledge chunks, learning new software tools, and
introducing new technologies into the classroom. Under the constant changes and demands
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
13
placed on them, teachers become de-skilled as their ability and time available to specialize in
teaching methods are reduced. They are re-skilled using constant professional development to
perform the jobs of several other professionals not available in large enough numbers at the
school sites or who are unable to manage the number of students assigned to them.
The effects of intensification on teachers reach all levels of school systems today.
Existing research demonstrates the effect that accountability measures, high-stakes testing, and
bureaucratic management structures have on the intensification of non-instructional workload on
teachers. It also demonstrates that teachers must consistently perform work tasks outside of
contracted school hours, impacting their ability to perform needed tasks at home, spend time
with their friends and families, and take a mental break from the work.
Purpose of the Study and Guiding Questions
Currently, there is a gap in research connecting the demands of intensification and its
resulting non-instructional workload on a teacher’s feelings of self-efficacy and self-
determination. It is important to fill this gap because it can help explain why existing
interventions for high levels of teacher burnout, attrition, and turnover have yet to reduce those
numbers in any significant way. By connecting intensification to the loss of efficacy and
determination, researchers may understand the problem with a new lens and develop new ways
to combat, what has until now been, the intractable problem of sustained high levels of teacher
burnout, turnover, and attrition.
This study aims to focus on the teacher, to better understand the extent to which they
perceive intensification’s connection to their non-instructional workload and the tasks that stem
from it. Further, it will explore how the non-instructional workload, if any, impacts teacher time
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
14
outside of the classroom or during the school day at times designated for a break. Lastly, it will
explore the extent to which teachers perceive the weight of their non-instructional workload on
their feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination, specifically looking at autonomy,
relatedness, competence, and task and job-level efficacy, all factors that when reduced increase
levels of burnout, turnover, and attrition levels.
To that end, the questions and hypotheses that guide this study focus on examining
whether teachers perceive a non-instructional workload and whether that workload impacts their
perception of self-efficacy or self-determination and their desire to remain in the teaching
profession. The questions and hypotheses include:
1) How do teachers perceive intensification’s role on their non-instructional workload?
Hypothesis 1.1) Teachers will perceive a significant impact from intensification on
their non-instructional workload.
2) Do teachers perceive an impact from non-instructional work tasks in their personal
and work lives?
Hypothesis 2.1) Teachers will perceive a significant impact from non-instructional
work tasks on their personal and work lives.
3) How do teachers perceive the impact of non-instructional workload, if any, on their
feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination?
Hypothesis 3.1) Teachers will perceive a significant negative impact from non-
instructional workload tasks on their feelings of self-efficacy (Teacher Self-
Efficacy Scale – TSES) and self-determination (Basic Psychological Need
Satisfaction at Work-BPNSW: Autonomy, Competence, Relatedness, and the
global needs – ACR combined score.)
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
15
Hypothesis 3.2) There will be a significant prediction in teachers’ self-efficacy by
intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
Hypothesis 3.3) There will be a significant prediction in teachers’ self-
determination by intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
4) What role does a loss of self-efficacy and self-determination, if any, play in a
teacher’s decision to continue in the teaching profession?
Hypothesis 4.1) Loss of self-determination (BPNSW global score, and the
autonomy, competence, and relatedness sub-scores) will significantly correlate
with a teacher’s decision to remain in the teaching profession.
Significance of the Study
This study explores a gap in the existing literature between intensification’s non-
instructional workload on teacher self-efficacy and self-determination and its resulting impact on
teacher burnout, attrition, and turnover. This study may help focus future research on specific
aspects of non-instructional workload or fine-tune existing interventions to better help teachers
and reduce overall attrition rates. Ultimately, the study is important because not only does it aim
to understand the impact on teachers and ways in which governments, policymakers, and
districts can support teachers, it also benefits students by helping to improve the teacher’s ability
to effectively manage their workload and increase their self-efficacy and self-determination,
aspects that directly impact the performance of students.
Overview of the Methodology
This study used a mixed-methods research design to explore the connections between
teacher perceptions of intensification of non-instructional workload and its connection to self-
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
16
efficacy and self-determination. The mixed-methods approach allowed the researcher to use
quantitative instruments to describe and explore populations, while the qualitative methods
allowed the researcher to listen directly to teachers, to “hear from them, not about them,”
(Clemons & Espada, 2017) to understand how intensification impacts their lives specifically.
Although using mixed methods does not allow us to make causal connections, it can help to
illuminate specific areas for future examination using quantitative methods.
To examine the topic, the study surveyed current and former teachers using Qualtrics, an
online survey tool. Quantitative data and scale responses were collected by survey. Qualitative
data was collected with open-ended survey questions online or by phone. Some participants
provided additional qualitative data through follow-up questions, providing even greater depth to
the collected data. Respondents fell into two main categories, current or former teachers. They
further fell into three main school types, the majority of respondents worked in either traditional
public, charter, or private K-12 schools.
The respondents provided data on their experiences in a variety of school contexts,
working as a special education teacher or working in a high- or low-socioeconomic school, for
example, which provided an opportunity to explore whether the specific class or school contexts
impacted the ways in which teachers feel intensification, and how access to resources or a
student population that has access to resources changes the effects of non-instructional workload.
By including the responses of current or former teachers in private schools, the study gained the
ability to compare what aspects of the non-instructional workload came from the job of teaching
and which aspects of the non-instructional workload on the public side, if any, could be a result
of intensification.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
17
By looking at both current and former teachers, the study also gathered information on
teachers who had left the teaching career in their first five years as well as those who spent their
entire careers in education and retired, providing a meaningful look into factors that led some
teachers to leave the teaching career. Having scale responses, quantitative categorical data,
descriptive survey results, and follow-up data from these multiple teacher perspectives allowed
the researcher to triangulate and explore the data from multiple perspectives, giving depth and
richness to the data (Ingersoll, 2001).
Assumptions
A number of assumptions were made for this study. First, it was assumed that the
individuals who responded were in the teaching profession or formerly in the profession and had
joined the profession with a desire, at various levels, to perform the routine job functions and
teach students in a way that would lead those students to improve. Second, it was assumed that
study participants would be able to respond in a way to differentiate their perceptions of non-
instructional workload from other issues involved in the teaching profession, such as student
disruptions in class. Third, it was assumed that teachers would answer truthfully and to the best
of their ability, that they would be able to convey their experiences and perceptions accurately.
Limitations and Delimitations
Every study has limitations, and this study was no different. The following limitations
could have affected the strength and validity of the results. First, respondents were initially
referred to the study by people with whom the researcher may have had some form of limited or
established relationship. This could have influenced the participants’ desire, positively or
negatively, to accept the interview request if the connection to the respondent was from a
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
18
superior or administrator in their school or workplace. Second, this study explored the impact of
non-instructional workload on the teacher’s typical work days. The particular time and day of
the study and when it fell in the school year could have an impact on their perceptions of
workload at that time. This is most true during times leading up to high-stakes testing or times
just after a term begins or prior to the end of a term. The third relates to the ability of teachers
from all backgrounds to respond to the survey. While this does improve the ability to triangulate
data and perspectives, offering multiple and contrasting views of the same problem, it could pose
a concern by adding several dissimilar factors between the teaching contexts, factors unique to
those particular settings. Lastly, the researcher only had a limited time to perform the study and
while each participant was allowed to answer completely, fully, and at their convenience, the
time limitation necessarily reduced the ability to follow every lead, a potential threat to the
overall quality of the study.
Definition of Terms
Accountability measures – Criteria such as standards or progress goals promulgated by one or
any combination of school districts or education management companies, and federal, state, and
local governments. Students, teachers, and schools are held accountable to these various
measures (Ingersoll & Collins, 2017).
Attrition – The number of teachers who leave the teaching profession altogether, finding work
in a non-teaching role or some other industry (Rinke, 2008).
Burnout – A psychosocial condition in which a person becomes emotionally disconnected from
the work being performed as a result of the workload and time available to complete the tasks,
lack of control over the work, perceived fairness of the person’s input (time and effort) and
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
19
output (recognition and salary), community interactions (supervisor, clients, coworkers)(Maslach
& Leiter, 2008).
Charter school – A school funded by public funds, like a traditional public school, but which
exists outside the immediate control of the local school board. These schools tend to have more
control over curriculum and personnel choices. They also tend to have higher reporting and
accountability requirements to local and state officials to justify their existence outside of the
standard regulatory framework of traditional public schools (Tabs, 2004).
De-skilling – An argument furthered in intensification theory that describes a process by which
teachers are deskilled through persistent high levels of overwork which reduces or eliminates the
time available for teachers to master skills in their professional areas. It also creates a context
where they must rely on experts skilled in other areas to perform the required functions of their
jobs (Apple, 1986).
Intensification – A chronic persistence of work overload that requires work tasks to be
completed outside of contracted work time; a lack of time generally, which impacts time
available to relax and update skills needed to perform the job; time spent completing
administrative and non-instructional tasks instead of working directly with students; the enforced
diversification of expertise (technological troubleshooting skills to help students with laptops,
tablets, phones, and the software running on those devices); lack of control over curriculum due
to state and other mandates, as well as the purchase and use of pre-packaged curricula, against
which job performance and student success is measured (Apple, 1986).
Non-instructional workload – Any task performed outside of the contracted work hours, either
at home, before or after the school day, or during designated break times (meal or other breaks).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
20
These tasks are required to do the job and include paperwork, grading, supplementing
curriculum, advising, and more (Sheppard, 2008).
Private School – A private school refers to a K-12 institution that does not receive its primary
source of funding from the local or state government. This type of school is, therefore, free of
many of the accountability measures and other restraints on curriculum and personnel choices
faced by traditional public schools (Henig, 1994).
Re-skilling – An argument furthered in intensification theory that describes a process by which
teachers are reskilled through training for job skills that used to be performed by other staff who
have been eliminated or have caseloads too large of their own to be available in frequent enough
intervals or when required by the teacher (school psychologists or staff to provide technical
support for classroom technology and programs, for example)(Apple, 1986).
Self-determination – A person’s motivation to take on tasks because of their ability to have
autonomy and exert control over the activities in which they engage, to feel connected socially
and professionally to peers, and to feel that they can effectively perform the tasks related to the
job (Deci & Ryan, 2017).
Self-efficacy – A person’s perception of their ability to successfully organize and perform the
components necessary to perform tasks. This concept is found in social cognitive theory and
affects the choices of activities a person makes and their effort and persistence in accomplishing
those activities (Bandura, 1997).
Traditional public school – A traditional public school refers to a K-12 institution that serves
the public and receives its funding from local and state funding sources. This type of school is
therefore required to follow the curriculum, personnel, and other restrictions placed on it by the
state, district, and local authorities. Charter schools, while also funded in similar ways, have
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
21
some differences specifically in the areas of personnel choices, and are therefore considered a
different type of school (Misra, 2011).
Turnover – The number of teachers who leave the classroom but move to teaching positions in
other schools (Rinke, 2008).
Organization of the Study
Five chapters comprise this study. This first chapter reviews the problem, provides a
brief background to the problem, and defines key concepts and terms encountered when
discussing the problem. Chapter two offers a review of the literature that informs the topic and
provides a framework that bounds the scope of the current study. Chapter three explores the
methodology used to conduct this study, including the rationale for the choice of study
participants, data collection strategies, and data analysis techniques. Chapter Four will present
the data, results, and an assessment and analysis of the results. Chapter Five will examine the
implications of the results and possible areas of future research to better understand any trends
revealed by the analysis.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
22
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Most studies on teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition focus on the factors at school:
instructional time, how student readiness or behavior impacts the teacher, whether administration
provides sufficient support, the impact of parent demands on teachers, and other factors related
to teacher-student interactions and teacher-institution interactions (Grayson & Alvarez, 2008;
Pas, Bradshaw, & Hershfeldt, 2012; Seferoglu, Yildiz, & Yucel, 2014; Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2009, 2010). Very few studies look at the impact of changing mandates, weekly initiatives or
directives on how to teach a class or which aspect of the curriculum to implement first, the
impact of changing national and state standards that teachers must teach and prepare for even
when few or no resources are available for those new standards, and the segmenting of subjects
into testable chunks that fit well with high-stakes testing but not necessarily the class context in
which the teacher instructs students, among other factors that increase a teacher’s non-
instructional workload. Additionally, teacher evaluations are performed measuring the teacher’s
ability to effectively instruct students and prepare them for state assessments, even though the
districts purchase and provide pre-packaged curriculum packs, which again do not necessarily
align with the standards provided by the state, fit the individual student or class needs within the
classroom, and which may increase the non-instructional workload such that teaching quality is
impacted. The pre-packaged curriculums are written with a certain student in mind and are not
written to match the needs of increasingly diverse student populations who need differentiated
instruction or other instructional supports.
Research suggests that the accumulation of non-instructional tasks impacts the teacher’s
emotional and psychological health, their ability to interact with and teach students, and their
ability to work effectively with other colleagues and administrators at their schools (Brown,
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
23
2004; Sheppard, 2008; Sugden, 2010). Additionally, the increased non-instructional workload
directly impacts the number of hours that teachers work outside of their contracted work time
(Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2012; Richwine & Biggs, 2013; Stoddard & Kuhn, 2008).
Teachers make up the difference between their contracted workload and actual workload by
arriving to their schools early, staying to work after school, working over breaks and lunch
periods, and working from home in the evenings and on weekends, decreasing their ability to
spend time with their friends and families (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2012; Choy et al.,
1993; Drago & Al., 1999; Krantz-Kent, 2008).
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework that guides this literature review and the following study
comes from the book Teachers & Texts, written by Michael Apple in 1986, specifically Apple’s
intensification theory. The theory posits that through the use of accountability measures and
inappropriate labor management techniques, the work of teachers becomes intensified. Teachers
will struggle under a chronic work overload and have reduced autonomy within the classroom
(Apple, 1986). The consequences of Apple’s intensification theory have a direct impact not only
on the ability of teachers to do their jobs but also how they perform their jobs. Although Apple
derives his theory from a concept of proletarianization, a component of labor process theory,
where individuals must sell their labor to survive, Apple makes useful and important extensions
of the theory that better explain the complexities of intensification’s role within the education
context (Gitlin, 2001; Hall, 2004).
This study will explore whether the results of what Apple describes in his intensification
theory converges on the concepts of relatedness, competence, and autonomy found in self-
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
24
determination theory and the perceptions of efficacy of ability and impact found within the
constructs of self-efficacy theory. These constructs of self-determination and self-efficacy build
off of the real-life consequences of processes outlined in Apple’s intensification theory and
provide a significant and valuable context through which to understand the sustained levels of
teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition. Further, it may provide ideas for developing effective
responses that can have a positive impact on those stubborn challenges.
Apple’s Intensification Theory
In the book Teachers & Texts, Apple (1986) uses a critical lens to explore race and
gender in education. He furthers a theory that fits here on the proletarianization of work in
education, called intensification. The theory posits that intensification results in workers having
less autonomy over how they perform their daily work tasks, through a process of de-skilling and
re-skilling. The control formerly held by teachers over how they teach their students, the
methods they use and the particular content that works for their classroom context, shifts to
increasing numbers of administrators and larger numbers of experts who manage the work
process (Apple, 1986).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
25
Intensification
Figure 2.1
Concept Map
Decreased
Self-Efficacy
(Social Cognitive
Theory)
Decreased
Self-
Determination
(Basic Psychological
Needs Theory)
Increased Levels
of Burnout and Exhaustion
Sustained High
Levels of Attrition
and Turnover
Instructional
Workload
Non-
Instructional
Workload
(and out-of-contract
work tasks)
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
26
Although Apple’s work and the resulting theory developed out of the context of
education in the 1980s, the processes that he describes still occur today in a more intensive way
than when he first wrote his book. Indeed, those exploring the text today would likely be
surprised to know that the book was written over thirty years ago. Since the publication of
Teachers & Texts in 1986, several other researchers have written and performed research studies
to test Apple’s theory. While researchers have suggested some modifications to Apple’s theory
since its original publication, the underlying causes and results of intensification remain the same
(Apple & Jungck, 1990; Ballet & Kelchtermans, 2008, 2009; Ballet, Kelchtermans, & Loughran,
2006; Gitlin, 2001; Hall, 2004; Hargreaves, 1992). Indeed, Apple himself provided a more
nuanced view of certain aspects of how teachers perceive and internalize the effects of
intensification in a follow-up book to Teachers & Texts titled Official Knowledge (Apple, 2000).
Apple’s intensification model developed out of the political and economic forces of the
1980s, forces which have heightened considerably in the 2000s. Apple describes intensification
as a way in which the privileges of teachers are eroded as a result of misapplying neo-liberal
economic theory and organizational management tools to attempt to influence the education
system. This system sees prepared students as outcomes and the teachers as the producers within
that system. This trend occurs not only in the United States but in several western democracies
that subscribe to similar economic and political thought.
Intensification manifests itself through many symptoms that range from trivial to
complex, from a significant shortening of lunch or other breaks, to loss of time with family, and
a loss of control over how teachers instruct and craft lessons for the students in their care.
Though intensification is not limited to education and occurs in various forms in many other
industries, within education it has pronounced and long-term implications on not only the
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
27
nation’s teachers but the students and broader community as well (Apple, 1986, 2000; Apple &
Jungck, 1990; Ballet & Kelchtermans, 2008; Ballet et al., 2006; Gitlin, 2001; Ingersoll, 1996;
Philip & Garcia, 2013).
As states and districts struggle to redefine the purpose of education for traditional public
schools, they have increasingly looked to education as a way to meet economic needs rather than
educate the whole child. The merits of that debate are not at issue specifically within this study;
the non-instructional tasks that result from using economic and policy levers on teachers and
students is at issue. Intensification has increased as the result of specific policy levers related to
the use of accountability measures. These are not measures of teachers’ feelings of ethics and
professional responsibility and ability to impact the learning and lives of the students they serve,
but accountability measures administered through meeting government-specified standards,
increased testing at regular intervals, strict reporting requirements, and student performance on
assessments. Policy makers use these measures to enforce market ideas on schools, introduce
market pressures, and capture easily measured benchmarks to show that schools are meeting
demonstrable progress goals. Additionally, policymakers use these accountability measures to
determine whether the producers in the system, the teachers, are producing adequately. If the
teachers fail to produce or meet the demands in this system, they risk their careers, and the
schools where they work are at risk of losing their accreditation (Apple, 1999; Apple & Jungck,
1990; Ballet & Kelchtermans, 2008; Ballet et al., 2006; Hall, 2004; Philip & Garcia, 2013).
Within this educational system where neo-liberal economic thought guides not only how
teachers teach but what they teach, teachers increasingly must use the pre-packaged curricula
products and teaching methods. These systems are designed to atomize the knowledge to be
learned by students so that frequent testing can take place to monitor student progress and so that
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
28
policymakers can ensure that the teacher is instructing students in a way that education systems
can use frequent testing to ensure mastery of required subjects (Apple, 1986, 1999; Apple &
Jungck, 1990; Ballet & Kelchtermans, 2009; Ballet et al., 2006). In this system, teachers must
instruct students in a way that demonstrates progress on the frequent required tests, whether it
benefits the students’ long-term knowledge and learning or not. In this context, the
administrative and non-instructional work demands on the teachers increase. The demand on the
teacher’s limited instructional and personal time to complete those tasks also increases. Within
this storm of mandates and demands, teachers find themselves with less time and fewer resources
to perform the essential functions of their jobs.
Re-skilling teachers. The effects of intensification can be seen throughout the
development of this process in the inability of teachers to take breaks due to the workload,
having less time or the inability to keep up with changes in one’s area of expertise, the loss of
leisure time and the ability to self-direct. The increased workload also forces teachers to learn
new skills outside of their areas (Apple, 1986; Apple & Jungck, 1990), which typically comes in
the form of professional development, or in Apple’s words, re-skilling. For example, while
teachers attend multiple professional development days a year, much of the training aims to
provide teachers with new and additional skills needed to administer and oversee the use of
multiple technology platforms and software products, to meet the needs of specific populations
of students with special needs, or to receive basic trainings in new curricular goals being
implemented in the district, as a few examples. While teachers may be happy to learn how to
better use technology or meet the needs of individual students in their classrooms, they must rely
on the expertise and training of highly trained specialists to do so in training sessions with little
individualized support. They must also increase their ability to troubleshoot when those
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
29
technologies do not perform as expected, becoming the de facto, in-residence computer and
technology experts, whether they have required knowledge or not (Apple, 1986; Philip & Garcia,
2013).
De-skilling teachers. This diversification of teacher skills also serves as a form of
deskilling because the teachers become increasingly disconnected from their fields, relying
instead on ideas and solutions provided by experts, experts who previously would have been
responsible for directly providing the skills and expertise (tech support for technology,
educational psychologists or specially trained teachers for students with specific needs, etc.) to
schools, teachers, and students. The persistent workload also decreases the time that teachers
have to reflect on their performance or to pursue opportunities for personal and professional
growth. Apple argues that the extension of this process is a significant burden on teachers who
must struggle to keep up with the work overload in their own and other domains.
Consequences of intensification. The consequence of this re-skilling, de-skilling, and
constant work overload is a system that requires teachers to perform work tasks at home, before
school starts, after school ends, during their lunch or other breaks, in the evenings, over the
weekends, and throughout holidays (Apple, 1986). The implication of this intensification of
non-instructional work tasks is a cohort of teachers performing so many other jobs than the one
they were hired to do that they are stretched, stressed, and overworked. Teachers are left with
less time and autonomy to teach, and they are unable to make the meaningful impact needed for
students to learn. The reality of this system stands in contrast to the stated goals of the neo-
liberal economic levers employed to make the producers, in this case, the teachers, accountable.
Within this system, the producers are not able to produce while simultaneously being held
accountable for the lack of production.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
30
Critique of Apple’s Model of Intensification. Apple’s seminal book, Teachers & Texts,
provides an important theoretical look at the causes for a change in educational policy on the
macro level and the resulting changes that teachers within schools experience. Because
intensification only looks at the theoretical constructs leading up to the described change, readers
may wonder what the actual impact looks like or how teachers perceive the effects of
intensification on their workplace. Importantly, Apple acknowledges that teachers do not just
accept the changes; they experience them in different ways and struggle against them
individually on their own and in their classes once the door has shut for that period.
Although Apple’s theory explains many observable changes and argues against what he
believes is the underlying paradigm that led to those changes, he does not describe alternate ways
of achieving the goals that policymakers set out to accomplish. In Apple’s view, the economic
and managerial changes exerted over education provide a modern way to maintain patriarchal
societal controls over a largely female teacher workforce. Others who may not agree with
Apple’s premise might argue instead that Apple’s explanation may have historic merit but see
the movement to greater accountability and standards as necessary changes to a system that
suffers from great challenges. Apple does not discuss whether the changes have merit and can
help to resolve some of the challenges faced by the system of public education, nor does he
discuss other ways in which the tension could be lessened between a teacher’s need to educate a
unique student and the state’s need to be accountable to the public for its expenditures on
educating that same student.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
31
Accountability Reforms
Ingersoll and Collins (2017) conducted an analysis of qualitative and quantitative data
from multiple surveys that looked at accountability measures from an organizational perspective,
a different school of thought than the labor process theory on which intensification is based.
Even from a different organizational perspective, the researchers, like Apple, indicated that
accountability measures as they are currently enforced do not find success and tend to have
negative consequences on the teachers, students, and the performance of the school. Viewing
accountability measures from an organizational perspective, they noted that accountability
measures in their current incarnation similarly view the education system as having too low
standards and inadequately supervised teachers. Proponents of the organizational perspective
view teachers as producers that need to be controlled. They combat these educational problems
and unsupervised teachers by increasing management, using intrusive management techniques,
reducing the autonomy and control that teachers have over their domain in the classroom, and
increasing the persistence of work overload (Ingersoll & Collins, 2017).
Ryan and Weinstein (2009) argued that high-stakes testing measures developed from
policymakers’ desire to use classical operant theory, reinforcement and punishment of specific
behaviors, to incentivize and measure student outcomes. The problem is that high-stakes testing,
rather than incentivizing a targeted behavior as in operant conditioning, tries to influence an
outcome using consequences, consequences that impact the student, the teacher, and potentially
even the school. The use of consequences to target outcomes instead of behaviors that lead to
outcomes is a misapplication of the theory. These policies not only discourage students, but they
also change the way that teachers instruct students causing lasting harm on student learning, and
on the health of the teacher (Ryan & Weinstien, 2009).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
32
A paper published in 2015 explored the impact of Common Core standards on teachers
and students in traditional public schools. The authors suggest that the standards, as they are
currently written and enforced, increase high levels of stress on teachers during the high-stakes
testing seasons. The teachers also feel pressures related to job security and their career path due
to the potential consequences if their students do not perform to standard. The authors suggest
that these accountability measures in practice reduce teacher motivation rather than increase it,
decrease teacher morale, and increase levels of burnout and attrition. The accountability
measures also negatively change the way that teachers instruct their students, to the detriment of
their students, by narrowing down the range of topics taught to only those expected on tests.
Because careers and school accreditation are potentially on the line, examples exist of teachers
specifically targeting instruction towards students that have the best chance of raising the
average for the class, rather than teaching in a way that benefits the learning of every student
(Saeki, Pendergast, Segool, & Embse, 2015).
Alternate view of reforms. As early as 1982, researchers warned about the impact of
performance standards on teaching, noting that when one makes a teacher responsible for a
student’s test outcomes, ignoring the many other factors that play significant roles in student
performance, teachers use more controlling teaching methods. The researchers performed an
experiment with two groups of teachers and students, totaling forty participants. In one group,
teachers were told to allow their students to explore. In the other group, teachers were told that
they were responsible for teaching the students to certain standards. In the first group, teachers
allowed their students to explore, to master the concept on their own with the teacher facilitating
the process. In the second group, teachers were more critical and instructional, helping students
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
33
to complete the task rather than encouraging them to develop the ability to solve the task on their
own (Deci, Spiegel, Ryan, Koestner, & Kauffman, 1982).
Psychological Effects of Reforms
In practice, workload intensification comes from the gap between the job demands
imposed by accountability measures that drive high-stakes testing, curricula to match those tests,
and the administrative tasks required to document student progress (or lack thereof), and the job
resources teachers have available to meet those demands. When the gap between demands and
resources persists, teachers increasingly feel tension and stress that can cause significant changes
in their emotional, social, physical health, and the way that they teach (Deci & Ryan, 2017; Deci
et al., 1982; Gillet, Fouquereau, & Lafrenière, 2016; Quint, Bloom, Black, Stephens, & Akey,
2005; Ryan & Weinstien, 2009; Saeki et al., 2015; Sheldon & Biddle, 1998).
Sheldon and Biddle (1998), in their meta-analysis, likewise argue that many
accountability measures do more harm than good. They argue that using economic models and
methods that work well on production lines, many of which are now operated by computers and
robots and take uniform raw materials as inputs, do not fit neatly on an education system that
relies on a teacher’s technical and personal skills and their creativity to both transfer knowledge
and skill sets to students of wildly varying needs and abilities who need to perform academically
and exist within a myriad of familial and societal contexts. While most companies measure their
goals by examining unit cost and profit, teachers exist within complex organizations that work to
satisfy many varied goals, goals which change often and may even conflict. The researchers
explored how accountability measures impacted the ways in which teachers taught and the
resulting impact on student learning. The reforms that stressed outcomes and imposed rigid
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
34
controls tied to standards caused teachers to narrow the focus of their teaching and use
controlling methods to teach, which harmed the long-term learning of their students (Sheldon &
Biddle, 1998).
A five-year study, concluded in 2005, explored large-scale reform and how it can
negatively impact teachers and students when they are not part of the process of change (Quint et
al., 2005). The researchers examined the First Things First school reform project in Kansas City,
Kansas and the challenges faced when the program was expanded to neighboring districts and
cities. Using data from quantitative surveys and qualitative data generated by observations
interviews with various stakeholders, they found that when teachers receive directives that are
extremely rigid, they are less likely to feel satisfaction of their psychological needs. When
districts and principals include teachers as part of the process, allowing them to implement the
policy changes in ways that fit their teaching style and class contexts, they are more likely to feel
autonomy, and both internalize and endorse the reform efforts.
Increasing Teacher Workloads
If intensification creates an increasing gap between the demands of the teaching
profession and the lack of tools and resources available to teachers to complete those tasks, those
investigating might expect to see an increase in the numbers of hours teachers work outside of
their contracted school hours. Indeed, researchers noted an increase in the number of hours that
teachers worked starting in the 1980s (Alberta Education, 2015; Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation, 2012; Crotwell, 2011; Drago & Al., 1999; Figlio & Kenny, 2007; MacDonald,
Wiebe, Goslin, Doiron, & MacDonald, 2010). An additional report completed by the American
Enterprise Institute (2013), a conservative think tank in Washington D.C. that tends to favor
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
35
market-based approaches in education, also found that teachers worked more hours than
contracted, though they calculated a smaller number than those found in the previously cited
studies (Richwine & Biggs, 2013).
Stoddard and Kuhn (2005) looked at national survey data from two datasets covering
teacher work hours over the periods of 1983-1998 (Current Population Survey) and 1987-1998
(Schools and Staffing Surveys) and found that teacher work hours increased over the two time
periods. They found significant differences in hours worked depending on states, attributing
those to legislative effects. They also report that during the period 1983-1986, reform efforts
were underway in 28 states. By 1995-1998, the number of states implementing large-scale
reforms increased to 48, half of which also included sanctions on schools with student
populations that failed to perform. While Stoddard and Kuhn failed to note a direct correlation
to work hours due to school reforms on a national level, they did find effects at the more local,
state level. They also argue that some of the increase may have occurred due to the same overall
economic and policy climate in which workers from other sectors also saw increased work hours.
Apple’s intensification theory parallels Stoddard and Kuhn’s assertion by arguing that
other industries would experience similar effects as the education sector. Stoddard and Kuhn’s
study (2006) ultimately showed that compared to their colleagues in the early 1980s, teachers in
2008 spent an additional hour working at school and an additional 2.5 hours working from home
(Stoddard & Kuhn, 2008).
Research on Work Tasks
Apple (1986) argues that intensification is not limited to the United States and that
intensification can be seen in countries with similar governing and economic structures. Two
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
36
studies conducted in Canada, Alberta and Prince Edward, looked at more recent data on hours
worked and the tasks performed during that time. A 2010 study that examined the teaching
profession in 2010 noted how teachers’ work had intensified over the decade leading up to the
study, noting specifically that changing to an outcomes-based curriculum, implementing new
technology, and changing infrastructure had contributed to increased stress and decreased job
satisfaction among teachers. Using surveys and focus groups to gather data, they found that
teachers worked nearly 48 hours a week, a full 12 hours a week outside of the contracted school
day. Interestingly, the top five most important non-instructional tasks that teachers reported
performing outside of work hours were modifying the curriculum to fit their needs, performing
administrative tasks, working with technology, preparing for assessments, and preparing for
instruction. In a teacher-created list of the 23 most stressful tasks, those same five tasks that
teachers report doing outside of their contracted school day are found within the top 8 most
stressful tasks. Communicating with parents, public perception, and discipline made up the other
three of the top 8 (MacDonald et al., 2010).
A 2015 workload study in Alberta was conducted in real time and surveyed nearly 3,400
teachers. The study indicated that teachers worked approximately 50 hours during school weeks
and that they worked closer to their contracted 36 hours during school holidays. They also found
that teachers who worked higher hours were more likely to be dissatisfied with their work-life
balance. The report indicated that among the teachers dissatisfied with their jobs, they were also
less likely to perceive autonomy in their job, have higher stress levels, and spend less time
collaborating with colleagues than teachers who were satisfied with the job (Alberta Education,
2015).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
37
A 2012 national study conducted in the United States surveyed over 10,000 teachers on a
number of issues. Included in the survey were questions related to workload and the new
Common Core standards. Teachers reported that they spend, on average, over 10 hours outside
of school hours performing various work tasks. These hours are in addition to hours spent
assisting with extracurricular school activities like coaching or leading clubs. When asked
whether they felt prepared to teach to the new standards, over half said they were not prepared
and over a quarter of respondents said they felt only somewhat prepared. They also indicated
frustration with a lack of adequate resources and technology to fully implement the changes
needed, a lack of freedom in choosing how and what to teach their students, and also frustration
with the frequency with which standards have changed over the decades since education reforms
began (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2012).
In the same report, teachers also responded to 15 factors they felt impacted teacher
retention rates. Nine of those items deal with some aspect of teachers’ needs for self-efficacy
and self-determination’s three pillars of human needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness.
Those factors included having supportive leadership and time to collaborate with other teachers,
evaluating teachers based on multiple methods, being evaluated using multiple measures instead
of a single, yearly, high-stakes test, and having more autonomy over curriculum and teaching
methods (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2012).
Non-Instructional Workload
Recent research results mirror studies conducted in the 1990s, finding that teachers spend
approximately 9-to-11 hours outside of their contracted work requirements grading student work,
planning lessons, supplementing lesson material, attending professional development sessions,
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
38
and keeping up with other non-instructional, administrative work (Alberta Education, 2015; Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2012; Choy et al., 1993; Drago & Al., 1999; MacDonald et al.,
2010). While the hours vary considerably based on context-specific factors such as school
district, the day of the week, early term versus the end of the term, research shows consistency in
the number of hours spent by teachers on non-instructional work tasks both at school and home.
These non-instructional tasks take other forms as well when examining workload related to
standards and accountability measures. They include the administrative paperwork necessary for
teachers to follow student progress, documentation of classroom activities or accommodations
for students, documentation of student mastery of curricular chunks needed to satisfy standards
reporting requirements, and others. Over time, these tasks increase with the continued
development of accountability measures connected to standards, the need to supplement the
provided curricular components with materials that fit the class context and help the students
make progress towards the goals and even the broader data collection demands of the school
administration to satisfy annual yearly progress numbers to maintain school accreditation.
Attrition and Burnout
Research also exists connecting self-efficacy and self-determination to burnout, turnover,
and attrition, traits all negatively impacted by the intensification of non-instructional workload
described by Apple (1986). This has significant implications on the education system because if
this study can connect intensification to either self-efficacy or self-determination, researchers
will have an important and under-researched domain to explore that directly contributes to the
sustained high levels of teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
39
The first motivation theory explored is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy theory posits that
teachers who fail to feel efficacious in their task- and job-level abilities are at increased risk for
burnout and more likely to leave the job. The task-level abilities relate to the teacher’s ability to
perform specific tasks needed to be successful in their job, preparing engaging lessons for
example. Job-level abilities include the ability to feel efficacious on a broader, classroom level,
to help students learn in a way that leads to their growth.
These same concepts relate closely to complementary concepts found within self-
determination theory which suggests that humans have three basic psychological needs,
autonomy, relatedness, and competence (Deci & Ryan, 2017). When these needs are threatened
or go unmet, a psychological impact results. The pillar of autonomy suggests that humans need
to have control over their lives, this includes not only the personal realm but also in their
professional working realm. Intensification impacts the teacher directly by decreasing the time
they have available to control their time in their personal lives. Additionally, it decreases the
control that they have over the performance of their job, the ability to instruct their students in
the way that best fits the students’ abilities and needs. The pillar of relatedness suggests that
humans have a psychological need to experience social connections. These connections allow
for a mental break at the personal level and an opportunity to explore solutions, ideas, and
connections in their professional lives. As discussed, intensification increases the non-
instructional workload to the point that teachers cannot complete the tasks during their work day
and must use personal time, decreasing their opportunity to meaningfully connect with peers in
their work setting and with family and friends at home. The last pillar, competence, relates
closely to efficacy (Deci & Ryan, 2017). This pillar suggests that in addition to having control
over their personal and work domains, humans also have a psychological need to feel competent
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
40
in the performance of tasks within those domains. For teachers who serve in districts that
provide them with little autonomy over the way they teach their students and what they teach
their students, especially given the complex and wide-ranging needs of most classrooms, those
teachers may feel low levels of competence in their abilities to effectively teach students. This
loss of self-determination impacts the level at which teachers feel motivated to continue their
work and to engage with their students.
Intensification explains the reasons for which districts increase the level of central control
over not just the educational content but also the instructional methods used to teach that content.
This is seen most clearly in the multitude of professional development days related to topics
performed by other experts, numbers of former or overworked staff, pre-packaged curriculums
that may or may not fit the specific classroom context of that teacher, and the increasing use of
technology or other instructional tools that may add additional layers of complexity to the work
of the teacher.
Inspection of Burnout
Outcomes of Apple’s intensification theory relate to constructs found in both the self-
efficacy and self-determination theories, theories that have research-based connections to
burnout. Maslach is widely credited with conceptualizing the term burnout, describing it as a
syndrome that includes emotional exhaustion, feelings of reduced personal accomplishment,
depersonalization in the workplace, and a loss of control (Maslach & Jackson, 1981). Several
decades of research support the concept of burnout as a psychosocial problem that impacts
people in many stressful jobs, especially those in human service jobs such as teaching
(Kristensen, Borritz, Villadsen, & Christensen, 2005; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
41
Taking a wide view of burnout, researchers have examined several areas for better
understanding what leads to burnout, finding links to constructs which may also help to predict
problems. The factors can include working in a high-stress job but feeling a loss of control over
how you perform the functions of that job, having job demands that exceed the time allotted to
perform them, psychological exhaustion attributed to work with clients (students in the case of
this study), and a lack of support within the workplace from co-workers and supervisors
(Kristensen et al., 2005; Larrivee, 2012; Maslach & Leiter, 2008).
In 2008, Maslach and Leiter conducted a longitudinal study of 466 organizational
employees. They used six variables of burnout, measured twice in yearly intervals, to determine
whether those factors could serve as early predictors of engagement and burnout in the
workplace. The variables map well onto the constructs of intensification, self-efficacy, and self-
determination (SDT). The variables were workload (intensification), control (SDT – autonomy),
reward (includes SDT- relatedness), community (SDT – relatedness), fairness (self-efficacy,
SDT – autonomy and competence), and values (SDT – autonomy). They found that participants
who displayed early warning signs were more likely to have higher levels of burnout than those
participants who did not show early warning signs. In a different study, Kristensen et al. (2005)
surveyed 1,914 employees in various human service workplaces over five years using the
Copenhagen Burnout Inventory. Using this updated burnout inventory that more closely
mirrored the realities of workers in Denmark, the researchers were able to predict future levels of
sicknesses and absence, the use of painkillers, and employees’ intention to quit.
Burnout in teachers. A common theme in the literature on the concept of burnout and
also in the literature specifically related to the teaching profession is that of autonomy and
control over how the high-stress job is performed. In the teaching-specific literature, that
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
42
translates to control over the classroom teaching and whether a teacher’s perceptions of self-
efficacy carry over to having a positive impact on the students in the classroom (Brouwers &
Tomic, 2000; Friedman & Kass, 2002; Pas et al., 2012; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007, 2014). Self-
efficacy relates to the concept of teachers having ability and control over their actions in the job
that they do and by extension the results of that job. When teachers feel that they have lost
control over their ability to control the curriculum and present it in a way that best fits their
students’ needs, or by having so much work that they do not have time to adequately plan and
prepare for their lessons, while simultaneously being judged and evaluated on the performance of
their students, the lack of perceived self-efficacy becomes a significant factor in the level and
rate of burnout among teachers.
In the teaching profession specifically, burnout has a significant impact on not only the
teachers experiencing the symptoms of burnout but also on the family of the teacher, the students
in the classroom, relationships with co-workers, and more generally on the school as a whole
(Brouwers & Tomic, 2000; Grayson & Alvarez, 2008; Pas et al., 2012). Teachers experiencing
burnout may lose interest in the content that they teach, and they may lose interest in the
performance of their students. Feelings of burnout may also make it difficult for teachers to
effectively manage their classrooms. Additionally, those teachers may seem more stressed and
disinterested in life at home, in their relationships with family members. In their professional
relationships, these teachers may interact less with colleagues at school, parents of students, and
participate in fewer school activities. For some teachers, burnout becomes a factor leading to
attrition.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
43
Inspection of Attrition
Simply stated, teacher attrition is the level at which teachers leave the classroom for other
opportunities. Sometimes, this means leaving one school for another, dismissal from their post,
temporarily leaving for personal reasons, leaving the profession early, or retirement. Within
education, attrition rates have remained high, especially for new teachers. Specifically looking at
teachers in the first five years of their teaching career, attrition hovers around 50% (Boyd,
Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2008; Boyd, Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2005; Gray
& Taie, 2015; Ingersoll, 2001).
Research on New York teachers has shown that while salary levels do have an impact on
a teacher’s decision to stay in the profession, remuneration is only one of several factors that
explain attrition. One study conducted on datasets on every teacher in New York City from
1995-1996 and 2003-2004 found that several factors play a part in attrition rates for teachers in
their first three years of teaching (Boyd et al., 2005). The researchers found several non-
pecuniary factors influenced a teacher’s desire to leave, including non-instructional tasks and the
time required to perform them. A further study that explored more recent datasets on every
teacher and the related student data from 1998-1999 and 2004-2005 had similar findings and
showed the unequal impact of that attrition on student performance (Boyd et al., 2008).
Additional research shows similar findings, indicating an unequal impact of attrition and
that several factors play a part in attrition rates which, in total, do not explain the total levels of
attrition in the United States (Gilpin, 2011). Gilpin (2011) followed 5,000 teachers from public
schools from 1999-2000 and 2004-2005. The researcher conducted statistical analyses on the
pecuniary and non-pecuniary aspects of teaching and found that although the salary level played
an important role, especially among new teachers, factors related to the work environment and
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
44
the individual teacher also increased the probability that both new and veteran teachers would
leave the profession.
By examining the research with intensification as a framework, the multiple factors
teachers cite for leaving the profession acquire greater nuance. In a recent study from 2015
conducted in Alberta, Canada, researchers framed the attrition problem as one which requires
examination of both the individual factors (such as exhaustion and burnout) and contextual
factors (such as school leadership or salary levels) to better understand how teaching impacts a
teacher’s whole life, not just the individual factors studied in isolation (Clandinin et al., 2015;
Schaefer, Long, & Jean Clandinin, 2012). Using a qualitative approach, they interviewed forty
current teachers. The researchers analyzed the data and found several themes that mirror closely
the challenges that workload intensification introduces and which, like burnout, also connect
directly to the constructs found in self-efficacy and self-determination theories.
Alternate Views of Attrition
In a review of research conducted by Doune Macdonald in 1999, Macdonald concluded
that attrition may not be wholly negative and that those in the field should take greater care when
raising the alarm. Similarly, Ingersoll (2003) reminds those in the field that some attrition is
necessary and even beneficial, though the effects are felt unevenly within school types and
locations. In a separate earlier study, Ingersoll also suggests that whether teachers leave for a
different school or the teaching force altogether, the impact of that attrition on the particular
school is the same: an experienced teacher has left that the school needs to replace (Ingersoll,
2001). In both instances, however, the researchers indicate that many of the reasons for the
current rates of attrition, whether they are as high or dire as other researchers indicate, relate
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
45
directly to issues of intensification. Some of these connections include loss of teacher autonomy
and control in the classroom and over educational decisions for students, a change of support
from the community (parents moving, for example, from collaborators in the production of the
educational product to consumers of an educational product), and a need to increase the ability of
teachers to benefit from healthy social and professional relationships with colleagues, in other
words, feelings of relatedness, one of the three pillars in self-determination theory (Borman &
Dowling, 2008; Ingersoll, 2003; Macdonald, 1999; Phillips, 2015).
Impact of Teacher Attrition on Students and Schools
The cost of teacher turnover to the various government entities has been estimated to fall
in the range of one-to-two billion dollars yearly in the United States (Haynes, Maddock, &
Goldrick, 2014). At the district level, the level of attrition has significant costs as districts work
to hire and train replacements for the high percentage of leavers in the first five years, as well as
the cost to replace career teachers leaving due to other factors and reaching retirement
(Goldhaber & Cowan, 2014). These costs come not only in the form of monetary costs, but in
the form of classes with substitute teachers, the impact on students of not having the same
teacher, or of having a new, less experienced teacher, among many others.
Students and school districts feel the impact of teacher attrition in different ways. At the
school level, whether a teacher transfers out or leaves the profession entirely, the school must
find a replacement. Research likewise suggests that attrition and turnover lead to stratification
within and between districts, with the most able teachers shifting to the highest-performing
schools and the least able teachers remaining in the lowest-performing schools (Borman &
Dowling, 2008; Boyd et al., 2005; DeAngelis & Presley, 2011). State and city-wide attrition
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
46
averages also obscure the impact that leavers have on schools that serve different student
populations. Research conducted by Richard Ingersoll (2003) on earlier data showed that of the
nearly 16% of teachers who left their positions the first year, half of them left the teaching force
and entered a completely different career. Additionally, his research showed that urban, high-
poverty school districts saw the highest rate of teachers leaving for schools in more desirable
districts or leaving the teaching force (Ingersoll, 2003).
Ingersoll’s (2001) research has also shown that schools with a one-unit difference in
teachers’ reported feelings of support (reported on a 4-unit scale) reduced odds of attrition by
23%. Further, a one-unit difference in a teacher’s reported feelings of autonomy and decision-
making ability also reduced odds of attrition, this time by 26% (Ingersoll, 2001). Ingersoll then
examined reasons for teacher turnover more closely, finding 11 main reasons that teachers give
for turnover. Of those, 8 of them relate to intensification’s effect on the teaching profession.
These include a lack of influence, a lack of time to prepare, and intrusions of outside tasks on
teaching time. Notably, these factors were reported in increased numbers in urban, high-poverty
schools compared to respondents in more affluent districts or private schools.
Intensification’s Connection to Self-Efficacy and Self-Determination
Although significant research has been conducted exploring the institutional and
classroom-facing factors related to levels of teacher burnout and attrition, little attention has been
paid to the connections between the way that intensification increases the number of non-
instructional tasks that make up a significant portion of a teacher’s weekly workload. Teaching
workloads include the contracted work hours that mandate the time a teacher stands in front of a
class performing instructional tasks, consultations with students outside of classroom hours,
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
47
consultations with parents, curriculum planning sessions, administrative and school-level
trainings, school activities, and other responsibilities that must occur on school grounds and
during a teacher’s contracted work time. When many of these tasks occur outside of that time,
they become part of or increase the non-instructional workload that must be performed outside of
contracted work hours. In addition to the instructional and non-instructional tasks that occur
within the school context, the profession also includes activities both required by contract and
duties expected to be performed out of feelings of responsibility to the students and the school.
Teachers may work from home in the evenings and on weekends, also arriving at school early
and leaving late, to complete all the tasks necessary for the job (Crotwell, 2011; Krantz-Kent,
2008; Richwine & Biggs, 2013; Stoddard & Kuhn, 2008).
Self-Determination and Self-Efficacy
Several changes have occurred in education since Apple first wrote about intensification
in the 1980s. While he explains how legislation requiring greater accountability and ties to
economic needs changed the education landscape, the full impact of those bills had not yet been
realized at the time of writing. Since the writing of Teachers & Texts, teachers have had to adapt
their teaching to the initiatives in the 1980s with inconsistently administered state-level tests, to
specific standards under Goals 2000, No Child Left Behind, and most recently the Common
Core.
Apple also described the role of technology in the classroom in the 1980s, which mainly
consisted of computer labs and educational software that students frequently used for
entertainment purposes. Today, however, technology permeates almost all aspects of a school.
Students carry one or more personal devices, as do teachers. Students perform research and
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
48
complete assignments digitally. Teachers use personal and school-provided devices for
communication. Content is delivered by electronic means and displayed on computers, by
projectors, and smartboards in classrooms. Much of the software technology in use by teachers
in their classrooms comes directly from publishers and other companies to complement or
supplement the curriculum that follows and aligns content with standards.
Standards now largely dictate what and how teachers teach their students, a significant
intensification compared to the early implementation of accountability measures in the 1980s.
Technology also permeates the classroom and has become a requirement for the teacher to teach,
adding additional layers of knowledge and skills to the profession. In this context, Apple’s
theory argues that teachers experience a loss of autonomy in their workplace; they lose control of
what they teach, how they teach, the way units are organized, testing intervals, and the content
assessed in those tests. Additionally, after having lost that control, districts evaluate their
teachers based on their ability to improve student scores. Several studies suggest that the loss of
control in the classroom and the ability to actively craft what and how students learn has an
impact on teachers’ feelings of self-determination and self-efficacy (Fernet, Guay, Senecal, &
Austin, 2012; Ingersoll & May, 2012; Ryan & Deci, 2000; Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich, 2014).
The subsequent sections will explore these two theories in more detail.
Self-Determination Theory
In an article from 2000, Ryan and Deci described self-determination theory as a way to
understand the conditions for sub-optimal human functioning as well as inspired and self-
motivated work, specifically mentioning self-determination’s importance to those in teaching
roles and the power the theory has in optimizing human performance (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
49
Although self-determination theory has several sub-theories and significant research into specific
areas of human motivation, the underlying theory is built on three main pillars: relatedness,
competence, and autonomy.
Apple’s intensification theory explores the social, economic, and political conditions
through which teachers lose their power and ability to self-direct within their positions as
teachers and in their classrooms. In self-determination theory, the amount of autonomy that a
person has to choose and perform job functions and their ability to exert control over how those
decisions are implemented within the workplace, directly tie to their motivation to actively
participate in or complete those tasks, especially those that are required to perform the job but
which may have an impact on them outside of the workplace (Schunk et al., 2014).
Relatedness refers to an individual’s need to feel belonging to a group, to peers in the
workplace, a structure mentioned by Apple as a victim of work intensification. Competence
refers to a person’s need to feel mastery over their environment, to feel and act capably in
accomplishing the tasks and activities needed to perform the job and in interactions with others.
Apple discusses, too, how intensification creates conditions for de-skilling and the need for
teachers to rely increasingly on outside experts to perform their day-to-day duties as teachers.
Lastly, autonomy refers to an individual’s need to feel control and have autonomy with and over
the interactions in their environment, both personally and professionally. This includes the level
at which the individual self-endorses changes and can align them with their values (Deci &
Ryan, 2017). Apple’s intensification theory describes similar conditions related to this as well
with the increase in pre-packaged curricula and teaching methods that must be used to satisfy the
atomized learning requirements being routinely tested by the state and other agencies monitoring
student progress. In this environment, teachers lose autonomy to use the materials and methods
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
50
best suited to their particular student population and class context (Apple, 1986, 2000; Ryan &
Deci, 2000).
To illustrate, a study conducted on the phenomena of teacher burnout in 2012 specifically
explored the impact of self-determination on motivation in the workplace and its potential as a
major factor in the underlying root of teacher burnout (Fernet et al., 2012). The researchers
found that factors such as classroom overload (too many demands and lack of time to accomplish
them all) and lack of decision latitude (ability to have control over tasks and how to perform
them) affected a teacher’s autonomous motivation, predicting exhaustion. A gap forms between
the job demands and the resources available to the teacher to meet those demands. When the gap
persists, teachers feel they have less control over their workplace and ability to perform the
duties of the job, hampering their motivation and reducing their feelings of personal
accomplishment in the workplace.
A study from 2012 by Ingersoll and May examined nationally representative data from
the National Center for Education Statistics to explore turnover of mathematics teachers. They
found that among mathematics teachers the strongest factor for whether the teacher stayed in a
particular school or not was the degree to which that teacher had autonomy in his or her
classroom. The lack of autonomy often resulted in teacher attrition from high-poverty, high-
minority schools to low-poverty, low-minority schools. In the same study, the researchers also
found that while salary was a strong predictor, classroom autonomy also played a significant role
in their decision to stay or leave a particular school (Ingersoll & May, 2012).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
51
Self-Efficacy Theory
When exploring the reasons for why people choose a teaching career, remain in that
career, or the reasons why they leave, concepts related to self-efficacy frequently surface. For
many, choosing a teaching career means actively choosing to have an impact on a student’s life,
providing him or her with the knowledge and tools needed to learn further on their own and
interact in society. Studies indicate that failing to feel efficacious in the pursuit of those goals is
a significant factor for why teachers decide to move to new schools or move on from the
profession (Brouwers & Tomic, 2000; Friedman & Kass, 2002; Pas et al., 2012; Skaalvik &
Skaalvik, 2007, 2014).
Apple’s intensification model also touches on how the provision by the state of pre-
packaged curricula with frequent tests of mastery on curricular chunks impact the teacher’s
ability to feel efficacious within his or her classroom because of the resulting increase in non-
instructional work tasks. Within the burnout and attrition research, themes and strains of study
explore perceptions of self-efficacy and its impact on teachers’ health and decisions to leave
teaching completely (Brouwers & Tomic, 2000; Friedman & Kass, 2002; Skaalvik & Skaalvik,
2007, 2010, 2014). The theory of self-efficacy, developed by Albert Bandura, grew out of social
cognitive theory and principally looks at a person’s perceptions of his or her efficacy in relation
to tasks (Bandura, 1997, 2001). It is one of the most pervasive and core beliefs related to the
way that humans function and the decisions they make each day (Bandura, 2000). That
perception influences the motivation of a person to choose certain activities, persist in
completing them, and contribute consistent effort to accomplish the necessary tasks (Schunk et
al., 2014).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
52
Friedman and Kass (2001) surveyed over 550 teachers to explore whether definitions of
teacher self-efficacy should include aspects of the work that fall outside of their immediate
academic context (i.e., not only their specific classrooms but the broader organizational structure,
and the teacher’s role within the organization). They found that, indeed, how the teacher views
his or her ability to function within the school context as a professional and their relationships
with colleagues and supervisors directly relates to perceptions of self-efficacy.
Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2007) surveyed 246 teachers to explore whether certain stressors such as
having to reorganize teaching due to reforms (i.e., increased collaboration with parents or a
principal mandating specific teaching methods) were connected to perceptions of self-efficacy
and had an effect on teacher burnout. Their analysis showed strong correlations between a
teacher’s perceptions of their efficacy and teacher burnout. These findings mirror the pillars of
autonomy, competence, and relatedness in self-determination described previously because they
relate to the ways that teachers relate with peers and community, and the ways that they self-
endorse the changes to the way they work and the effectiveness of that work.
Brouwers and Tomic (2000) examined results from 243 teachers and found a reciprocal
relationship between self-efficacy and emotional exhaustion. They showed that a teacher’s
perception of their self-efficacy could have an effect on their performance in the classroom and
that a negative performance further reduced their perceptions of self-efficacy, leading to
emotional exhaustion and burnout. They argued that teachers needed positive mastery
experiences to help break the negative cycle, which may increase self-efficacy but not
necessarily ameliorate the emotional exhaustion.
Lastly, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2014) studied whether teacher self-efficacy and teacher
autonomy (self-determination) are associated with teacher engagement, emotional exhaustion,
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
53
and overall job satisfaction. They found a strong correlation showing that self-efficacy and
autonomy both independently predict teacher engagement as well as job satisfaction. They also
showed a strong independent correlation between self-efficacy and autonomy that negatively
predicts emotional exhaustion. Though they only found weak connections between self-efficacy
and autonomy, the results showed that perceptions of self-efficacy and autonomy play a vital role
in a teacher’s ability to do their job as well as their emotional health.
In a book published in 2014, the author, Carol Rinke, presents case studies of current and
former teachers to explore the aspects of teaching that affirm a teacher’s desire to stay in the
profession and the aspects of teaching that cause them to re-evaluate and sometimes leave the
profession. A common theme found throughout relates to how teachers dedicate themselves to
their profession and to the children they teach, but who ultimately struggle to feel as though they
are making a difference. These teachers indicate the tremendous time demands that they spend
working inside and outside of class hours, lunch hours spent advising students, and weekends
spent adapting old textbooks for previous standards to new standards to which they must teach
but do not have materials (Rinke, 2014). Ultimately, the non-instructional demands of the
profession add to the traditional teaching tasks in a way that causes many teachers, especially
those in the first five years of teaching, to experience feelings of disappointment and failure.
Many leave the profession as they struggle to reconcile their feelings of efficacy within the
context of the educational environments in which they teach (Hammerness, 2006; Rinke, 2014).
Theoretical Overlap
Multiple studies demonstrate that the gap between the demands of the job imposed by
intensification and the lack of resources that teachers have available to meet those demands
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
54
creates a growing level of stress on teachers that reduces their optimal functioning and increases
the risk of burnout and attrition (Chen, Vansteenkiste, Beyers, & Boone, 2008; Fernet, Guay, &
Senecal, 2004; Gillet, Fouquereau, Huyghebaert, & Colombat, 2015; Hobson & Maxwell, 2017;
Ilies, Huth, Ryan, & Dimotakis, 2015; Roth, Assor, Kanat-maymon, & Kaplan, 2007; Ryan &
Deci, 2000; Stone, Deci, & Ryan, 2008; Trépanier, Fernet, Austin, Forest, & Vallerand, 2014).
The consequences of this gap highlight the significant overlap that exists between self-
efficacy theory, based on social cognitive theory, and self-determination theory. A teacher’s
beliefs are central to his or her perceptions of mastery and competence in their field. It comes as
no surprise then that intensification significantly changes the environments in which teachers
work and that their perceptions within this context can have such a profound impact effect on
levels of burnout and attrition. Similarly, in self-determination, individuals (teachers) work to
satisfy their internal needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2017;
Garrin, 2014). These three pillars of self-determination, like self-efficacy, integrate experiences
within the specific school and work contexts and play an important part in determining the
teacher’s desire to continue teaching.
Summary
Apple’s intensification theory provides a vivid description of the direct connection that
social, economic, and political pressures have had on the creation of accountability measures and
state standards starting in the 1980s. The impact of those policies is felt more strongly today.
Apple’s intensification theory additionally describes how those policy measures affect teachers
and the teaching profession through a process of de-skilling and re-skilling. Following where
Apple’s model leaves off, self-determination and self-efficacy offer explanations on the
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
55
psychological impact of intensification in the workplace and a plausible connection to teacher
burnout and attrition.
This study explores in more detail the connections between intensification and self-
efficacy and self-determination. It does this by exploring teacher perceptions of intensification
and whether it may lead to increased non-instructional workload both in and out of the
classroom. Because most literature examines school-level factors, this study focused specifically
on the impact of the workload intensification pre- and post-instructional period in the school
context, the related workload at home, and whether that non-instructional workload led to a
perceived loss of self-determination and self-efficacy, for which strong and repeated connections
have already been made to high levels of turnover, burnout, and attrition levels.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
56
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
High levels of teacher burnout and attrition continue to plague the teaching profession
with nearly 50% of teachers leaving within the first five years of their teaching career. Teachers
are increasingly required to perform time-intensive, non-instructional work tasks, in addition to
their regular teaching tasks in front of students, in order to comply with new and increasing
demands for accountability, high-stakes testing, curriculum demands related to the current
standards, and supplements for those materials based on the specific student populations in their
classrooms, among other duties performed by teachers. This study used a mixed-methods
approach with open-ended qualitative survey questions designed to hear directly about the on-
the-ground experiences and thoughts that teachers hold related to non-instructional work tasks.
These qualitative responses provided valuable insight because the “experience that one has
includes the way in which the experience is interpreted” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 9).
Additionally, quantitative data were collected using two scales, as well as closed questions on
various aspects of teaching and demographic variables using the same survey instrument
administered to teachers. The study respondents participated using a survey link found in online
teacher forums or that had been provided to them by someone else connected to teachers in
various educational and professional networks.
The purpose of this study was to understand in more detail whether teachers perceive an
impact from work intensification, as described by Michael Apple (1986), and whether it may
have an effect on teacher burnout and attrition levels by increasing non-instructional workload to
such an extent that it negatively and significantly impacts teacher perceptions of their self-
efficacy and self-determination. This chapter will explain in greater detail the methods chosen
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
57
for collecting data. It will include sections on research design, the chosen population and
sample, the research questions, data collection techniques, and the data analysis procedures.
Because research already demonstrates connections between loss of self-efficacy and
self-determination and levels of teacher turnover, burnout, and attrition, this study’s purpose was
to move up one level to better understand how the teachers operating in this environment
perceive the intensification of their profession and what effects, if any, that intensification has on
issues related to self-efficacy and self-determination. The qualitative method allows for an
exploration of the intensification theory in the real world and how it directly affects a teacher’s
work life at school and their personal life outside of the school environment. The quantitative
scales and survey results complement the qualitative interviews.
On the following page, Figure 3.1 provides a concept map modified from the original in
Chapter 1 and highlights the areas of focus for this study. Although the effects of intensification
can be seen on both the instructional and non-instructional sides of education and although the
effects are intertwined and have reciprocal relationships, the research here attempted to
disentangle the concepts and focus solely on the non-instructional side, teasing out the themes
and connections to self-efficacy and self-determination. While concepts and scales related to
self-efficacy and self-determination were used, their purpose was to complement and possibly
support the themes noticed in qualitative data. The primary focus here is on how workload
intensification impacts teachers directly, how they experience that intensification, and how their
feelings and perceptions related to that impact filters down in their real lives.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
58
Research Design and Methods
The research was done as a multiple case study to explore how teachers perceive
intensification and whether it increases or decreases the non-instructional workload in a way that
impacts perceptions of self-efficacy and self-determination, which research suggests are
significant factors contributing to teacher burnout and attrition. This was done using a mixed-
methods approach.
First, quantitative data were collected using surveys that included questions related to
demographics, intensification, work patterns, non-instructional workload, as well as previously
validated scales on self-efficacy and self-determination. These surveys were provided in an
online format using Qualtrics (“Qualtrics,” 2018). Links were provided and shared with teachers
in teacher-only online forums and with teachers or former teachers through introductions by
individuals in other educational and professional networks. At the start, a convenient sample
was used, followed by snowball sampling where teachers and former teachers shared the link
with other current or former teachers in their networks.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
59
Figure 3.1
Focused View of the Concept Map
Intensification
Decreased
Self-Efficacy
(Social Cognitive
Theory)
Decreased
Self-
Determination
(Basic Psychological
Needs Theory)
Increased Levels
of Burnout and Exhaustion
Sustained High
Levels of Attrition
and Turnover
Instructional
Workload
Non-
Instructional
Workload
(and out-of-contract
work tasks
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
60
The use of qualitative methods and data allowed the researcher to explore in greater depth
the same issues above by allowing the teachers and former teachers to describe in their own
words their experiences, while also providing much more granular information than surveys with
pre-selected answer options would have been able to provide. Specifically and because of the
wide range of responses, this method allowed for the exploration and analysis of participant data
in three key areas: 1) a prospective examination of current teachers from a school or schools in
affluent communities (i.e., high socio-economic status) and schools in less affluent communities
(i.e., low socio-economic status); 2) variations in perceived impact between current and former
teachers in traditional schools, charter schools, and private schools and; 3) a retrospective
examination of those teachers who have left teaching from high- and low-SES schools in both
public and private systems. This data was collected using the Qualtrics survey tool, except for
one respondent who provided her open-ended responses via telephone. The multiple case study
method allowed for the exploration of the real-life contexts and experiences of teachers working
within a system of intensification and provided an opportunity to explore how teachers perceive
the touches of that system on essential aspects of their work life and home life as well as their
physical and emotional well-being.
This type of study is useful when trying to understand a situation in which it is difficult to
view the variables separately from the context (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, looking
at data collected from multiple sources and contrasting the findings with those from other case
sites provided an opportunity to understand better the phenomenon. The addition of quantitative
data allowed for added opportunities for triangulation and served to strengthen the findings
discovered in the qualitative analysis by offering a descriptive look at teacher experiences on a
slightly larger scale.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
61
This type of mixed-method research is different from research conducted solely using
qualitative or quantitative methods because it provides an opportunity for the researcher to note
general trends described in the data and also to hear directly from participants to understand how
they make meaning within their particular units or contexts, providing greater depth and meaning
to the descriptive quantitative results. In contrast to quantitative research which aims to
generalize findings across a population or describe populations, the qualitative research used
here uses the researcher as an instrument of analysis to examine actual experiences of
participants in great detail but does not necessarily allow one to generalize to other populations
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study allowed the participants to share their experiences in an
open, informal manner using open-response survey questions in order to create a meaningful
understanding of their perceptions of intensification and its effects in their real lives.
Study Sample and Population
This study’s goals were to focus on two main groups as the unit of analysis: current and
former teachers. Based on the responses received, other important subgroups emerged from the
central unit of analysis and grouped based on several other factors including school type
(traditional public, charter, or private) being the second highest level after whether the
respondent was a current or former teacher. Further details on the respondents and the sub-
groups that emerged will be described in greater detail in Chapter Four.
The study design did not call for or anticipate that respondents come from a single
institution or geographic location because the research questions examine teacher responses to
and perceptions of impacts from education work trends that transcend individual work
environments and speak more to the broader teacher experience. Including data from teachers
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
62
from multiple sites allowed for analysis to identify areas of similarity and contrast. Confirming
important data about work trends among current and former teachers from multiple contexts
would not have been available if the data came from only a handful of teachers from the same
location.
In all instances, the interviews and surveys were provided to current and former teachers
outside of their school site. While the school site and its specific context does have an impact on
teachers and their perceptions, especially related to student populations, school resources, and
school leadership, the purpose of the study was to understand teacher perceptions of work
intensification and what that looks like outside of the contracted work time, most of which
occurs in their workspace before or after they begin work or outside of the school context and
away from students and school leaders. Using the quantitative instruments and qualitative
questions with teachers from various educational contexts, analysis of the data provided rich
insight into perceptions and experiences of the same topic from multiple viewpoints.
Because of the time demands on placed on teachers professionally, potential respondents
were provided the option to participate by phone, in-person interview, or using an online tool
administered by Qualtrics. In all but one case, current and former teachers indicated a
willingness to respond using the Qualtrics online survey tool. The participants responded to
questions in both closed and open-ended response formats. Demographic and scale data for one
participant was collected using the online instrument, and the open-ended questions were
administered by phone. Several participants provided additional follow-up data using emailed
responses. Additionally, all respondents completed two, research-validated scales which
explored the specific areas of self-determination and self-efficacy experienced by teachers in the
workplace.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
63
By allowing teachers from multiple sites to respond to the survey, it was expected that an
analysis could be conducted on the data that would contrast the experiences of the participants in
several main overlapping areas; 1) current teachers from high-and-low SES schools; 2) variations
in impact among teachers from traditional, charter, and private schools and; 4) the retrospective
experiences of former teachers. These groups helped to highlight differences influenced by
needs in context-specific student populations, school resources, or school leadership. Data from
charter teachers will also provide a valuable opportunity to contrast the experiences of the
teachers working directly in a public system that differs slightly and significantly from the
traditional public school model. Data from teachers in private schools, teachers who may or may
not experience intensification at all since they work in a system outside of the traditional
funding, regulatory, and accountability models used by the public and charter school systems
should highlight important similarities and differences in the ways that teachers from each of the
contexts experience (or not) the pressures of intensification. This is an important area for
contrast because teachers in private schools are also included in many research samples that
explore issues related to attrition (Ingersoll, 2001; Ingersoll & Smith, 2003). The final expected
group consisted of former teachers who have left the teaching profession, but not necessarily
education. Data from these respondents can help to understand the reasons for ending a career in
teaching and whether those reasons align with the findings in the first three groups of current
teachers.
Research Questions
The research questions will be used to understand whether intensification has a
connection to teacher burnout and attrition by increasing the non-instructional workload to such
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
64
an extent that it negatively and significantly impacts teacher perceptions of their self-efficacy
and self-determination. The questions explore the topics from a qualitative perspective and the
hypotheses provide avenues to explore the topics from a quantitative perspective.
1) How do teachers perceive intensification’s role on their non-instructional workload?
Hypothesis 1.1) Teachers will perceive a significant impact from intensification on
their non-instructional workload.
2) Do teachers perceive an impact from non-instructional work tasks in their personal
and work lives?
Hypothesis 2.1) Teachers will perceive a significant impact from non-instructional
work tasks on their personal and work lives.
3) How do teachers perceive the impact of non-instructional workload, if any, on their
feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination?
Hypothesis 3.1) Teachers will perceive a significant negative impact from non-
instructional workload tasks on their feelings of self-efficacy (Teacher Self-
Efficacy Scale – TSES) and self-determination (Basic Psychological Need
Satisfaction at Work-BPNSW: Autonomy, Competence, Relatedness, and the
global needs – ACR combined score.)
Hypothesis 3.2) There will be a significant prediction in teachers’ self-efficacy by
intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
Hypothesis 3.3) There will be a significant prediction in teachers’ self-
determination by intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
4) What role does a loss of self-efficacy and self-determination, if any, play in a
teacher’s decision to continue in the teaching profession?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
65
Hypothesis 4.1) Loss of self-determination (BPNSW global score, and the
autonomy, competence, and relatedness sub-scores) will significantly correlate
with a teacher’s decision to remain in the teaching profession.
Scales
Because this study examined intensification and the resulting impact on issues related to
workload, loss of self-efficacy, and loss of self-determination, previously validated scales were
examined to inform the development of the qualitative interview questionnaire and the
quantitative survey instrument. The scales provided additional opportunities for data
triangulation in the analysis phase outlined in Chapter Four.
Self-determination scale. Within self-determination theory, a macro theory on human
growth and motivation, six sub-theories exist that focus on specific areas of functioning. The
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Theory most directly applies because it explores how
supporting or thwarting a person’s autonomy, relatedness, and competence impacts optimal
functioning and overall wellness. These needs must be continually met for people to grow and
function in healthy ways (Deci & Ryan, 2000, 2017; Ryan & Deci, 2016).
Based on this sub-theory, the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work Scale
(BPNSW) was used in the quantitative instrument. This scale looks specifically at issues within
the work domain. It was examined to better frame questions for teachers, providing insight into
perceptions of the three basic psychological needs of autonomy, relatedness, and competence in
their work environment and whether teachers experience a loss of self-determination as a
consequence of intensification and the associated non-instructional work tasks.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
66
This scale provided context for questions to former teachers to see whether they
perceived a loss of autonomy, relatedness, or competence and whether that contributed to their
decision to leave the teaching profession. Additionally, interview participants completed the
scale prior to the open-ended question interview or section of the online survey. This was to
prevent any specific questions from positively or negatively coloring the participant’s feelings
while responding to the scale. The results were compared against the responses provided during
the interview process and with the results obtained from the other respondents, which provided
an opportunity to triangulate the data further.
In addition to the vetting performed by Ryan and Deci and their cited studies related to
the BPNSW, other researchers have conducted high-level statistical analyses to determine
whether separately considering the three pillars of autonomy, relatedness, and competence, as
was done in this scale, was appropriate. They administered the scale to a sample of over 1,100
participants and found that the scale did appropriately assess the three pillars and that the sub-
scores were reliable (ω = 0.76 autonomy, ω = 0.82 relatedness, ω = 0.82 competence) (Sánchez-
Oliva et al., 2017). The researchers additionally wanted to determine whether there were any
gender effects at the individual pillar levels of autonomy, competence, or relatedness. They
found none. They did find a slight difference in the overall global needs satisfaction level
(combined) scores among females who scored slightly higher than males at the global needs
level.
In a slightly older study conducted in 2010, researchers administered the scale to a
sample of 1,185 participants and performed statistical analyses on the instrument. They came to
the same conclusion that the BPNSW is a reliable instrument finding the autonomy, competence,
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
67
and relatedness reliability scores of .81, .85, and .82 respectively. Additionally, they found that,
as expected, satisfaction of each of the three pillars was positively correlated with job
satisfaction and negatively with exhaustion. They also found that work-related need satisfaction
related positively with affective organizational commitment and self-reported performance (Van
den Broeck, Vansteenkiste, De Witte, Soenens, & Lens, 2010).
Self-efficacy scale. Several scales exist that seek to measure the respondent’s perceptions
and judgments of their ability to organize and execute the tasks and decisions needed to attain a
particular outcome. Many of the components of intensification may have a direct impact on
components of a teacher’s self-efficacy in the ability to perform the tasks associated with their
jobs and achieve specific outcomes. Because these tasks and outcomes can be specific to a
certain industry, researchers have developed scales with questions to target specific actions in
certain job types.
For those in a teaching career, Schwarzer’s Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale uses ten
questions to explore an individual’s sense of self-efficacy. Developed from a larger general self-
efficacy scale, a modified 27-item teacher self-efficacy scale that explored four major areas of
teaching skills related to job accomplishment, skill development, social interaction with students,
parents, and work colleagues, and dealing with job stress was developed based on Bandura’s
guidelines for exploring self-efficacy. The ten questions were derived from that larger set of
questions and administered to three samples. Among those three samples, a Cronbach’s alpha
was found between .76 and .82, higher levels of associations compared to responses to the larger
27-item self-efficacy scale (Schwarzer, Schmitz, & Daytner, 1999). Another study was
conducted using the teacher self-efficacy scale with two teacher samples. The Cronbach’s alpha
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
68
was .80 and .81 respectively (Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008). In 2009, a study conducted in Spain
also used the Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale with a sample of 724 primary and secondary school
teachers and found a Cronbach’s alpha of .84 (Betoret, 2009).
The Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale was included in the quantitative instrument for this
study. It was examined to better frame questions for teachers, providing insight into perceptions
of their self-efficacy in the classroom and their ability to impact the lives of students under their
instruction. This scale also provided context for questions to former teachers to see whether they
experienced a loss of self-efficacy and whether that contributed to their decision to leave the
teaching profession. Additionally, interview participants completed the scale prior to the open-
ended question interview or section of the online survey. This was to prevent any specific
questions from positively or negatively coloring the participant’s feelings while completing to
the scale. The results were compared against the responses provided during the interview
process and with the full results obtained from the other respondents, which provided an
opportunity to triangulate the data further.
Data Collection
For data collected through qualitative research to be useful, it must include data points
from multiple sources. The strength of this study relies on the researcher to triangulate data from
multiple sources to help ensure the internal validity of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In
this study, data were collected from current and former teachers from different socio-economic,
school, and other contexts. Data was collected through several methods: 1) open-ended response
questions; 2) the completion of demographic information on the individual respondents and their
schools; 3) psychological scales on self-efficacy and self-determination and; 4) follow-up
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
69
questions based on primary scale and question responses. The quantitative instrument will
provide a descriptive look at teachers and their experiences and provide further points of
comparison.
By comparing and contrasting the data collected from multiple qualitative and
quantitative sources, this study provides a rich look into how teachers make meaning in the
context of intensification of their non-instructional workload in the teaching profession and how
it affects their personal and work lives outside of the classroom. The demographic questions and
scales were provided online. In most cases, the open-ended questions were administered via the
same online tool, or by email or phone, depending on the preferences and availability of the
respondent. This allowed participants to choose a time and format most convenient for them, to
feel free to talk about the topic and what is most important to them. This type of questioning was
chosen because it allows the researcher to use open-ended questions to obtain specific data from
participants while understanding that the participants’ experiences are guided by their unique
ways of defining the world. It also allowed the researcher to explore the participant’s worldview
and how they experience it, allowing for new ideas and interpretations of the phenomena to arise
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data Analysis
In qualitative research, the researcher is an instrument, not only for data collection but in
the analysis of that data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Because the goal of qualitative research is
to understand what is happening and the perceptions of the participants, the researcher is in the
best position to understand and make meaning of the patterns in the collected data and also to
respond to nonverbal cues and subtle changes in tone of the participants.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
70
Creswell (2007) advises that analyzing and making sense of data requires several steps.
After the surveys were administered and follow-up conducted, the data was prepared and
organized in a way to facilitate analysis. The data collected for this study was organized using
Creswell’s categorical aggregation and then examined for major themes. Interview data were
transcribed, coded, categorized, and analyzed for major themes by the researcher (Creswell,
2007, 2014). The themes and the data collected through the surveys are described and
represented using figures, tables, narrative description, and other forms that best fit the
presentation of the data. Because the survey responses were collected using convenient and
snowball sampling, they were not expected to represent a normally distributed group so the
researcher examined data collected in this manner using non-parametric statistics, or descriptive
statistics whose parameters grow with the data and do not require that the population surveyed
represent a certain distribution or set of parameters at the outset. Data that was statistically
determined to be normally distributed, however, was standardized and examined using other
appropriate statistical tools.
Ethics
The success of this study depends entirely on following ethical guidelines related to
qualitative research meant to protect both the participants and the data collected. The researcher
followed guidelines provided by the institutional review board (IRB) at the University of
Southern California.
The researcher took a CITI training course on ethics in research and how to perform
research ethically, receiving a certificate after successful completion. The researcher followed
all steps required by the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) to
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
71
achieve approval of the study. All data was collected after IRB had approved the study to move
forward.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) remind us that ethics come up not only in the procedures
used to collect data but also relationally, meaning the researcher should be aware of his or her
role and the impact that the researcher has on the participants. This includes remembering that
the participants are whole people, and treating them as such, not simply looking at them as
subjects there to provide the researcher with the information needed for research.
In preparing for the study, the following precautions were taken. First, an informed
consent form was provided to every potential respondent to explain the purpose of the study,
what topics the research explores, why the topic is under study, and the role that the data
provided by the participants plays in the overall study. The participants have the final say in
whether their statements correctly portray their position and they retain the right to have data
redacted following the data collection. It also included a promise that potential identifiers would
not be publically connected to their data, and that their responses would not be connected
directly to their workplace. Confidentiality of the data was also guaranteed. The collected data
is stored in a secure digital folder separate from identifying information using several encryption
technologies and passcodes to ensure that only the researcher has access. After the follow-up
responses were received, all responses were linked solely to a randomly generated ID number
and not directly to the individual identifying information.
In the event that an ethical dilemma or a need for advice arose in choosing the most
ethical path, the researcher had the ability to refer to the dissertation committee members who
have performed studies and guided many doctoral students through the process before.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
72
Validity
In order to strengthen the study and provide support for its validity, one method is to
triangulate data from several sources. From the previous sections, those different data points
include open-ended responses, email responses, and interviews both with current and former
teachers; responses to scales on self-efficacy and self-determination, other responses to close-
ended questions provided by teachers that relate to the research questions, and quantitative
surveys designed to provide descriptive data. Additionally, by using member checking,
participants had the opportunity to view and alter their responses to ensure that they were
appropriately recorded and that their views were presented fairly and accurately. Adequate time
was also provided to make sure that participants were not rushed or felt forced to provide
incomplete answers. Adequate and flexible time allowed participants to provide information and
saturate the data.
The study aimed for maximum variation by including data from participants from schools
in multiple different contexts, as well as data from former teachers to see whether differences
exist in the ways that current teachers and former teachers perceive their environments and
whether the specific contexts influence those perceptions. This provides an opportunity to
explore the ways in which the school context impacts perception and whether the experiences of
former teachers align with those who have decided to stay in the profession.
Lastly, the questionnaires and scales were provided to four individuals, all of whom have
taught in education at some point in their careers. One is a current teacher. The three remaining
individuals hold doctorates in education and work in various capacities in education. They also
conducted their own studies and wrote dissertations. These individuals were tasked with looking
for inconsistencies in the questions, gaps in the logic, problems with the flow, appropriateness of
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
73
the questions, and appropriateness of the included scales based on the research questions and
goals of the study. Comments and suggestions were discussed and then incorporated prior to
beginning data collection. This provides a measure both of face and construct validity to the
overall instruments in terms of the stated aims of the study.
Reflexivity
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) explain reflexivity as the researcher’s views and assumptions
that lead to the study and could have an impact on the analysis of the data. It allows the
researcher to clarify their positions and worldview which may bias the way in which they view
the data and report the results.
For this research project, the researcher assumed that people who become teachers
largely do so out of a desire to make an impact on someone’s life, that they take the job
seriously, at least in the beginning of their careers. Additionally, the researcher assumed, based
on several studies and anecdotal stories from teachers collected over his 15 years in the
educational sector, that teachers spend significant time outside their work hours performing tasks
related to their employment. They often complete these tasks at the expense of both their
personal and professional lives. While some teachers may perform little to no preparation,
performs only the minimum needed to remain in the profession, or spends none of their personal
time performing tasks that can improve the learning of their students outside of their contracted
work time, the researcher assumed that this type of teacher is the exception and is not typical of
teachers in the field. The researcher further assumed that of those teachers who do fall into the
exception category, many did not begin that way but rather ended up as exceptions because they
have experienced burnout as a result of intensification or other challenges in the workplace.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
74
Conclusion
This chapter provided an outline of the methodology and the procedures used to guide the
study from beginning to completion. The detailed explanations on the sample, collection of data,
analysis of data, issues related to validity and reliability, and the ethical procedures put in place
were meant to show that the methods chosen were appropriate given the research questions
posed at the beginning of the chapter. The following chapter will explore in detail the results
obtained from the analysis of the data.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
75
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
This study explores the impact of intensification on non-instructional workloads and
whether it plays a role in a teacher’s perceptions of their self-efficacy and self-determination. To
answer the research questions, the researcher developed an instrument containing demographic
questions and open-ended questions related to the teacher experience. Two previously validated
scales were also included, one related to teacher self-efficacy and the other related to self-
determination, specifically in the basic psychological need satisfaction at work domain. This
chapter will explore the results and findings contained in the data that span 67 current and former
teachers from three main types of schools. All findings are based on participant responses from
the open-ended survey questions, follow-up emails, and one administration of the survey by
phone. This chapter will include further details on the descriptive characteristics of the
respondents, as well as what data was gathered, recorded, and analyzed. Non-confirming data
will also be discussed.
Descriptive Characteristics of Respondents
Data were collected from 67 current and former teachers from the K-12 school sector.
The instrument collected categorical variables such as gender, age, race/ethnicity, school type
(i.e. traditional public school, charter school, private school), the number of years taught, grade
level taught, education/degree attainment level of the respondent, and whether the teacher or
former teacher was in special education. Limited information was also collected on the
institution and included only the school’s city and state or the school district, percentage of
students receiving free or reduced lunch, and the approximate percentage of students who come
from a minority or non-white background.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
76
Gender, Age, and Ethnicity
Of the 67 respondents, 55 (82.1%) were female, and 12 (17.9%) were male. Other non-
binary gender options were available to respondents, but none were chosen (Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1
Gender
Note. n = 67
Figure 4.2
Age Groups
Note. n = 67
82.1%
17.9%
Gender
Male Female
10.4%
37.3%
16.4%
32.8%
3.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Under 30 Between 31-40 Between 41-50 Over 50 Prefer Not to Say
Age Group
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
77
Age categories were used instead of requesting exact ages to encourage truthful responses
and because there was no need for specific ages. These choices also mirrored those found in
similar studies. Of the 67 respondents, 7 (10.4%) were under the age of 30, 25 (37.3%) were
between 31 and 40, 11 (16.4%) were between 41-50, 22 (32.8%) were over the age of 50, and 2
(3.0 %) chose not to report their age (Figure 4.2).
Respondents were able to choose one or more of eight race/ethnicity categories or a ninth
category for those who preferred not to respond. Of the 67 respondents, 2 (3.1%) chose African
American, 10 (14.9%) chose Asian, 47 (70.1%) chose Caucasian/White, 6 (9.0%) chose Latino.
1 (1.5%) chose other, and 2 (3.0%) chose not to respond (Figure 4.3).
Figure 4.3
Race/Ethnicity
3.0%
14.9%
68.7%
9.0%
1.5%
3.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
African American/Black
Asian American/Asian
Caucasian/White
Latino/Hispanic
Other
Prefer Not to Say
Race/Ethnicity
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
78
Education Level and Teaching Experience
Seven categories were presented as options to respondents to identify their highest level
of academic achievement. Of the 67 respondents, 19 (28.4%) indicated a bachelor’s degree, 10
(14.9%) indicated a graduate-level certificate, 34 (50.7%) indicated having earned a master’s
degree, and 4 (6.0%) indicated holding a doctorate (Figure 4.4).
Figure 4.4
Education Level
Three options were available to report the number of years of experience that participants
had in teaching. Although more categories could have provided opportunity for more granular
statistical analysis, the three categories provided aligned well with the goals of the study,
primarily by focusing on teachers who had fewer than 5 years of experience, those who passed
the five-year mark, and those who could be considered veteran teachers with 10 or more years of
experience. Of the 67 respondents, 17 (25.4%) had 0-5 teaching years, 17 (25.4%) had 6-10
teaching years, and 33 (49.3%) had over 10 years of teaching experience (Figure 4.5).
28.4%
14.9%
50.7%
6.0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Bachelor
Graduate Certificate
Master
Doctorate
Education Level
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
79
Figure 4.5
Years of Teaching Experience
Note. n = 67
School Types, School Level, and Current or Former Teacher
This study focused on schools in the K-12 education sector. Two survey responses were
excluded because the respondents worked in tertiary education. Of the remaining 67
respondents, participants reported four types of schools which included 51 (76.1%) having
experience in traditional public schools, 7 (10.4%) having experience in charter schools, 8
(11.9%) having experience in private schools, and 1 (1.5%) with experience in a public high-
school alternative program (Figure 4.6). Respondents came from both primary and secondary
schools, 37 (55.2%) and 30 (44.8%) respectively (Figure 4.7).
Because this study explored questions related to the career choice of teachers, hearing
from former teachers about their experiences provided valuable information. Of the 67
respondents, 49 (73.1%) indicated that they are current teachers while 18 (26.9%) indicated that
they were former teachers (Figure 4.8).
25.4%
25.4%
49.3%
Years T eaching
0-5 years 6-10 years More than 10-years
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
80
Figure 4.6
Type of School
Note. n = 67
Figure 4.7
Primary or Secondary School
Note. n = 67
76.1%
10.4%
11.9%
1.5%
Type of School
Traditional Public School Charter School Private School Other
55.2%
44.8%
School Level
Primary Secondary
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
81
Figure 4.8
Current or Former Teacher
Note. n = 67
Summary of Other Variables
Other categorical and continuous variables were collected from the respondents for
quantitative analysis that included: 1) the specific grade taught; 2) whether they arrive to
complete work tasks prior to the beginning of their contracted work time and a weekly estimate
of that time; 3) whether they stay after their contracted work time to complete tasks and a weekly
estimate of that time; 4) whether they work during their break and lunch periods; 5) whether they
work from home in the evenings, weekends, and holidays and a monthly estimate of that time; 6)
an estimate of the monthly hours worked outside of their contracted work time; 7) whether they
feel they have enough time to work and collaborate with their peers, 8) the degree to which they
feel they have autonomy over their work on a three-point scale; 9) whether they feel they have
enough time to complete the tasks needed to be an effective teacher; and 10) other combinations
73.1%
26.9%
Current or Former Teacher
Current Former
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
82
of previous variables which took dichotomous, ordinal, and continuous forms. Finally, several
continuous variables were generated as a result of the Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale and the Basic
Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work scale scores.
The above variables provided significant weight to the qualitative aspects of this study
and are included if and when appropriate in the analysis. Data that disconfirms or has been
found contrary to expectations is also described and analyzed.
Scales
As previously discussed, two scales were included because they provided multiple data
points and opportunities for further triangulation. They are the Basic Psychological Need
Satisfaction at Work scale (BPNSW) and the Teacher Self-Efficacy scale (TSES).
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work. A Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for
the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work scale scores collected in this study (Figure
4.9). The alphas were calculated, one for the entire sample, one for the current teachers, and one
for the former teachers. An additional analysis was conducted on the scores for teachers from
public, charter, and private schools. These analyses were done in case the experiences of one
group was too far removed and had a disproportionately positive or negative impact on the alpha
for those in a different group.
In all cases, the alpha fell from just below good to well into the excellent range. For all
the teachers, the alpha was .85, indicating good internal consistency (Evans, 1996). It increased
to .91 (excellent) for former teachers, and it was .79 (acceptable) for teachers who are currently
teaching. When the alphas were computed for teachers in school types, interesting differences
also appeared. The alpha among teachers (current and former) from traditional public schools
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
83
was .83. For teachers in private school settings, the alpha dropped slightly to .81. In both cases,
this indicates good internal consistency. The alpha for this scale among teachers from charter
schools, however, was .94, indicating excellent internal consistency. In all cases, the Cronbach
alpha indicates that the scales are measuring the same construct.
Figure 4.9
Cronbach's Alphas for All, Current, Former, Public, Charter, and Private Respondents- BPNSW
Teacher Self-Efficacy. A Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for the Teacher Self-Efficacy
scale scores collected in this study (Figure 4.10). The alphas were calculated, one for the entire
sample, one for the current teachers, and one for the former teachers. An additional analysis was
conducted on the scores for teachers from public, charter, and private schools. These analyses
were done in case the experiences of one group was too far removed and had a
disproportionately positive or negative impact on the alpha for those in a different group.
In all cases, the alpha fell in the acceptable to good range. Compared to the BPNSW
alphas, the overall alpha scores for the TSES were slightly lower. While still acceptable, the
0.85
0.79
0.91
0.83
0.94
0.81
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
All Current Former Public Charter Private
Cronbach Alphas
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
84
lower alpha scores may be a result, in part, of the relatively few items in the scale (Kurpius &
Stafford, 2006). For all the teachers, the alpha was .78, indicating acceptable internal
consistency (Evans, 1996). It increased to .79 (acceptable) for current teachers, and it was .71
(acceptable) for former teachers. When the alphas were computed for teachers in school types,
interesting differences also appeared. The alpha among teachers (current and former) from
traditional public schools was .76. For teachers in charter school, settings the alpha dropped
slightly to .75. In both cases, this indicates acceptable internal consistency. The alpha for this
scale among teachers from private schools, however, was .82, indicating good internal
consistency. In all cases, the Cronbach alpha indicates that the scales are measuring the same
construct.
Figure 4.10
Cronbach's Alphas for All, Current, Former, Public, Charter, and Private Respondents - TSES
Although the TSES and the BPNSW scale measure different things, they do look at
overlapping constructs as discussed in Chapter 2. A Pearson product-moment correlation
0.78
0.79
0.71
0.76
0.75
0.82
0.64
0.66
0.68
0.7
0.72
0.74
0.76
0.78
0.8
0.82
0.84
All Current Former Public Charter Private
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
85
coefficient analysis was conducted to see whether the scores from respondents on the TSES
correlated with the global and sub-scores on the BPNSW. They did. There was a moderate,
positive relationship between the two variables, the global needs score (autonomy, competence,
and relatedness sub-scores combined) and the teacher self-efficacy scale, r=0.45, n=67, p=.000.
There was a weak, positive relationship between the autonomy sub-score variable and the teacher
self-efficacy variable, r=.35, n=67, p=.000. The strongest correlation was a moderate, positive
relationship between the competence sub-score variable and the teacher self-efficacy variable at
r=0.59, n=67, p=.000. There was no significant correlation between the relatedness sub-score
variable and the teacher self-efficacy scale variable (Evans, 1996). These correlations are
expected given the construct overlap. The higher correlation found between the self-efficacy
theory and competence sub-score is expected because those two constructs most closely align
(Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Analysis of Data
This research study aimed to understand whether intensification’s increase in non-
instructional work tasks and pressures on personal time, time with peers, and autonomy over
their work environment had an impact on teachers’ abilities to perform the job they were
presumably hired to do, that is to teach, and their perceptions of the impact that the increased
workload has on their self-efficacy and self-determination.
Many of these topics are deeply entwined so to answer the research questions, both the
data generated from the quantitative analysis and the qualitative analysis are discussed. In most
instances, the quantitative analysis complements the data generated in the qualitative analysis
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
86
and, importantly, provides a more holistic view of the perceptions and experiences of the
respondents.
Scale and Response Normality
Because this study was conducted with no expectation of random sampling or that
parametric tests could be used, the majority of the statistical analyses conducted used non-
parametric procedures. Three main variables, however, were examined using the normal
distribution fitting analysis Kolmogorov-Smirnov test because they were relied on heavily for
research questions 2-4. The variables were the combined score for the BPNSW (Table 4.1), the
TSES (Table 4.1), and the total reported time - monthly estimate (Table 4.1). The normality
analysis provided a way to better understand the composition of the responses and whether
respondents tended to skew one direction or another in their perceptions of self-efficacy and self-
determination or in their recollections of time spent working. Each of the three variables met the
assumption of normality with a p > .05. The three BPNSW sub-scores were also tested and fell
within limits to be considered normally distributed.
Table 4.1
Test of Normality – One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov
N Mean Std. Deviation Kolmogorov-
Smirnov Z
Total reported time – monthly
estimate
67 48.80 25.33 .90
Basic Psychological Need
Satisfaction at Work Scale – ACR
Combined
67 110.51 14.06 .81
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
67 33.76 3.56 .72
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
87
Qualitative Analysis
The software package NVivo (“NVivo qualitative data analysis software,” 2017) was
used to collect and analyze open-ended, phone interview, and follow-up email responses. This
software facilitates coding and analysis of qualitative data. Responses were coded and analyzed
for individual items and reoccurring terms or comments. Further coding and analysis looked at
the individual items and reoccurring themes and then were coded again for broader themes. In
addition to the manual coding and analysis for every response, NVivo’s built-in tools also
provide a way to look at word frequencies, create word maps, create word clouds, as well as
perform other sophisticated analyses. These tools assisted in finding other areas for potential
coding and analysis as well as assisted in verifying themes previously coded and analyzed.
Research Question One: Results
Research question one asks: how do teachers perceive intensification’s role in their non-
instructional workload?
Quantitative Analysis
To answer this research question, several variables were analyzed which included
whether a current or former teacher arrived early, stayed late, worked over lunch or breaks,
worked in the evenings, over weekends, or holidays, and whether they felt they had enough time
to complete the tasks required to be an effective teacher.
Intensification: Work that spills into personal time. The intensification theory argues
that because of multiple and increasing demands, teachers will perceive an increase in the
amount of work they must accomplish and that this work will spill outside of work hours (Apple,
1986). Looking at the four variables that relate to out-of-contract work time, 100% of the 67
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
88
respondents indicated that they spent some time working outside of their contracted hours to
perform needed work tasks during one of the four out-of-contract work variables (Table 4.2). A
full 52.2% of respondents indicated that they needed to perform work tasks during all four of
those out-of-contract work periods. Some teachers, based on their particular school contexts, had
certain tasks like hall duty, coaching, or other activities that did not allow them to arrive early or
stay late. Some respondents indicated that their efficiency in planning lessons or performing
other tasks meant they did not need to stay for one or more of the time periods. Of those
teachers, 34.3% needed to work during three of the four periods, 11.9% worked over two of
them, and one individual representing 1.5% worked during one of those periods. A full 86.6% of
respondents indicated that they worked at least 3 of the 4 periods.
When disaggregating the responses, some additional differences appear between current
and former teachers (Table 4.2). For example, among current teachers, 46.9% reported working
during all four out-of-contract time periods while 66.7% of former teachers indicated the same.
Of all the respondents, 66 of the 67 teachers, (98.5%) worked in one of three school types, a
traditional public school, charter school, or private school. Of current and former teachers in
these three types of schools, 52.9% of traditional public-school teachers reported working all
four time periods, while 71.4% of charter school teachers and 37.5% of private school teachers
reported the same. An analysis of these differences will take place in Chapter Five.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
89
Table 4.2
Percentage of Respondents Who Worked Outside Hours
1 Period 2 Periods 3 Periods 4 Periods 3-4 Periods
All
Respondents 1.5% 11.9% 34.3% 52.2% 86.6%
Current 0.0% 14.3% 38.8% 46.9% 85.7%
Former 5.6% 5.6% 22.2% 66.7% 88.9%
Public 0.0% 9.8% 37.3% 52.9% 90.2%
Charter 0.0% 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 85.7%
Private 0.0% 25.0% 37.5% 37.5% 75.0%
Note. n = 67
Of all the estimated times reported by teachers outside of contracted work hours, the
minimum time was 5 hours of outside work in a month and the maximum reported time was 130
hours (Table 4.3). The mean time worked was 48.8 hours among all the respondents. Current
teachers reported an average of 47.3 hours spent monthly outside of their contracted work hours
and former teachers reported spending over 52.9 hours monthly. Public school teachers reported
an average of 48.1 hours outside of contracted work time, while charter school teachers reported
64.1 hours and private teachers reported 40.9 hours working.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
90
Table 4.3
Hours Worked Outside of Contracted Hours
Before and after, evenings, weekends, and holidays
All Teachers Hours/month
Minimum Value 5.0
Maximum Value 130.0
Mean 48.8
Specific Means: -------
Current 47.3
Former 52.9
Public 48.1
Charter 64.1
Private 40.9
Note. n = 67
Intensification also posits that because the teacher workload has intensified and that
demands on time outstrip the time available, teachers will also need to use break times and lunch
periods to manage non-instructional work tasks and that lack of time to take a step back and clear
the mind contributes to the stress that teachers experience. Of the 67 respondents, 89.2%
indicated that they spent their break time and lunch periods completing work-related tasks
(Figure 4.11). The reasons teachers gave for needing to use this time included providing
additional tutoring to students, grading papers, and replying to school and parent emails. That
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
91
teachers performed these tasks over their lunches and breaks indicates the persistent and pressing
nature of these demands and tasks on teachers.
Figure 4.11
Respondents Who Work Over Breaks and/or Lunch Periods
Note. n = 67
Hypothesis 1.1. Teachers will perceive a significant impact from intensification on their
non-instructional workload.
A Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was computed to determine whether a
relationship existed between a teacher’s perceived impact of intensification and their non-
instructional workloads. Consistent with the expectations, a significant positive correlation was
found between the two variables, r=.89, n=67, p=.000 (Table 4.4). This finding indicates a high,
positive correlation between teachers’ perceptions of impact from intensification on their non-
instructional workloads (Evans, 1996). Increases in a teacher’s perception of impact from
intensification were correlated with an increase in their perception of the impact from their non-
instructional workloads.
89.20%
10.80%
Respondents Who Work Over Break and/or Lunch Periods
Yes No
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
92
Table 4.4
Correlation Between Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Intensification
Total reported time – monthly estimate Pearson Correlation .89
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 67
Qualitative Analysis
The vast majority of teachers reported needing to arrive early, stay late, work over their
lunch or break times, or work from home in the evening and over weekends and holidays. While
the questions that teachers responded to did not provide a definition or description of
intensification, teachers did mention the same work tasks repeatedly that the intensification
theory posits will occur.
How often do you arrive early? Of the 67 respondents, over 83% indicated that they
arrived early. They provided further information on how often they arrived early and what tasks
they were performing that required an early arrival. In over half of the responses, participants
repeatedly indicated that they arrived early “every day of the week” and “every day if possible.”
What tasks did you complete when you arrived early? Of those who arrived early,
they spent an average of about 4.5 hours a week prior to their start time performing non-
instructional tasks (Table 4.5). While the responses varied, the same few tasks were repeatedly
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
93
mentioned. Over half of the participants responded by indicating a need to arrive early for
“lesson planning, catching up on emails, grading, meeting with students” or, a refrain often
repeated, “paperwork, paperwork, paperwork.”
Table 4.5
Frequent Codes for Responses to Tasks Performed Early
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Prepping
Planning
Copying
Paperwork
Grading
Emails
Tutoring Students
Informal Meetings
Supplementing
Contacting Parents
Lunch and break times. One of the central and repeated symptoms of intensification is
that the demands of the job exceed the time available (Apple, 1986). As previously described,
the overwhelming majority of teachers spend a significant amount of time before and after their
workday completing non-instructional tasks. Intensification also posits that the demands placed
on teachers would be so high that they would not be able to take the emotional or mental breaks
needed during their lunch or other break periods (Table 4.7). Of the 67 respondents, over 89%
reported that they worked over their breaks and lunch periods.
Do you perform work tasks during your breaks or lunch periods? As expected, the
responses varied but most teachers repeated the same handful of tasks during their breaks and
lunch periods. One respondent indicated that she spent the time “grading, planning, [and[
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
94
answering emails,” while another respondent said, “I tutor, work on lesson plans, grade, or run
student activities.”
Table 4.6
Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed During Breaks and Lunch Periods
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Planning
Prepping
Grading
Meetings
Tutoring Students
Emailing
Copying
Informal Meetings with Co-workers
Administrative Paperwork
Often, one could see a hesitancy or contradiction in the teacher’s response. For example,
one teacher indicated that they were very good at keeping their lunch and break periods to
themselves, while in the very next sentence they indicated frequent daily requirements over the
same break and lunch periods such as “meeting with students, meeting with colleagues, meeting
with administrators. That’s all I would really do.”
Other respondents reported long lists of daily tasks that they performed over their breaks
that included frequently needing to work on lesson plans, working on school programs and
leadership-directed projects, evaluating lessons and grades, calling parents, answering emails,
completing data entry needs, and completing administrative paperwork (Table 4.6).
How often do you stay late? Of the 67 respondents, over 77% stayed late. Several of
the respondents who did not stay late indicated that they had other obligations such as coaching
or hall duty, tasks that kept them at school past their instructional time, but which they did not
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
95
consider in the same category as the non-instructional task time they needed in the mornings or
other out-of-contract work times. Respondents were clear about the need by reporting, “I stay
late every day after school,” or another who said, “I typically stay late every day to get tasks
accomplished.”
What tasks do you accomplish when you stay late? Of those who stayed late, they
spent an average of about 6.5 hours a week performing non-instructional tasks. While the
responses varied, the same few tasks were repeatedly mentioned and also included several tasks
not mentioned in the morning task list (Table 4.5). For the majority of those who stayed late,
they reported needing the time for “planning, grading, finding new resources” or “paperwork,
preparing lessons, reviewing student work” and “documenting, resource gathering, collaborating,
[and] communicating with parents.”
Several respondents provided significantly more detailed responses. One respondent
described creating lessons for the entire school and the need to use digital technologies to create
and share those lessons. The respondent also indicated needing significant time to complete
paperwork for state and professional accountabilities, as well as the significant time needed to
learn more about the lessons and requirements found in the curriculum. Another respondent
indicated needing to stay late to help students having difficulty in class, filling out paperwork for
various meetings, grading and recording those results, as well as preparing and planning for
following days (Table 4.7).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
96
Table 4.7
Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed Late
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Planning
Prepping
Grading
Emails
Data Analysis and/or Data Entry
Supplementing
Emails
Copying
Tutoring Students
Supervising Exams
Informal Meetings with Co-workers
Work Demands in the evenings, weekends, and over holidays. Of the 67 respondents,
over 89% worked from home during the evenings, weekends, and over holidays. They reported
an average of approximately 17 hours a month during these time periods completing these and
other non-instructional work tasks (Table 4.8). The tasks completed mirror those mentioned by
respondents in the previous out-of-contract work periods. Two respondents elaborated in more
detail on their experiences. These were typical among many of the other respondents.
I primarily work on my Chromebook creating lessons for our school steam [sic] program,
communicate with my boss, communicate with parent volunteers, communicate with
teachers, gather supplies, evaluate the effectiveness of what I am working on, revise, and
research new ideas.
I look through resources to find tools to help me teach to the standards since the reading
program we purchased is inadequate. I read books and research online teaching
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
97
techniques. I design problem solving activities to do in the classroom to help excite my
students to learn. I shop for tools to help me [sic] students with math, science, and social
studies. I make up folders and organizational tools to keep my students organized and
efficient. I grade my papers at home as well.
Table 4.8
Frequent Codes for Tasks Performed: Evenings, Weekends, and Holidays
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Planning
Grading
Supplementing
Preparing
Writing Curriculum
Contacting Parents
Data Entry
Emailing
IEPs
Informal Meetings with Co-workers
Differences in Responses Between School Type
In all cases, intensification can be seen in the workload and work tasks that teachers
perform outside of their contracted work time. They repeatedly report performing a number of
non-instructional tasks. Although current and former teachers from the three main school types
indicated similar lists of tasks, a few primary differences did become apparent between teachers
in schools funded publically (traditional and charter) versus teachers in private schools. First,
teachers in private schools were more likely to mention coaching, school activities, or student
pick-up/drop-off duties compared to their counterparts in public and charter schools who were
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
98
more likely to report activities such as grading, copying, or planning. Teachers in private
schools also worked the fewest hours outside of their contracted work time. Respondents from
charter schools reported working over 16 hours more per month than their counterparts at
traditional public schools and over 23 hours more than their private school counterparts. Further
analysis of these differences will be discussed in the following research questions and in more
detail in Chapter Five.
Research Question Two: Results
Research question two asks: do teachers perceive an impact from non-instructional work
tasks in their personal and work lives?
Quantitative Analysis
To answer this research question, several variables were examined which included an
analysis of 1) the time period worked outside of school; 2) the time periods worked prior to the
start and after the end of their contracted work times (most often at school); 3) whether teachers
felt they had time for their colleagues and; 4) whether teachers reported using their break and
lunch times to perform non-instructional tasks.
While some of this data overlaps with the analysis in research question one, it
demonstrates some of the difficulty in disentangling issues and perceptions related to
intensification and non-instructional workload. For example, in Table 4.2, 100% of current and
former teachers reported needing to work during at least one of the four time periods outside of
their contracted work time (arrive early, stay late, work over breaks and lunches, or work from
home during evenings, weekends, and holidays). A full 98.5% of teachers (66 of the 67)
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
99
reported needing to arrive early, stay late, or both to complete many of the tasks. Only one
teacher reported that they did not work during either of those two time periods.
The two time periods, arrive early and stay late, were combined to form a work-life
variable in order to conduct a statistical analysis. The 98.5% of the teachers who felt they
needed to spend time doing non-instructional work tasks either at home or the school site prior to
or after work, necessarily had to reduce the time available to spend with family, friends, or
pursuing other personal or professional interests. The difficulty disentangling these variables
based solely on quantitative data provides an opportunity for the qualitative data and individual
responses of teachers to demonstrate the specific impact that the work has on their personal and
work lives.
Hypothesis 2.1. Teachers will perceive a significant impact from non-instructional work
tasks on their personal and work lives.
The time data was used to conduct a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
analysis to assess the relationship, if any, of a teacher’s non-instructional workload and their
personal life. As expected, a significant positive correlation exists between the variables, r=.66,
n=67, p=.000 (Table 4.9). This finding indicates a moderate, positive correlation between
teachers’ perceptions of impact from non-instructional work tasks on their personal lives (Evans,
1996). Increases in a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional work tasks were
correlated with increases in their perception of that impact on their personal lives.
The time data above was further used to conduct a Pearson product-moment correlation
coefficient analysis to determine the relationship, if any, of a teacher’s non-instructional
workload and their work life. As expected, a significant positive correlation exists between the
two variables, r=.82, n=67, p=.000 (Table 4.9). This finding indicates a high, positive
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
100
correlation between a teacher’s perceived non-instructional workload and their work lives
(Evans, 1996). Increases in a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional work tasks
were correlated with increases in their perception of that impact on their work life.
Table 4.9
Correlations Between Non-Instructional Work Tasks and Personal and Work Life
Personal Life
a
Work Life
b
Total reported time - monthly estimate Pearson Correlation .66 .82
Sig. (1-tailed) .000 .000
N 67 67
Note.
a
Personal life variable defined as work during evenings, weekends, and holidays.
b
Work life variable defined as work prior
to and after contracted work time.
Non-instructional workload on personal and work life. As expected, teachers
perceived a moderate impact on their personal lives as the level of non-instructional tasks
increased, whereas they perceived a much stronger impact on their work life as those same non-
instructional work tasks increased. While these findings seem to conflict, two things may temper
the apparent conflict. Because the variables separated personal time (time at home in the
evenings, on weekends, and over holidays) from work time (time spent at the site prior to and
after the contracted work time), any increase in non-instructional work tasks that could not be
completed during time at the work site would have been accounted for in an increase in the
single personal time variable. Additional statistical analyses and research would need to be
performed to better disentangle the concepts to determine which tasks were performed at the
school site that could have been performed elsewhere and those work tasks that required the use
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
101
of school resources and needed to be completed on site but occurred outside of contracted work
hours.
Although the findings indicate that respondents did perceive an impact from non-
instructional work tasks on their work lives, data from the qualitative analysis suggests that the
connection may be more tangled. For example, 89.2% reported working during their breaks and
lunch periods. This variable was not included in the metavariable for work life because of the
statistical test used.
Time to be effective. One question presented to respondents asked whether they felt they
had enough time to complete all of the tasks needed to be an effective teacher. Nearly 80% of
respondents indicated that they did not feel they had enough time to complete the tasks needed to
be an effective teacher. In the open-ended responses, approximately 5% teachers offered a
qualified yes saying that while they felt they were effective teachers, they felt they could be
better teachers in the classroom during instructional time if their non-instructional workload were
not so high. By disaggregating these numbers by school types, significant differences appear.
Taking the opposite view, 13.7% of current and former traditional public school teachers and
28.6% of current and former charter school teachers reported that they felt they had enough time
(or qualified that they did) to complete the tasks required to be effective teachers, while a full
62.5% of private school teachers felt they had the time needed to be effective teachers. While
some respondents qualified that they were good (various other positive adjectives were also
used) teachers, they felt that they were not as effective or as good as they could be given the
constraints on their time imposed by the non-instructional workload and the lack of resources
needed to complete those tasks.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
102
These findings provide evidence on the impact of intensification on traditional public and
charter schools because intensification is a by-product of government control and accountability
measures placed on publically funded schools and employees, including school administration
and teachers. While teachers in traditional public schools and private schools indicated a closer
number of hours worked outside of the contracted work time, the hours that traditional public
and charter school teachers work are permeated with the weight of intensification.
Time for colleagues. An additional question asked respondents whether they felt they
had sufficient time for their colleagues. This provides an indication of teacher work life, whether
teachers can collaborate and work with their peers. It also provides a connection to
intensification’s persistent overload of work tasks which prohibit teachers from performing
normal functions, and the relatedness pillar of self-determination theory which posits that
humans seek connections with peers, both on the individual level and the broader organizational
level (Deci & Ryan, 2017). Respondents indicated three different answers: 25.4% said they had
sufficient time, 11.9% said they had sufficient time when qualified (using technology outside of
work, for example), and 62.7% said they did not have sufficient time (Figure 4.12).
Respondents who indicated a yes or a yes/no answer often qualified it by saying that the
time was not provided by the school. These teachers answered in the affirmative but said that
they made time by chatting when passing in the hallway, scheduling some time during the
weekend to talk and collaborate, or by texting. This is an impact on teacher work life because
teachers do not have the time during their contracted work day to complete tasks needed,
including meeting with peers. In addition to the work impact, by meeting with peers outside of
the contracted school time to work and collaborate, it necessarily increases the number of non-
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
103
instructional tasks completed on a teacher’s personal time and decreases the amount of personal
time that a teacher has available.
Finally, respondents frequently indicated that a direct impact of the non-instructional
work tasks and the time those tasks require directly relates to the quality of the work they are
able to do in the classroom with their students and the quality of feedback that they can provide
students.
Figure 4.12
Time for Colleagues
Note. n = 67
Qualitative Analysis
The research question looked at personal and work life together because the greatest
impact of non-instructional workload is the reduction of time available to teachers to do their
work during their work hours. The time spent performing those work tasks must come from
their personal time, whether teachers perform the extra work at home, or whether they perform
the tasks at the school before or after work hours, or over breaks and lunches.
25.4%
11.9% 62.7%
Time for Colleagues
Yes Some No
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
104
Time before and after. Some teachers shared concrete ways in which intensification and
non-instructional work tasks impacted their work lives. One teacher indicated needing to come
early to prepare daily because “we no longer have the afternoon prep time.” Another teacher
shared their experience by saying “I stay late every day. I think I have only left school at my
contracted end time twice in the 5.5 years I have been teaching.”
Some teachers indicated how the impact to their personal and work felt to them and
others in their lives. One teacher said, “I have gotten much better about this. In my initial years
of teaching, it would be like I had homework each night, about an hour or two.” Another teacher
responded by saying, “My husband complains that I work all the time…I maybe take two hours
out of my week to actually focus on my family and faith. The rest is primarily work-based, sad
to say.” In some responses, participants indicated an extreme tension that the workload imposes
on them. One respondent shared, “Before I became a mother, I was the teacher who would stay
two and three hours after work every day to create amazing lessons. Now that I am a mother, I
do not have this time. I feel guilty.” A current teacher with over 10 years of experience shared a
similar sentiment by saying, “Never is there enough time to be a really good teacher and also be
a really good parent to your own children.”
Time for colleagues. An additional question asked whether teachers felt they had
sufficient time to interact with colleagues, an indication of opportunities to satisfy the relatedness
pillar found within self-determination theory and an indication of their overall work
environment. Three answers were available to them in the quantitative variable that included,
yes, no, or both. The open-ended responses allowed respondents to provide more detail to
explain their answers. The ‘both’ response often indicated some indecision or showed some
difficulty on the teachers’ parts in disentangling the effects of intensification on their teaching
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
105
reality. For example, teachers would respond in the positive that they did have enough time with
their colleagues, but then follow that by saying it was non-existent or extremely limited and that
it was most often not provided by the school. An example is this respondent who answered the
question by saying, “Yes and no. During our common plan times, meetings or IEPs happen and
we are never together to discuss students.” The teacher indicated that without common time, they
had to interact with colleagues to discuss student needs or work on a common goal when they
passed in the halls or over their lunch breaks. Another respondent described her experience by
saying, “No, we no longer have common plan time so our contact is at down times during the
school day or via email.” Respondents also mentioned having to make time to collaborate,
discuss important student-related concerns, or do other things that arose because, in the words of
one teacher, “We had approximately 30 minutes for lunch but we didn’t have the same lunch as
any other teacher so there was very little time to “chat” about student concerns, share ideas, or
ask questions of each other.” Respondents often tried to make up for this lack of collaborative
and peer time outside of the school setting by meeting with each other for happy hours, meals
over the weekends, or by texting and emailing each other.
Time to be effective. One open-ended question asked whether respondents felt that they
had enough time in their day to complete all the tasks needed to be an effective teacher.
Approximately 77% of teachers indicated, often in very strongly worded responses, that they felt
they did not have the time needed to be effective teachers. One respondent indicated that she did
not have time to be effective saying “No. I work 12 hours a day and am constantly exhausted. I
spend all of my weekends lesson planning as well.” Another teacher indicated that he had time
to be effective but qualified it by saying “[a]s long as I use my time.”
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
106
Other teachers provided greater description about where their time was going and why
they felt they did not have the time they needed to be effective teachers:
We are constantly having “data” meetings, but I am not convinced my administrators
really know much about data. I am also not convinced that the data we have is all that
meaningful anyway. This all just adds to my non-instructional paperwork requirements.
No, absolutely not. Between the teaching and planning, the workload was already
extremely high. Adding to that all the administrative duties and grading, it was nearly, if
not entirely, impossible to manage anything resembling a work life balance.
If you broke down into a pie chart the amount of time teachers at my school spent on
non-instructional activities, it might come up to as much as 1/3 to 1/2 of their time.
Many teachers led clubs or coached sports. Any teacher with non-scantron [sic] grading
to do had a ton of grading to work on each night. Each teacher had required parent phone
calls before and after school duty.
As teachers, we are also required to hold parent conferences twice a year, yet a
reasonable amount of time is not provided for them. We must then hold conferences on
our own time, in order to complete meeting with the parents of oversized class
populations.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
107
The only paperwork that contributed to the success of my students is grading work in a
manner that provides meaningful feedback… All the other paperwork I am asked to
complete is a waste of time and prevents me from doing better for my students.
In almost every case, even among teachers who felt they had enough time, the respondents
indicated an impact from non-instructional work tasks on their personal and work lives. They
indicated a frustration between the demands of the job and the resources and time available to
meet those demands. Often, respondents indicated that they could reduce the impact of the non-
instructional workload by not completing certain tasks, but the outcome of that would mean
unprepared lessons, less creative lessons, a decrease in resources for the students, and other
similarly negative reductions in the ability of teachers to positively impact their students. The
chronic overload of non-instructional work tasks is seen as an impediment to achieving the
results that the current educational system is hoping for, a good return on the public’s investment
in the form of students that are meeting achievement goals.
Research Question Three: Results
Research question three asks: how do teachers perceive the impact of non-instructional
workload, if any, on their feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination?
Quantitative Analysis
Relationships between several variables were examined and included the Teacher Self-
Efficacy Scale, the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work scale, the amount of time and
the time periods that teachers worked outside of their contracts, whether teachers felt they had
autonomy in their work, and whether teachers felt they had enough time for colleagues.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
108
Hypothesis 3.1. Teachers will perceive a significant negative impact from non-
instructional workload tasks on their feelings of self-efficacy (Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale -
TSES) and self-determination (Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work-BPNSW:
Autonomy, Competence, Relatedness, and the global needs - ACR combined score).
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were computed to determine the
relationship between a teacher’s perception of the impact from their non-instructional work tasks
on their feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination.
Consistent with expectations:
Self-Efficacy and non-instructional workload. A significant, negative correlation exists
between a teacher’s perception of their non-instructional workload on their feelings of
self-efficacy (TSES), r=-.25, n=67, p=.041 (Table 4.10). Overall, a weak, negative
correlation exists between a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional work
tasks on their feelings of self-efficacy (TSES)(Evans, 1996). Increases in a teacher’s
perception of impact from non-instructional work tasks correlate with decreases in
perceived self-efficacy (TSES).
BPNSW –autonomy and non-instructional workload. A significant, negative correlation
exists between a teacher’s perception of their non-instructional workload on their feelings
of autonomy (self-determination), r=-.33, n=67, p=.006 (Table 4.10). Overall, a weak,
negative correlation exists between a teacher’s perception of impact from non-
instructional work tasks on their feelings of autonomy (self-determination)(Evans, 1996).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
109
Increases in a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional work tasks correlated
with decreases in perceived autonomy (self-determination).
BPNSW – competence and non-instructional workload. A significant, negative
correlation exists between a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional
workload on their feelings of competence (self-determination), r=-.23, n=67, p=.066
(Table 4.10). Overall, a weak, negative correlation exists between a teacher’s perception
of impact from non-instructional work tasks on their feelings of competence (self-
determination)(Evans, 1996). Increases in a teacher’s perception of impact from non-
instructional work tasks correlated with decreases in perceived competence (self-
determination).
BPNSW – global score and non-instructional workload. A significant, negative
correlation exists between a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional work
tasks on their global feelings of self-determination (ACR combined), r=-.29, n=67,
p=.019 (Table 4.10). Overall, a weak negative correlation exists between a teacher’s
perception of impact from their non-instructional work tasks on their global feelings of
self-determination (ACR combined) (Evans, 1996).
Contrary to expectations:
BPNSW – relatedness and non-instructional workload. No significant, negative
correlation exists between a teacher’s perception of impact from non-instructional work
tasks on their feelings of relatedness (self-determination), r=-.09, n=67, p=.478 (Table
4.10).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
110
To further explore the intensification variable’s and the non-instructional work variable’s
connections to self-efficacy and self-determination, two additional hypotheses were proposed.
Table 4.10
Correlations Between Non-Instructional Work Tasks and Self-Efficacy and Self-Determination
Autonomy Competence Relatedness ACR Combined TSES
Total reported time
– monthly estimate
Pearson
Correlation
-.33 -.23 -.09 -.29 -.25
Sig. (1-
tailed)
.006 .066 .478 .019 .041
N 67 67 67 67 67
Hypothesis 3.2. There will be a significant prediction of teachers’ self-efficacy by
intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
A multiple linear regression analysis was used to test if intensification and non-
instructional work tasks significantly predict teachers’ self-efficacy. The results of the
regression indicate the two predictors explain 36% of the variance (Adjusted R
2
=.36) (Table
4.11), F(2,64) = 19.78, p = 000) (Table 4.12). It was found that intensification significantly
predicted teachers’ self-efficacy (β = -1.26, p = .000), as did non-instructional work tasks (β =
.88, p = .000) (Table 4.13). The equation of the fitted regression line is ŷ = 38.39 -
0.13(intensification) + 0.12(non-instructional work tasks). For each one unit increase in
intensification, the average decrease in the mean of teachers’ self-efficacy is about 0.13 units
(Table 4.13). In addition, for each one unit increase in non-instructional work tasks,
the average increase in the mean of teachers’ self-efficacy is about 0.12 units (Table 4.13).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
111
Table 4.11
Variance Explained by Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks on Teachers’ Self-
efficacy
R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
.62 .38 .36 2.19
Table 4.12
Multiple Linear Regression of Teachers’ Self-efficacy by Intensification and Non-
Instructional Work Tasks
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 319.45 2 159.73 19.78 .000
Residual 516.73 64 8.07
Total 836.18 66
Table 4.13.
Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients of Teachers’ Self-efficacy by
Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
(Constant) 38.39 0.88 .00 43.3 .000
Intensification -.13 .02 -1.26 -5.75 .000
Total reported time – monthly estimate .12 .03 .88 4.0 .000
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
112
Hypothesis 3.3. There will be a significant prediction of teachers’ self-determination by
intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
A multiple linear regression analysis was used to test if intensification and non-
instructional work tasks significantly predicted teachers’ self-determination. The results of the
regression indicate the two predictors explain 96% of the variance (Adjusted R
2
=.96) (Table
4.14), F(2,64) = 775.71, p = 000) (Table 4.15). It was found that intensification significantly
predicted teachers’ self-determination (β = -2.09, p = .000) as did non-instructional work tasks (β
= 1.58, p = .000) (Table 4.16). The equation of the fitted regression line is ŷ = 134.97 -
0.87(intensification) + 0.88(non-instructional work tasks). For each one unit increase in
intensification, the average decrease in the mean of teachers’ self-determination is about 0.87
units (Table 4.16). In addition, for each one unit increase in non-instructional work tasks,
the average increase in the mean of teachers’ self-determination is about 0.88 units (Table 4.16).
Table 4.14.
Variance Explained by Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks on Teachers’ Self-
Determination
R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
.98 .96 .96 8.07
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
113
Table 4.15
Multiple Linear Regression of Teachers’ Self-Determination by Intensification and Non-
Instructional Work Tasks
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 12526.02 2 6263.01 775.71 .000
Residual 516.73 64 8.07
Total 13042.75 66
Table 4.16
Unstandardized and Standardized Coefficients of Teachers’ Self-Determination by
Intensification and Non-Instructional Work Tasks
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
(Constant) 134.97 .88 .00 153.68 .000
Intensification -.87 .03 -2.09 -37.67 .000
Total reported time – monthly
estimate
.88 .02 1.58 28.50 .000
Qualitative Analysis
Participant responses were coded, analyzed, and grouped by themes. Respondents
frequently described situations that had a direct connection to the constructs found in self-
efficacy and self-determination theories.
Self-efficacy – mastery. The quotes here show the tension between intensification’s non-
instructional workload on the teachers’ abilities to fully master their skills, skills needed to
perform the functions and duties of their job. Apple’s intensification theory posits that teachers
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
114
will find their days at home and work so filled with tasks that they will be less able to create
engaging lessons or develop additional skills needed to be effective teachers (Apple, 1986). In
their responses, teachers discussed how their time and training were significantly impacted (de-
skilling and lack of time) and, as a result, they reported being unable or feeling unprepared to
fully perform the functions of their jobs and engage their students in meaningful ways. Echoing
this sentiment, one respondent said that “With more time (or less useless paperwork taking up
the time I do have), I could plan more engaging activities, contact parents more often, and make
my classroom a more inviting space.” A former teacher shared similar opinions when they said,
“There were too many administrative demands. We were swamped with loads of paperwork that
had nothing to do with instruction.” In another case, a respondent shared an additional source of
the workload and why it took so much out-of-contract time to get ready:
I had kids in my class who were on Kinder levels, and some who were at college level.
There’s not a lot of training on how to differentiate like that. It takes a tremendous
amount of planning and manpower to pull off well.
Self-efficacy – competence. Themes connected to the impact of intensification and non-
instructional workload came into focus through teacher comments such as, “Students are passed
when they shouldn’t be. Students are in the same place every year and we can’t do anything.”
Apple’s theory on intensification describes the teacher’s frustration. The theory posits that
through the chronic work overload, the de-skilling, and the re-skilling teachers will be less able
to educate their students and provide the learning experience that they know their students
require to make needed progress (Apple, 1986). In their responses, teachers commented on their
inability to perform all the tasks required for them to competently do the job and make a
difference in the lives of their students, a desire that they have personally but which is also
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
115
mandated through the use of accountability measures and high-stakes testing by various
government authorities. Respondents shared several ways in which the workload impacted their
competence in the workplace.
I am intimidated by the responsibility of it all. There is a lot to handle in terms of
planning, organization, etc. I don’t feel entirely capable at this point. I don’t feel
confident that I know what I’m doing. This produces a lot of anxiety for me.
I found more of my time being dedicated to how we could help our students deal with
the stress of student life and the need for their sanity versus worrying about the
expectations that were placed on us from D.C. or from [our city education department.]
Every year I would start the school year with high hopes and thinking I could leave the
building 30-45 minutes after contract time. During the meetings before school started,
we would be given more things to put on our plate, things that can’t be done during the
instructional day so every year we stayed later and later. It’s rare for a teacher at my
school to be out the door before 5:30 and the parking lot is never empty by 7:30pm.
Self-determination – competence. The respondents often indicated a level of distress because
they lacked the ability to control their workloads and work environments in such a way that they
can ably perform the tasks of the job. One current teacher shared, “Our administrators always
come up with new things for us to teach. It’s so hard to fit everything in. Sometimes it feels like
we’re being set up to fail.” Teachers reported using personal time and time away from their
friends and family to complete the tasks needed to feel competent in their work realms. One
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
116
teacher echoed many of the others when she said, “I have to take work home and use my
weekends, which is time away from my family.”
Some teachers shared their frustrations with the timing of the district-mandated
curriculum and how they took control back to prepare lessons that would benefit their students:
We have a curriculum guideline which was updated 2 weeks before school began. After
a couple of weeks trying to follow it, we expressed our displeasure with it and basically
received the go-ahead to ignore the stupid thing.
Even when teachers were able to regain some control and use their expertise to create
engaging lessons for their students, their comments quickly returned to the demands on their
time and the additional ways in which they worked to help the students who were still struggling:
There was never enough time to complete everything that needed to be done. That is
why most of the teachers at my school showed up extra early in the mornings and stayed
so late. There were also no programs to help underprivileged students who were
struggling, so many teachers did free after-school help.
Self-determination – relatedness. In contrast to the lack of significant quantitative findings,
respondents frequently showed a desire for relatedness and often indicated how that time with
peers could enhance their abilities to perform the functions of the job. Combined with the
findings for research question two on the impact of non-instructional work tasks on a teacher’s
personal and work life, the quotes and the previous findings take on additional meaning. One
teacher expressed frustration at lack of time with peers because, “I’ve found that I’ve created
lessons that others have already created and thinking, why am I wasting my time doing this when
you’ve already done it?” Another teacher shared that for her it “would be helpful to have a
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
117
monthly planning meeting with colleagues.” She continued by saying, “We do not have co-
planning worked into our schedules, even with teachers who work together and co-teach classes.
Teachers often reflected on the lack of time to collaborate at the school site. Several
respondents described the meetings they do have to be a waste of time, time that could be used
for planning and prep which they ultimately have to do by arriving early, skipping breaks,
staying late, or taking the work home. A new teacher indicated her interest in time with peers
when she said:
I strongly wish we had time during staff meetings to plan with our departments. Our staff
meetings are generally wastes of time. As a newer teacher, I would like time to talk
to/seek advice from the veteran teachers who have taught my students in past years, but
we are rarely in the same room.
Self-determination – autonomy. The respondents showed how they perceive the impact of
the symptoms of intensification and the non-instructional workload byproduct. These symptoms
include having to teach lessons that follow pre-spaced and pre-defined standards-based
curriculum and the accompanying work tasks required to prepare and fit that curriculum to their
class contexts. Although the comments reflect both positive and negative sentiments, teachers
discussed how the byproducts of intensification created an impediment to their abilities to
exercise autonomy in not only the way they plan their lessons and classes but also the way in
which they are able to teach their students. One teacher shared, “I am limited in what I can do
and limited in the amount of time I can spend on topics in order to get through the entire
curriculum.” Another teacher described the tension saying, “My boss did give me space to
create original activities that supported the standards that would be taught. The problem was
more having the time to create anything original.” Several teachers echoed this teacher’s desire
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
118
to teach subjects that were not tested because “high-stakes testing made it very difficult to teach
kids to think rather than fill in the darn little circle.” Another teacher shared, “I really
appreciated teaching something that was an elective. I could do as I thought best.”
Research Question Four: Results
Research question four asks: what role does a loss of self-efficacy and self-determination,
if any, play in a teacher’s decision to continue in the teaching profession?
Quantitative Analysis
Relationships between several variables were examined including, the Teacher Self-
Efficacy Scale (TSES), the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work scale (BPNSW), and
data on current and former teachers.
Hypothesis 4.1. Loss of self-determination (BPNSW global score, and the autonomy,
competence, and relatedness sub-scores) will significantly correlate with a teacher’s decision to
remain in the teaching profession.
Point-biserial correlation coefficients were computed to determine the relationship
between a teacher’s work status (current or former teacher) and teacher self-efficacy (TSES),
self-determination (BPNSW - global needs score), and self-determination (BPNSW) autonomy,
competence, and relatedness sub-scores.
Consistent with expectations:
Self-efficacy and work status. A significant, negative correlation exists between a
teacher’s work status (current or former teacher) and their feelings of self-efficacy
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
119
(TSES), r=-.25, n=67, p=.046 (Table 4.17). Overall, a weak, negative correlation exists
between a teacher’s work status and their feelings of self-efficacy (TSES)(Evans, 1996).
Respondents with lower self-efficacy scores (TSES) were more likely to be former
teachers.
BPNSW – global score and work status. A significant, negative correlation exists
between a teacher’s work status (current or former teacher) and their feelings of self-
determination, r=-.37, n=67, p=.002 (Table 4.17). Overall, a weak, negative correlation
exists between a teacher’s work status on their feelings of self-determination (BPNSW -
global needs)(Evans, 1996). Respondents with lower self-determination scores (BPNSW
– global needs) were more likely to be former teachers.
BPNSW – autonomy and work status. A significant, negative correlation exists between
a teacher’s work status (current or former teacher) and their feelings of autonomy (self-
determination), r=-.42, n=67, p=.0004 (Table 4.17). Overall, a weak, negative
correlation exists between a teacher’s work status and their feelings of autonomy (self-
determination)(Evans, 1996). Respondents with lower autonomy sub-scores (self-
determination) were more likely to be former teachers.
BPNSW – competence and work status. A significant, negative correlation exists
between a teacher’s work status (current or former teacher) and their feelings of
competence (self-determination), r=-.27, n=67, p=.029 (Table 4.17). Overall, a weak
negative correlation exists between a teacher’s work status and their feelings of
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
120
competence (self-determination)(Evans, 1996). Respondents with lower competence
sub-scores (self-determination) were more likely to be former teachers.
Contrary to expectations:
BPNSW – relatedness and work status. No significant correlation exists between a
teacher’s work status and their feelings of relatedness (self-determination), r=-.14, n=67,
p=.248 (Table 4.17).
Table 4.17
Correlations Between Work Status and Self-Efficacy and Self-Determination
Autonomy Competence Relatedness
ACR
Combined
TSES
Current or
Former
Teacher
Pearson
Correlation
-.42 -.27 -.14 -.37 -.25
Sig. (1-
tailed)
.0004 .027 .278 .002 .046
N 67 67 67 67 67
Significance of self-efficacy and self-determination. The significance of the findings
above highlight that both self-efficacy (TSES) and self-determination global needs (BPNSW), as
well as the self-determination autonomy and competence sub-scores, have significant
associations with a teacher’s decision to remain in or leave the teaching profession. Respondents
with higher scores were more likely to be current teachers while those with lower scores were
more likely to be former teachers. These findings closely mirror the associations found in
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
121
Hypothesis 3.1 between the non-instructional workload and self-efficacy, self-determination
global needs score, and the BPNSW autonomy and competence sub-scores.
Self-determination - relatedness and work status. The lack of statistical finding
between the self-determination relatedness sub-score and work status mirrors the lack of findings
in previous quantitative analyses. This finding seems to conflict with the qualitative analysis and
may indicate several things. First, it may indicate that the variable that looks at time for
colleagues and the related open-ended response does not adequately represent a respondent’s
perception of relatedness. Second, except for teacher mentoring programs mentioned by some
charter school respondents, most teachers work alone in their classrooms and tend to seek out
connections with other colleagues to plan parallel lessons or as part of the broader organizational
context. Third, when teachers do need to work together to achieve goals such as parallel lessons
or to run a school event, they may perceive that peer interaction in a way that has more
significant connections to their feelings of autonomy and competence.
Qualitative Analysis
To better understand the reasons that teachers chose the teaching profession and to
provide greater context for answering Research Question 4, respondents were asked to provide
their reasons for choosing teaching as a profession (Table 4.18), what about teaching reaffirmed
that decision (Table 4.19), and what about the teaching experience causes/caused them to re-
evaluate their decision (Table 4.20).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
122
Table 4.18
Frequent Codes for Reasons for Becoming a Teacher
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Make a difference
Sharing
Help others
Inspire passion
“I like my (insert subject)”
Follow in my mentor’s/parent’s footsteps
Give opportunity
Create a safe place for students (from challenging
homes and/or communities)
Table 4.19
Frequent Codes for Aspects of Teaching that Re-Affirm Teaching as a Career
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Seeing growth
Seeing the “lightbulb” go off
Teacher/Student Relationship
Autonomy compared to office job
Hearing from former teachers
Learning new teaching methods
Being able to create
Positive comments from parents
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
123
Table 4.20
Frequent Codes for Aspects of Teaching that Cause Teachers to Re-Evaluate Teaching as a
Career
Most Common Codes Less Common Codes
Non-instructional work tasks
Student needs (special education
paperwork specifically)
Hours spent outside of school on work
tasks (grading, paperwork)
Assessments/High-stakes testing (and the
hours required to prepare and evaluate)
Data requirements
Monotony (students make progress and leave, new
students with the same needs arrive in August)
Lack of personal learning and growth
opportunities
Parents
Inappropriate demands on students (expecting too
much in too little time) and being judged on that
Former teachers. Though many of the mental and logistical strains on teachers are
evident in previous quotes, former teachers demonstrated the impact of intensification in their
lives and work choices. The teachers describe the tension between the symptoms of
intensification and the demands of the job, much of which is non-instructional, and the resulting
impact on their self-efficacy and self-determination. One former teacher shared why she left the
classroom saying, “There were too many administrative demands. We were swamped with loads
of paperwork that had nothing to do with instruction.” Another former teacher repeated the
sentiment by saying, “The focus was on test scores and not on individual student success. My
accountability was test scores and my teaching was supposed to focus on state test objectives.”
The idea that teachers were supposed to work in the same way, like a factory machine, came up
several times as well. One former teacher provided an example of this when she said, “We lost
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
124
the ability to interject our own personality and strengths into planning classroom projects,
activities, etc. This change evolved over several years and we felt like we were human robots.”
Other former teachers offered their perspectives on the educational system and how
intensification and the non-instructional workload impacted their self-efficacy and self-
determination.
Teachers are expected to be licensed with degrees, recertify frequently, continue
professional development, and engage in instructional and non-instructional tasks while
being experts in the field. For all that teachers do to shape the future, they have not been
able to reshape the way that society views their importance and teachers are certainly not
valued financially.
The school where I worked at controlled what we taught and how we taught. For
example, the language arts curriculum was scripted and had many protocols and wasn’t
autonomy supportive. Not much leeway was given for teachers, especially with
instructional coaches and principals policing teachers’ every move.
I definitely didn’t have enough time during the day to appropriately plan… I was
expected to have all the content mastered and ready to teach while also providing my
case load of special education students appropriate accommodations and activities to
reach their IEP goals.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
125
It demanded that I ignore my kids’ needs and “teach to the test” so that MAYBE they
wouldn’t cry when it was put in front of them. We taught them to “play the game” more
than we were able to teach them real, tangible skills that would help them in real life.
In kindergarten, much time used to be used on social skills (sharing, learning to take
turns, etc.) and it became all academic and those things were put aside in favor of making
them master skills and concepts that they were not developmentally ready for. Students
became data generators and teachers became data collectors.
I always feel like we are teaching less and less and assessing more and more. We need
more time to teach our students. If you are always measuring a flower and not taking
time to give it water and love then your flower is not going to grow.
An Example of Intensification and Non-Instructional Workload in Action
To better illustrate the effect that the intensification process has on the experience of
teachers, one additional story is provided that embodies the experience of teachers in an
education system profoundly influenced by intensification. This particular respondent began the
study as a current teacher but ended the study as a former teacher. The experience of this
individual as a new teacher illustrates the extreme tension that teachers experience between their
reasons for becoming teachers in a system increasingly driven by accountability measures and
testing. It highlights the gaps in a teacher’s ability to self-endorse those job demands, to feel
efficacious in their work, and ultimately to perform the tasks needed to meet the mandated
standards and the needs of their students. This in-depth look at a single individual exemplifies
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
126
the findings and experiences of the other study respondents and provides a glimpse at the real
impact and struggle faced by a teacher at both the personal and work levels.
This teacher started as an excited new teacher in September 2017, ready to use her skills
and abilities to make a difference in the school and the lives of students. She entered teaching
using one of the numerous alternate routes to credentialing. She joined an established charter
system and had expressed many of the same comments that frequently recur in the findings
related to reasons for choosing a teaching career, the aspects that reaffirmed her decision to
choose teaching, and the aspects that caused her to re-evaluate her decision just months into the
job. In a follow-up to her survey, she was asked to elaborate on some of the challenges she
experienced related to job demands, non-instructional workload, and the impact those things had
on her personal and work life:
The hours spent in the classroom and directly supervising kids basically constituted an 8-
hour job. The added planning and administrative tasks were significant enough to require
far more time than my given planning period. In fact, planning periods were often taken
up by meetings or filling in for other teachers, meaning that planning and grading had to
be left until after school. It was taken for granted that teachers would be working on
these tasks each day after school and on weekends. Many teachers, myself included,
dedicated practically every Sunday to planning. My decision to leave the classroom was
largely due to the time-consuming nature of these tasks, combined with the school’s
attitude that this was a reasonable amount of work for a teacher to be doing. While I
agree that teaching is often more than a full-time job, the amount of time required at my
school didn’t allow for teachers having any sort of life outside their jobs (Teacher,
personal communication, January 30, 2018).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
127
Her response reinforces the findings from the first two research questions focusing on the
impact of non-instructional workload and the impact of non-instructional work tasks on her
personal and work life. Teachers often enter the job knowing that they will put in additional
hours, but she expresses frustration in the ways in which the administration added to the heavy
workload by re-purposing provided time that was already too short for teachers to accomplish the
required tasks. She was asked to provide a couple of examples related to her work day and the
impacts that her schedule had on her personal and work life:
In order to be a successful teacher, I believe a good deal of both lesson prep and analysis
time is required. Furthermore, participation in other administrative tasks such as parent
communication, special education meetings, morning and afternoon duty, and afterschool
clubs or activities were generally required by my school. Adding these tasks to planning
lessons, executing them, and analyzing the success of those lessons made for an
incredible amount of work and time commitment. While teaching, I had very little time
to spend on anything other than work. I definitely had very little time to spend with
family and friends. For example, my parents came to visit over a long weekend. All I
could think beforehand was, “When am I going to have time to work?” As another
example, when I started teaching I moved to a new city. When I left, I didn’t feel like I
knew anyone outside of work well enough to really say goodbye; I hadn’t had time to
develop any meaningful friendships while I was working (Teacher, personal
communication, January 30, 2018).
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
128
This teacher, like many of the others, indicated that an inordinate amount of time was
spent on tasks like copying and grading; she provided some context on what that looked like and
the source of the non-instructional tasks:
The reading curriculum used a workbook, but not until about 1.5 months into the year.
Prior to that, we basically focused on expository texts to help the kids with what would
be their expository essay on the standardized writing exam in the spring. The selection of
these texts was up to the teacher, meaning I had to find, prep, print, and copy them for
each class.
The writing curriculum was well-designed, but again, very time-consuming to
prep and grade. We didn’t use the workbook for this, instead focusing on the [district-
created] materials that were organized into “writing workshops." These all had to be
printed and prepped by the teacher (Teacher, personal communication, January 30,
2018).
Many of the teachers surveyed mentioned the accompanying paperwork and workload
that comes with serving students with special needs. While none of the teachers reported
negative feelings towards students with special needs, they did report difficulty completing the
additional tasks required to serve those students and provide appropriate accommodation so that
they could succeed and thrive in class as well. This teacher was no different and provided her
view of the challenge of pre-packed curriculum for the various needs of her students:
The materials fit most of the students, but my school had a very high number of special
education students, many of whom were unable to follow along with the curriculum -
particularly the writing - at the same speed. There was a large ability gap between the
most and least academically-inclined students. This made it more difficult to take
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
129
advantage of the curriculum that the district had provided and required substantial
scaffolding (Teacher, personal communication, January 30, 2018).
The three quotes related to curriculum challenges reflect the responses from other
teachers, namely that this teacher found value in the provided curriculum and did not see it as an
attack on her autonomy in the class as proposed by Apple’s intensification thesis. Instead she
reflects on concepts of self-efficacy and two of self-determination’s pillars, autonomy and
competence, when describing her ability to choose certain materials to provide the students, in
the creation of material for her students, the pre-written but digital only district-provided
materials, the differentiation required, and the accompanying work and non-instructional work
tasks needed to engage students at every ability level in her classroom. In those examples, she
indicates a willingness to do the work and acceptance or self-endorsement of the needs required
to serve her students. When asked if testing had any impact on her non-instructional workload,
she shared how, “The most important and frequent assessments were "bi-weekly" tests that
needed to be graded and analyzed,” continuing to say:
While this was a good practice in terms of analyzing the efficacy of school curriculum
and teacher delivery, the frequency of these tests and the work and time required to
administer them was considerable. Because I had 7th grade English, the kids would be
taking both a standardized reading test and a standardized writing test in the spring. As
such, these bi-weekly tests were actually weekly (one week reading, the next writing).
Each week, one day would be dedicated to testing. Part of another class would be
dedicated to sharing the results with the kids, reducing the amount of time actually spent
teaching. Reading tests were multiple choice, but writing tests had a written component
that needed to be graded and entered within one week (between one paragraph and a full
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
130
essay). My supervisor later required that each time we had a writing test, an individual
writing conference had to happen with each student to go over their results. These
conferences were outside normal class time, meaning during prep periods, before, or after
school. Furthermore, teachers were responsible for prepping all the testing materials,
resulting in a considerable amount of time photocopying tests and sorting scantrons [sic]
so that the kids who tested in small group settings could be efficiently pulled from class
on test day. …. I found that, while useful in gathering data, these tests led to a
considerable reduction in teaching time, not to mention considerable time spent grading
the written components (Teacher, personal communication, January 30, 2018).
While much of her comment focuses on the impact that the testing had on her ability to
actually teach her students and the immense impact on instructional time that those tests had, she
also describes in detail a tremendous number of non-instructional tasks that had to be completed
in order to prepare for, perform, and analyze the testing. On top of the non-instructional tasks
described previously such as grading and copying, she also describes being instructed to use
preparation time to have one-on-one conferences with each student, reducing the amount of time
during her work day to perform the regular non-instructional tasks needed. She also mentions an
administrative requirement to input the contents of each student’s essay into a system for
analysis.
In the case of this teacher, much of what she describes revolves around a chronic work
overload and the inability to take a break, even when she was home. She arrived early to
perform the non-instructional tasks required to conduct classes. Her lunches and breaks were
used for copying, sorting, and other tasks. Her scheduled preparation times were re-purposed by
the administration for student conferences to review results of high-stakes tests or practice tests.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
131
She stayed late to prepare Scantrons and enter student essays and grades into data analysis
software. Even when she left the school, she still had grading, preparation, planning,
supplementing, and various other non-instructional tasks to accomplish before sleeping and
returning to work the next day. This life carried over into her weekends as well, impacting the
very limited time she had left for visiting family or for developing friendships. She described the
administration’s view on this chronic work overload put on teachers by saying, “The school I
worked at acknowledged that the job was time-consuming, however they almost took pride in the
difficulty it presented for teachers, as if choosing to spend time at work instead of with family
and friends was an admirable quality.”
A follow-up email was sent after this teacher left her position at the school where she had
been working. The response provided additional insight into her reasons for leaving the school
and some insight into the impact that the non-instructional workload specifically had on her
decision to leave the classroom:
My biggest reason for leaving was a lack of work-life balance. You might say that non-
instructional tasks led to a lot of issues in instruction as well. As more and more of my
time was spent grading, at meetings, copying, or dealing with parents, I found less and
less time to reflect on how to improve classroom management or lesson plans. I suppose
I could say that 75% of my reason for leaving would be directly or indirectly related to
my non-instructional workload (Teacher, personal communication, January 30, 2018).
The response provides a look at not only the challenges that accomplishing the many
work tasks posed for her work life, but also the direct impact that administrative data demands
had on the flow of her work, the way it increased the amount and intensity of her non-
instructional work tasks at the school site and later at home, and finally the attitude of the
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
132
administration knowingly creating a work environment in which they made clear the fact that not
just extra time was expected but sacrificing personal life as well. Her comment also connects to
self-efficacy and self-determination when she discusses her challenges with instruction in the
classroom and her inability to find time to reflect on her performance and improve.
Ultimately, after one semester, this teacher decided to quit the teaching profession. This
is not a teacher who was afraid to work or afraid of a challenge. This was not a teacher who did
not care for her students. This teacher did everything that governments, districts, schools, and
parents should want a teacher to do. When asked whether she would have made the same
decision if she had a degree in education and a teaching credential rather than utilizing an
alternate pathway to teaching, she responded that she would have likely made a move out of the
classroom and into administration or one of the other non-teaching education positions available.
Perhaps this teacher was idealistic, and the gap between her vision of teaching and the
reality of teaching was too great. What seems more likely given what this teacher shared, the
responses of the other study participants, and the quantitative findings is that she entered an
educational system hoping to make a difference in the lives of students but found so much testing
of subjects that she had no time to actually teach the subject content. She found her workday
used for things other than teaching and planning and preparing. She found a job with so many
non-instructional tasks, tasks that piled up and were never finished either at work or home, that
she had no personal time left to reflect on how to improve and to disconnect long enough to
recharge mentally. At the end of the semester, had she stayed on to teach, she would have had a
performance review to discuss her student’s progress on the assessments, assessments and data
analysis that would determine whether she would be kept as a teacher or thanked for her service
and released from the school. Perhaps the most poignant example she provided of the effect that
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
133
intensification and the non-instructional workload had on her self-efficacy and self-determination
can be summed up in one of her last comments, “I definitely felt that I was drowning most of the
time.”
Summary
Both the quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis highlight a growing tension
between the time provided to perform the functions of teaching and the non-instructional work
tasks that encroach on individual teachers’ personal and work lives. Teacher comments show
they are required to generate more data, are losing or have no planning and collaboration time,
and are feeling an increasing sense of loss in their abilities to make an impact on the lives of
students that they know would be possible otherwise. This stands in stark contrast to the reasons
why the majority of respondents chose careers as educators. The four most common codes noted
in teacher responses on reasons for choosing teaching were to make a difference in a child’s life,
share their love and knowledge of a subject with students, to help others learn the skills needed
to interact with the world and succeed, and to inspire a passion and love for learning in students.
These four codes were repeatedly found throughout the responses. Instead of feeling the self-
efficacy and self-determination needed to satisfy those personal goals, respondents mentioned
the lack of time to perform an increasing number of tasks, admittedly tasks related to instruction,
but tasks which cannot be done during their work time and which take away from their ability to
create meaningful learning opportunities for their students.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
134
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
This study explored the perceptions of intensification’s impact on teacher’s non-
instructional workload and the concomitant connections to their self-efficacy and self-
determination. The primary researcher did not word the initial and more general questions in
such a way that forced respondents to make connections between their experiences and non-
instructional workload. Instead, the study design attempted to provide opportunities for current
and former teachers to speak openly and honestly about their experiences before asking more
specific questions. If teachers felt that non-instructional workload was a concern, it would be
evident in their responses and those responses would provide insight into whether those non-
instructional work tasks have a connection to their self-efficacy and self-determination. In the
case of this study, respondents did discuss those very issues. To better understand the findings, it
will be helpful to provide a frame for the discussion.
Reasons for Teaching
In case after case, respondents provided the same handful of reasons for teaching. They
want to share knowledge with students, to help and inspire their growth and development and,
ultimately, develop students who are ready with the skills they need to succeed in the world, both
academically and socially. Teachers repeatedly shared that seeing the spark of interest in a
student, seeing the growth of students over time, and hearing how they had changed the lives of
others re-affirmed their decision to enter the profession.
The lurking challenge to teachers here is not just difficulties with leadership or class
management problems but rather a structure that has developed and been sustained over the last
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
135
40-plus years that challenges, at the very core, the reasons why teachers entered the profession in
the first place.
The Challenges
When teachers were asked about the aspects of teaching that caused them to re-evaluate
their decisions to continue in the teaching profession, they mentioned the same handful of things
repeatedly. They mentioned the non-instructional work tasks (such as grading, prepping and
planning), the significant negative impact on time for friends and family those tasks require, the
amount of paperwork and data generation needed, and the disconnect between the data collection
and assessments with the actual needs of the students in their classrooms.
Michael W. Apple’s seminal work on intensification posited that the increase in the use
of neo-liberal economic policy levers and management techniques would change the ability of
teachers to perform the jobs they were ostensibly hired to do, teach students (Apple, 1986). He
argued that intensification would be visible in decreased autonomy for teachers in the way that
they teach, by reducing the amount of time they have to interact with their families and
colleagues, by reducing their ability to grow and engage professionally in their fields (de-
skilling), by packaging curriculum into easily measured chunks that students need to master, and
by increasing the number of jobs they need to do (re-skilling) without the training or time to
perform the jobs.
The respondents repeatedly mentioned increases in the amount of work required and the
need to use personal time to accomplish even the most basic aspects of the job. One teacher said
that it takes about two hours to create a good lesson plan for a one-hour class for which her
school did not have time provided in their work schedules. Other teachers reported that even if
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
136
they had a planning period in their week or school day, that time was most often taken up by
meeting with students, parents, administrators, or to complete other non-instructional work tasks
(most required and some not). States and districts expect that teachers arrive prepared and ready
to teach the students, but do not provide the time needed for teachers to be able to do their jobs
effectively. This system increasingly holds the individual teacher accountable through data
collection and testing, as well as the teachers collectively at the school level.
The Question of Curriculum
Apple (1986) argued that pre-packaged curriculum was one of the leading stressors on
the autonomy of teachers and impacted the way they would be to do their jobs. In most cases,
the respondents seemed to be at ease with the curriculum finding it a useful guide through
changing standards; most did not mind the testing necessarily either when it was connected to
relevant skills and other required components of gauging a student’s progress. The tension arose
mostly from the lack of time to fit the curriculum to their students, the amount of time and non-
instructional work tasks it required to get those lessons in front of students, and the amount of
time it took to get the required components prepared and evaluated.
Teacher after teacher commented on grading, planning, and prepping (photocopies, data
entry…). To an outsider or a perhaps a non-teacher, one would think that the majority of a
teacher’s job falls into one of those three task areas. One area where Apple’s intensification
thesis lacked foresight is in the extent to which the pre-packed curriculums structure content in a
way that teachers find valuable. What remains of those same pre-packaged curriculum products
is that they do not reduce the intensity of the non-instructional tasks relating to grading,
planning, and prepping; they make it worse.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
137
In a follow-up book to Teacher’s & Texts, Apple (2000) acknowledges a more nuanced
understanding of intensification, standards-based curriculums, and the resulting non-instructional
workload on teachers. He notes that teachers do not necessarily passively receive the top-down
mandates and strategies of those in administration or higher, but rather they seek to continue to
retain their autonomy through various means. Indeed, teachers made comments relating to this
form of resistance, focusing on life skills or creating a safe place, regardless of what the
standards from the state or Washington D.C. require they teach that day. Apple acknowledged
that teachers might even be part of the curriculum selection or writing processes and have some
ownership over the curriculum used in their classrooms. Apple, however, still maintains that the
pre-specified objectives and competencies that students need to master rely on a substantial
amount of worksheet material and testing that must be prepared, graded, and evaluated. This
associated workload, even when teachers do have buy-in to the curriculum, still drowns them
under required paperwork needed to satisfy accountability and progress measures (Apple, 2000).
Additionally, Apple saw technology in education more abstractly; it was a tool being
forced on schools so that businesses could have trained, computer-literate employees when
students graduated. This technology was a form of teacher de-skilling because teachers were not
computer consultants or computer experts and instead had to rely on outside training and experts
to fully incorporate technology into their work lives and their classrooms. While some may still
accept those criticisms of technology as true, Apple and many others could not have seen the
ways in which physical technology devices have shrunk in size and become such an integral part
of people’s personal and work lives. While teachers bemoaned the fact that their preparation and
collaboration times were cut, removed, and used for other purposes, technology provided
teachers with ways to collaborate with their colleagues through emails, texts, and other digital
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
138
sharing communities. Technology has introduced challenges, but it has also provided ways in
which teachers can come together and share resources. This may also explain, in part, the lack of
findings connected to self-determination’s pillar of relatedness.
Connections to Theory
What Apple outlined as the symptoms of intensification aligned with many of the
theoretical underpinnings of self-efficacy theory and self-determination theory. Specifically, the
ways in which the non-instructional work tasks that grow as a result of intensification, hit
directly at the core of self-efficacy and self-determination. Teachers repeatedly talked about
their experiences and the impact that those experiences had on their perceptions of self-efficacy
and self-determination.
Self-Efficacy
Bandura argued that the perceptions that people hold of their self-efficacy have a
functional purpose in that they encourage people to engage in and continue to perform certain
tasks (Bandura, 1997). Intensification has the potential to disrupt the efficacy belief of the
individual and create a gap between that belief and that individual’s actions. With continued
levels of heavy workloads and a mismatch between the resources available to meet those
demands, teachers are at risk for increased feelings of inefficacy, which can lead to burnout,
other health challenges (stress, anxiety, substance abuse), and attrition.
Consider the statements in Chapter Four by current and former teachers on the non-
instructional workload and how it impacted their ability to feel competent in the performance of
their jobs. Also consider their quotes on how that same workload, as intensification predicts,
impedes their ability to effectively master their areas of expertise through a process of de-skilling
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
139
and re-skilling. Research already shows that self-efficacy levels have a connection to teacher
burnout, turnover, and attrition. In this study, the qualitative reports indicate that intensification
is a factor that negatively impacts teacher self-efficacy. The quantitative data also show multiple
significant correlations with non-instructional workload and perceived self-efficacy.
Self-Determination
Significant overlap exists between self-efficacy theory and self-determination theory.
Quantitative correlations were much stronger when examining possible connections between
non-instructional work tasks and perceived self-determination. Part of the strength in the
findings for self-determination may relate to the way that it seeks to explore the multiple facets
of human motivation, not just aspects related to efficacy. While Bandura’s theory on self-
efficacy looked at human action through the lens of self-concept acquired through experiences in
the social world, self-efficacy theory partially overlaps with self-determination theory’s
competence pillar and dismisses autonomy and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000, 2017).
Throughout the study, teachers mentioned perceived impacts to their competence,
relatedness, and autonomy, the pillars of self-determination which must be satisfied for humans
to thrive (Deci & Ryan, 2017). Teachers repeatedly referenced issues related to competence
(self-efficacy), and their need and ability to work effectively in both the performance of their job
requirements. They also referenced the constant stress and anxiety that accompanies challenges
in successfully performing those tasks given the resources and time available.
Relatedness is another pillar of self-determination and relates to the ability of an
individual to feel socially connected, whether they feel they belong to a particular group, whether
that group cares for them, and whether the individual feels that they can contribute to the broader
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
140
social organization (Deci & Ryan, 2017). Throughout the study, teachers repeatedly commented
on the lack of opportunities to meet and collaborate with their peers. They mentioned their
inability to share resources or work together to plan for common school-wide or grade-wide
goals. Some respondents shared that they desired to collaborate and connect with their peers and
felt a sense of sadness or loss when they were unable to do so. With a lack of time available and
a frequent re-purposing of collaborative planning time for other administrative goals, teachers
moved their communications to the hallways, break periods, and also to evenings and weekends
to co-plan outside of their workplaces by phone, email, and text.
Finally, respondents commented on self-determination’s pillar of autonomy, their ability
to self-regulate their actions in a way that led to the successful completion of outcomes. Ryan
and Deci argue that this autonomy does not mean independence in every aspect of performing
the job but instead how voluntary the teachers’ actions are within their work context, whether
teachers can self-endorse the needed behaviors, and whether those behaviors align with their
interests and values. Teachers described in detail their reasons for choosing the teaching
profession and also described in detail the impact that non-instructional work tasks have on their
perception of autonomy. They repeatedly mention the conflicts that the non-instructional work
tasks and administrative demands have on their ability to satisfy their intrinsic values and goals
as teachers and their ability to reach those goals (Deci & Ryan, 2017).
Traditional Public, Charter, and Private Schools
The purpose of this study was not to explore differences in public and private education,
but to better understand how intensification impacts teachers and increases their workloads in
various K-12 educational settings. While teachers fell into three main types of schools,
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
141
traditional public, charter, or private schools, they struggled with the same type of workload.
Significant differences emerged, however, and strengthen the theorized effects of intensification
on teachers and their workload, especially in charter and traditional public schools. In most
cases, the tone of private school teachers was more subdued; their responses did not have the
same intensity that the researcher sensed and saw in the responses from traditional public and
charter teachers. Private school teachers still experienced things similar to intensification, but
they differed in substantial ways. Rather than preparing for high-stakes accountability measures,
they were more likely to be coaching a sport or performing some other function related to school
activities. They tended to work fewer hours and also scored slightly higher on their self-efficacy
and self-determination scale scores compared to their colleagues in publically funded and
accountable schools.
Key Findings
In this section, key findings will be presented that relate to the following four research
questions which guided this study. The four research questions and their supporting hypotheses
are:
1) How do teachers perceive intensification’s role on their non-instructional workload?
Hypothesis 1.1) Teachers will perceive a significant impact from intensification on
their non-instructional workload.
2) Do teachers perceive an impact from non-instructional work tasks in their personal
and work lives?
Hypothesis 2.1) Teachers will perceive a significant impact from non-instructional
work tasks on their personal and work lives.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
142
3) How do teachers perceive the impact of non-instructional workload, if any, on their
feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination?
Hypothesis 3.1) Teachers will perceive a significant negative impact from non-
instructional workload tasks on their feelings of self-efficacy (Teacher Self-
Efficacy Scale – TSES) and self-determination (Basic Psychological Need
Satisfaction at Work-BPNSW: Autonomy, Competence, Relatedness, and the
global needs – ACR combined score.)
Hypothesis 3.2) There will be a significant prediction in teachers’ self-efficacy by
intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
Hypothesis 3.3) There will be a significant prediction in teachers’ self-
determination by intensification and non-instructional work tasks.
4) What role does a loss of self-efficacy and self-determination, if any, play in a
teacher’s decision to continue in the teaching profession?
Hypothesis 4.1) Loss of self-determination (BPNSW global score, and the
autonomy, competence, and relatedness sub-scores) will significantly correlate
with a teacher’s decision to remain in the teaching profession.
Research Question 1
The goal of the first question was to explore how teachers perceive intensification’s non-
instructional workload. The data indicated that, yes, teachers perceive a significant impact from
intensification on their non-instructional workload in the form of significant numbers of tasks
and significant amounts of time required to complete those tasks.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
143
Intensification’s role in non-instructional workload. Teachers perceive an impact in
their non-instructional workload. They perceive a large part of this impact by the number of
hours they work outside of contract time, and the time periods they need to work before school
begins, during breaks and lunch, staying late after school, and during evenings, weekends and
holidays. Differences were apparent when the data were examined more closely. The data
showed that teachers from charter schools reported working 16 hours more per month and 23.2
hours more per month than their counterparts at traditional public and private schools
respectively. This stark difference in reported hours worked may indicate not just issues related
to intensification of non-instructional workload that is imposed by various levels of government
entities but the additional layer of data requirements placed on teachers by administrators within
charter systems that need to justify their existence and the waiving of certain rules and
regulations that they enjoy from being part of but outside the traditional school system. This
structure puts an additional layer of intensification-like demands on teachers.
Additional findings showed that teachers performed a variety of tasks consisting of
significant numbers of non-instructional work tasks. Teachers reported spending significant
hours outside of their contracted time preparing lessons, planning and supplementing their
lessons, copying, filing paperwork, grading and evaluating student work, attending planned and
impromptu meetings, sending emails to parents and colleagues, and performing significant levels
of data entry and data analysis. Many of the non-instructional work tasks that lead to sustained
high levels of outside work hours are also repetitive tasks, many of which could benefit from the
addition of an administrative aide, a repeated request by teachers in their responses, or more
effective technology solutions that make the task processes more efficient. The level of this
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
144
outside workload suggests that a disconnect exists between those who are implementing work
requirements and those who are required to perform the job.
Research Question 2
The goal of the second research question was to explore the connections between
intensification’s non-instructional workload and the impact that teachers perceive from that
workload on their personal and work lives. The data indicate that yes, teachers perceive an
impact from intensification’s non-instructional workload on their personal and work lives.
Non-instructional workload in personal and work lives. The data indicate that the
hours spent arriving to work early, staying late, and working from home directly impact the
number of hours teachers have to spend with their family and friends. Teachers repeatedly
referenced long hours away from their families and challenges in managing their work/life
balance. They often attributed the difficulty to the weight of the non-instructional workload.
Many teachers commented on the tension between completing the tasks that districts,
administrators, and the job demand and the amount of personal time they must give up to
accomplish those things. Many teachers seemed resigned to the fact saying that it was just part
of the job.
On the work side, the impact of intensification’s non-instructional workload can be seen
in the use of contracted and required break and lunch times being used for work purposes. This
workload impacts the work life of teachers because teachers performed work tasks instead of
taking the mental breaks that are important to positive mental health. Teachers reported that the
lack of planning and preparation time meant that they had to do the non-instructional work tasks
over their breaks and at home on their personal time. Additionally, many tasks such as working
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
145
with students or collaborating with peers pushed into what little preparation time was available
or into the teacher’s break and lunch periods.
Responses from teachers included several accounts of teachers receiving directives from
the school or district leaders to perform job functions for which no time exists during the day to
complete those tasks and for which no additional time was provided. These directives further
exacerbate the challenges that teachers already face in completing the work tasks during non-
existent and overloaded preparation periods.
When teachers arrive early or stay late, they often perform tasks which require a physical
presence such as making photocopies on the school copy machine, though teachers also reported
needing to purchase copy paper using personal funds because the school lacked the resources to
provide the paper to the teachers. Additionally, teachers may be required to perform tasks such
as using the Scantron-reading equipment, accessing certain data entry points/networks, and
attending administrative meetings that many respondents felt intruded on their workflow. These
forms of non-instructional and other work tasks directly impact the perceptions and realities of
the teacher work experience at their work sites.
Type of school. Based on previously discussed descriptive findings on the impact that the
type of school can have on a teacher’s perception of the time they have to complete the tasks
needed to effectively perform the job of a teacher, a chi-square test of independence was
conducted on the reported school type and the response to the question. As expected, the
relationship between the variables was significant. Teachers who work in public and charter
schools were significantly more likely to claim that they do not have the time needed to perform
the tasks required to be effective teachers. This finding provides further evidence that
intensification impacts teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy and self-determination, specifically
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
146
at public and charter schools. It also indicates a possible area of future research to explore the
impact of differences in accountability measures between the public and private school worlds.
Research Question 3
The goal of the third research question was to explore the connections between
intensification’s non-instructional workload and the impact that teachers perceive from that
workload on their self-efficacy and self-determination. The data indicate that, yes, teachers
perceive an impact from intensification’s non-instructional workload on their perceptions of self-
efficacy and self-determination.
Non-instructional workload’s impact on self-efficacy and self-determination. Related
to the first two research questions, teachers also mentioned two other tasks of note that deserve
discussion; respondents frequently mentioned providing additional help to students and
contacting parents. Teachers repeatedly mentioned spending significant time helping students
outside of their work hours and over break and lunch periods. They likely do this in part to
reconcile their internal values and judgments of why they became teachers and their ability to
successfully change lives (self-efficacy and self-determination), but they also work within a
system that frequently judges their worth as a teacher based on student test outcomes. The extra
time spent helping these students appears to be a way in which teachers can reconcile the impact
to their perceptions of self-efficacy and self-determination and also serve as a defense against a
perceived threat to their livelihood in the form of possible sanctions related to accountability
measures.
Teachers also frequently mentioned contacting parents. While it is also a job requirement
in many instances, it also appears to be a way in which teachers can improve their perception of
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
147
relatedness in self-determination which looks at not just peers but a teacher’s perceived impact
on the organization and community in which they work. Bringing parents into the loop, finding
additional support for struggling students, seems to be a way to satisfy internal demands for
relatedness, competence, and efficacy, but which may also indirectly later reduce their non-
instructional workload.
Non-instructional workload correlations with self-efficacy and self-determination.
The multiple significant negative correlations found suggest that while teachers do perceive an
impact from non-instructional workload on their self-efficacy and self-determination, the work
tasks themselves are not the only factor. This does not reduce the importance of these findings
because they complement previous research on factors that contribute to burnout, turnover, and
attrition. While these findings may appear to diverge from the intensity of the open-ended
responses provided by teachers, the open-ended questions tended to focus more specifically on
aspects of teaching that are affected by the non-instructional workload whereas the scales looked
at perceptions of work and teaching more generally. These findings may indicate the need for an
instrument or specific scale questions that more precisely target specific work tasks and the
impact on various aspects of self-efficacy and self-determination. Both the qualitative results
and the quantitative results indicate, however, that non-instructional work tasks do have a
significant, negative impact on teachers’ feelings of self-efficacy and self-determination.
Intensification and non-instructional workload as predictors. A multiple linear
regression analysis was conducted to test whether the intensification and non-instructional
workload variables had any predictive value for the sample population. The analysis indicated
that the two predictors explain 36% of the variance in reported self-efficacy scores. Further
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
148
analysis should be conducted on other variable combinations to determine which variables have
the greatest predictive value on teacher self-efficacy.
A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to test whether the intensification
and non-instructional workload variables had any predictive value for the sample population.
The results indicated that the two predictors explain 96% of the variance in reported self-
determination scores. The significance and strength of this finding may also highlight which
theoretical construct and related constructs should receive the most attention in future research.
Additionally, the findings for this multiple linear regression were based on preliminary variables.
Further analysis should be conducted on other variable combinations to determine which other
variables also have the greatest predictive value and which variables combined serve as the best
predictors on the sub-scores and related theoretical constructs.
Research Question 4
The goal of the fourth research question was to explore the connections between
intensification’s non-instructional workload impact on teacher self-efficacy and self-
determination and whether it has an impact on teacher career choices. The data indicated that,
yes, a loss of self-efficacy and self-determination do have an impact on whether a teacher
remains in teaching.
Trends: the role of decreased self-efficacy and self-determination. To explore this
research question, a point-biserial correlation analysis was performed to examine the relationship
between a teacher’s work status (current or former) and the score on their Teacher Self-Efficacy
Scale (TSES), the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work scale (BPNSW - self-
determination global needs score), and the BPNSW autonomy and competence scale sub-scores.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
149
The relationships were significant. In all four cases, the variables were negatively correlated and
indicated that respondents with higher scores were more likely to be current teachers while those
with lower scores were more likely to be former teachers. Because teachers leave teaching for
many reasons, including retirement, and because the tested samples included both current and
former teachers with a cross-section of teachers with 0-5, 6-10, and more than 10 years of
teaching experience, the negative correlations suggest that low self-efficacy does relate to a
teacher’s decision to remain in a teaching career.
In the qualitative responses, several participants indicated that they felt that performing
tasks outside of their work hours was part of a being a good teacher; that colleagues and
administrators expected them to perform that work on top of their other responsibilities and
outside of what the contract technically requires. Many respondents likewise indicated that
going into the job they expected a certain amount of work outside of contracted hours or that
they enjoyed the challenge of finding new and creative ways to help their students given the
challenges in the education system. While these comments may indicate that teachers attempt to
self-endorse the demands on their times and abilities, the statistical findings suggest that a limit
likely exists to that self-endorsement and may ultimately lead to adverse effects on a teacher’s
perceptions of self-efficacy and self-determination.
Lastly, the qualitative responses provide additional strength to the statistical analyses
conducted. Specifically, teachers repeatedly mentioned the same factors for becoming a teacher
and the same handful of negative factors, mostly related to non-instructional work tasks, which
cause them to re-evaluate their decisions to become teachers. This gap, especially if it widens,
may lead to additional stress and negative effects on teacher self-efficacy and self-determination.
Closing that gap or finding ways to more effectively deal with the imbalance between the job
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
150
demands and the resources to perform the tasks associated with those demands (physical
resources, time, training, relationships with peers, efficacy over actions, autonomy in action,
competence in the work environment) should be the primary focus of researchers and education
leaders moving forward.
Implications for Further Research
The findings of this study implicate several specific areas for future research. The first
relates to Apple’s theory of intensification. While much of the theory is still prescient in current
times, aspects of it are dated and should be revised to better reflect reality. Areas of most urgent
need relate to technology and curriculum. Apple saw technology as an adjunct to the classroom
teaching experience. He, like most others both in and outside of education, did not foresee how
technology would come to permeate all aspects of modern life. Apple did provide more nuance
on the ways that teachers may feel greater autonomy and buy-in on provided curriculums in his
book Official Knowledge, but the thoughts on curriculum did not incorporate the more recent
developments in technology which have spawned an entire educational technology sector.
Solutions from technology companies in this sector include learning management systems,
standards alignment resources, and upcoming artificial intelligence computer chips that will help
to provide on-demand, student-specific learning plans, and student-specific learning
environments (Smith, 2016). These changes, for better and for worse, will alter the ways that
teachers interact with both the students and the technology.
Another area of research that this study highlights for future studies is self-determination
theory and to a lesser extent self-efficacy theory. The autonomy and competence pillars of self-
determination theory had the most correlations and strongest statistical relationships. It may
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
151
indicate that issues related to non-instructional work tasks most directly affect teacher’s
perceived autonomy and competence within self-determination and the tension or gaps that exist
between a teacher’s values and their ability to self-endorse the consequences of intensification
within the education system.
Additionally, six mini-theories exist under the central self-determination theory, and
while this study chose to focus on the sub-theory related to basic psychological need satisfaction
further research may indicate that a different sub-theory better explains the observed phenomena.
For this study, the Basic Psychological Needs at Work mini theory and its related scale seemed
to fit the hypothesized phenomena best. The scale explores the three pillars of autonomy,
competence, and relatedness in the workplace, however, it is formatted for use in multiple work
contexts. Given the strength of the findings related to the autonomy and competence sub-scales,
future research should explore whether certain questions should be worded differently to more
appropriately fit the teaching context, including items that look specifically at the non-
instructional workload and teacher-specific interpretations of the relatedness pillar.
Differences between the three main school systems reported by participants, traditional
public, charter, and private schools, were pronounced. For private schools, intensification does
not appear to be the driving force behind the non-instructional workload. Future research may be
able to shed light on that area. It is important because teachers from private schools are also
included in national teacher attrition and burnout rates and serve in a wide variety of school
settings, which includes the wealthiest students in the most prestigious secondary schools,
schools for students with therapeutic or other special needs, and tuition-free schools for students
from low-income backgrounds.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
152
Lastly, of the three main school types, teachers from charter schools put in the highest
number of hours outside of their contracted work time, had lower self-efficacy and self-
determination scale scores, and were most likely to be former teachers with 0-5 years of teaching
experience. These schools operate with fewer restrictions on personnel and curriculum than
public schools, but charter systems or their management organizations must show student
progress to maintain funding. Future research should look at the effects of this additional layer
of intensification on the non-instructional workload of teachers in charter schools.
Implications on Practice
The findings of this study indicate several implications on matters of practice. While one
could argue that these non-instructional work tasks are part of the job and people entering the
teaching career ought to be expected to copy as required, grade student work when needed, or
perform any of the other tasks routinely mentioned by teachers throughout this study,
administrators and governments should be aware of the impact that the overload of these non-
instructional work tasks have on teacher’s self-efficacy and self-determination. In this study,
teachers reported a slightly higher average number of hours worked outside of their contracted
work time than those in older studies. Including the participants in this study, this continues an
upward trend in the average number of hours worked by teachers in previous studies measuring
this variable over the last three decades. The challenge for administrators and policymakers
alike is trying to meet the learning needs of the students, meeting the standards and
accountability measures required by various government entities, while also providing teachers,
the producers in this economic and political environment, with the tools and resources needed to
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
153
perform the instructional and non-instructional tasks required by the job on which their
performance is now increasingly measured.
As Apple noted in his updated intensification theory, teachers who have some buy-in to
the curriculum used by schools may not directly feel their autonomy is threatened in the same
way as teachers who do not have a similar level of input or buy in. Indeed, teachers in this study
indicated a mostly positive acceptance of the curriculums and standards at their school sites but
ascribed their loss of self-efficacy and self-determination to the ways in which those standards
were paced and the non-instructional and other work tasks which decreased their ability to
perform the functions of the job effectively. First, administrators should be sensitive to the ways
that curriculum changes or administrative demands, even when endorsed by and incorporating
teacher stakeholders, affect the non-instructional work tasks that must take place on personal
time both at the work site and at home.
Districts and administrators should examine current initiatives and proposed changes with
a critical eye to determine whether the changes are working at cross purposes and creating
duplicative or chronic levels of non-instructional work tasks for teachers on the ground. Without
sensitivity to the ways that these changes affect teachers, districts and administrators may harm
the ability of teachers to perform the tasks they are hired to do. The changes may also harm the
ability of students to learn and do well on the very tests the district or other governments require
to show the public they have made a sound investment in public education.
Lastly, district and school leaders should consider the need for peer interaction among
teachers. When teachers have the opportunity to share lesson plans and techniques in face-to-
face meetings or on digital sharing platforms, teachers should find a reduction in the need to
duplicate effort on the creation of existing lesson plans and ideas or even on repetitive tasks. The
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
154
reduction in duplicative effort ought to increase feelings of relatedness as teachers work together,
and it should improve perceptions of autonomy and competence as teachers have more time to
perform other tasks, reflect on their work, and consider other ways that they can best serve their
students.
Limitations
The issues examined in this study are necessarily tangled. Separating these concepts will
require additional research and more specific instruments. Additionally, since the surveyed
sample did not represent a representative sample of any particular group of teachers, the findings
should only be examined as descriptive of the sample itself, areas of general association, and
with no expectation that the obtained results indicate any causal relationships to other
populations. Because the results were not causal, the implications for further research and the
implications on practice are necessarily limited.
Conclusion
This study sought to explore a gap in understanding the connection between
intensification’s non-instructional work tasks and the possible relationships between the self-
efficacy and self-determination theoretical constructs. Research has already shown that low self-
efficacy and low self-determination have an impact on rates of teacher turnover, burnout, and
attrition. The results of this study add to these findings by showing that the non-instructional
workload that results from intensification significantly impact a teacher’s self-efficacy and self-
determination in multiple ways. The results of this study help to close the gap in theories and
provide evidence for taking seriously both the source and effect of a teacher’s non-instructional
workload.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
155
References
Alberta Education. (2015). Alberta teacher workload study. Retrieved from
https://education.alberta.ca/media/3114984/teacher-workload-study-final-report-december-
2015-2.pdf
Apple, M. W. (1986). Teachers & texts: A political economy of class & gender relations in
education. New York: Routledge.
Apple, M. W. (1999). Rhetorical reforms: Markets, standards and inequality, 6–18.
Apple, M. W. (2000). Official knowledge. New York, NY: Routledge.
Apple, M. W., & Jungck, S. (1990). “You Don’t Have to Be a Teacher to Teach This Unit:”
Teaching, technology, and gender in the classroom. American Educational Research
Journal, 27(2), 227–251.
Ballet, K., & Kelchtermans, G. (2008). Workload and willingness to change: disentangling the
experience of intensification. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(1), 47–67.
http://doi.org/10.1080/00220270701516463
Ballet, K., & Kelchtermans, G. (2009). Struggling with workload: Primary teachers’ experience
of intensification. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1150–1157.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.012
Ballet, K., Kelchtermans, G., & Loughran, J. (2006). Beyond intensification towards a
scholarship of practice: Analysing changes in teachers’ work lives. Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice, 12(2), 209–229. http://doi.org/10.1080/13450600500467415
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freemam.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
156
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 1–26.
Betoret, F. D. (2009). Self-efficacy, school resources, job stressors and burnout among Spanish
primary and secondary school teachers: A structural equation approach. Educational
Psychology, 29(1), 45–68. http://doi.org/10.1080/01443410802459234
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (2012). Primary sources: 2012: America’s teachers on the
teaching profession. Primary Sources. Retrieved from
http://b.3cdn.net/nvps/352f5692fe91f9bc90_jom6ic80d.pdf
Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and
narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 367–409.
http://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321455
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). Who leaves? Teacher
attrition and student achievement. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper
Series (Vol. No. 14022). Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w14022
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005). Explaining the short careers of high-
achieving teachers in schools with low-performing students. The American Economic
Review, 95(2), 166–171. http://doi.org/10.1257/000282805774669628
Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2000). A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and perceived self-
efficacy in classroom management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(2), 239–253.
http://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00057-8
Brown, N. M. (2004). Improving the first year: How opportunities for faculty collaboration,
support from administrators, reduced workloads and formal induction experiences impact
first-year teachers. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
157
Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., & Boone, L. (2008). Explaining the relationships
between job charecteristics, burnout, and engagement: The role of basic psychological need
satisfaction. Work & Stress, 22(3), 277–294. http://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393672
Choy, S. P., Bobbitt, S. A., Henke, R., Medrich, E., Horn, L., & Lieberman, J. (1993). America’s
teachers: Profile of a profession.
Clandinin, D. J., Long, J., Schaefer, L., Downey, C. A., Steeves, P., Pinnegar, E., … Wnuk, S.
(2015). Early career teacher attrition: Intentions of teachers beginning. Teaching Education,
26(1), 1–16. http://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.996746
Clemons, J., & Espada, D. (2017, April). Millenials take on parenting. Southwest: The Magazine.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crotwell, W. (2011). Elementary school teachers’ experience of professional workload and time.
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
DeAngelis, K. J., & Presley, J. B. (2011). Toward a more nuanced understanding of new teacher
attrition. Education and Urban Society, 43(5), 598–626.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0013124510380724
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in
motivation, development, and wellness.
Deci, E. L., Spiegel, N. H., Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Kauffman, M. (1982). Effects of
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
158
performance standards on teaching styles: Behavior of controlling teachers. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 74(6), 852–859.
Drago, R., & Al., E. (1999). New estimates of working time for elementary school teachers.
Monthly Labor Review, 122 4, 31–40. Retrieved from
http://stats.bls.gov/opub/mlr/mlrhome.htm
Evans, J. D. (1996). Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., & Senecal, C. (2004). Adjusting to job demands : The role of work self-
determination and job control in predicting burnout q. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65,
39–56. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00098-8
Fernet, C., Guay, F., Senecal, C., & Austin, S. (2012). Predicting intraindividual changes in
teacher burnout: The role of perceived school environment and motivational factors.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(4), 514–525. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.11.013
Figlio, D. N., & Kenny, L. W. (2007). Individual teacher incentives and student performance.
Journal of Public Economics, 91(5–6), 901–914.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.10.001
Friedman, I. A., & Kass, E. (2002). Teacher self-efficacy: a classroom-organization
conceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 675–686.
Garrin, J. M. (2014). Self-efficacy, self-determination, and self-regulation: The role of the fitness
professional in social change agency. Journal of Social Change, 6(1), 41–54.
http://doi.org/10.5590/JOSC.2014.06.1.05
Gillet, N., Fouquereau, E., Huyghebaert, T., & Colombat, P. (2015). The effects of job demands
and organizational resources through psychological need satisfaction and thwarting. Spanish
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
159
Journal of Psychology, 18(e28), 1–19. http://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2015.30
Gillet, N., Fouquereau, E., & Lafrenière, M. K. (2016). Examining the roles of work autonomous
and controlled motivations on satisfaction and anxiety as a function of role ambiguity. The
Journal of Psychology, 150(5), 644–665. http://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2016.1154811
Gilpin, G. A. (2011). Reevaluating the effect of non-teaching wages on teacher attrition.
Economics of Education Review, 30(4), 598–616.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.03.003
Gitlin, A. (2001). Bounding teacher decision making: The threat of intensification. Education
Policy, 15(2), 227–257.
Goldhaber, D., & Cowan, J. (2014). Excavating the teacher pipeline: Teacher preparation
programs and teacher attrition. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(5), 449–462.
http://doi.org/10.1177/0022487114542516
Gray, L., & Taie, S. (2015). Public school teacher attrition and mobility in the first five years:
Results from the first through fifth waves of the 2007–08 beginning teacher longitudinal
study.
Grayson, J. L., & Alvarez, H. K. (2008). School climate factors relating to teacher burnout: A
mediator model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5), 1349–1363.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.06.005
Hall, C. (2004). Theorising changes in teachers’ work. Canadian Journal of Educational
Administration and Policy, (32), 1–24.
Hammerness, K. (2006). Seeing through teachers’ eyes. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A. (1992). Time and teachers’ work: An analysis of the intensification thesis.
Teachers’ College Record, 94(1), 87–108.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
160
Haynes, M., Maddock, A., & Goldrick, L. (2014). On the path to equity: Improving the
effectiveness of beginning teachers. Alliance for Excellent Edcation, (July), 17 p. Retrieved
from http://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/path-to-equity/
Henig, J. R. (1994). Rethinking school choice: Limits of the market metaphor. Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press. Retrieved from
http://www.google.com/books?id=XSTUCQSlRAUC
Hobson, A. J., & Maxwell, B. (2017). Supporting and inhibiting the well-being of early career
secondary school teachers: Extending self-determination theory, 43(1), 168–191.
http://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3261
Ilies, R., Huth, M., Ryan, A. M., & Dimotakis, N. (2015). Explaining the links between
workload, distress, and work–family conflict among school employees: Physical, cognitive,
and emotional fatigue. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 1136–1149.
http://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000029
Ingersoll, R. M. (1996). Teachers’ decision-making power and school conflict. Sociology of
Education, 69(2), 159–176. http://doi.org/10.2307/2112804
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.
http://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038003499
Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). The teacher shortage: Myth or reality? Educational Horizons, 81(3),
146–152.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Collins, G. J. (2017). Accountability and control in American schools.
Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(1), 75–95.
http://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2016.1205142
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
161
Ingersoll, R. M., & May, H. (2012). The magnitude, destinations, and determinants of
mathematics and science teacher turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
34(4), 435–464. http://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712454326
Ingersoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational
Leadership, 60(8), 30–33.
Krantz-Kent, R. (2008). Teachers’ work patterns: when, where, and how much do U.S. teachers
work? Monthly Labor Review, (March), 52–59.
Kristensen, T. S., Borritz, M., Villadsen, E., & Christensen, K. B. (2005). The Copenhagen
burnout inventory: a new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3), 192–
207. http://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500297720
Kurpius, S. E. R., & Stafford, M. E. (2006). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Larrivee, B. (2012). Job characteristics and their impact on burnout and well-being. In
Cultivating teacher renewal: Guarding against stress and burnout. Blue Ridge Summit:
R&L Education.
Macdonald, D. (1999). Teacher attrition: A review of literature. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 15(February), 835–848. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00031-1
MacDonald, R. J., Wiebe, S., Goslin, K., Doiron, R., & MacDonald, C. (2010). The workload
and worklife of Prince Edward Island teachers.
Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1981). Maslach Burnout Inventory manual. Mountain View, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. (2008). Early predictors of job burnout and engagement. The Journal
of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 498–512. http://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.498
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
162
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Misra, K. (2011). Measuring public school competition from private schools: A gravity-based
Index. Journal of Geographic Information System, 3(4), 306–311.
http://doi.org/10.4236/jgis.2011.34027
NVivo qualitative data analysis software. (2017). QSR International Pty Ltd.
Pas, E. T., Bradshaw, C. P., & Hershfeldt, P. A. (2012). Teacher- and school-level predictors of
teacher efficacy and burnout: Identifying potential areas for support. Journal of School
Psychology, 50(1), 129–145. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.07.003
Philip, T. M., & Garcia, A. D. (2013). The importance of still teaching the iGeneration: New
technologies and the centrality of pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 300–319.
Phillips, O. (2015). Revolving door of teachers costs schools billions every year. Retrieved
February 17, 2017, from http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2015/03/30/395322012/the-hidden-
costs-of-teacher-turnover
Qualtrics. (2018). Provo, UT. Retrieved from http://www.qualtrics.com
Quint, J., Bloom, H. S., Black, A. R., Stephens, L., & Akey, T. M. (2005). The challenge of
scaling up educational reform: Findings and lessons from First Things First. mdrc.
Retrieved from
http://www.education.vt.gov/new/pdfdoc/dept/transformation/commission/readings/reading
_032309/mdrc_challenge_scaling_up_reform.pdf
Richwine, J., & Biggs, A. G. (2013). How much time do teachers spend working? Evidence from
the American time use survey.
Rinke, C. R. (2008). Understanding teachers’ careers: Linking professional life to professional
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
163
path. Educational Research Review, 3(1), 1–13. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.10.001
Rinke, C. R. (2014). Why half of teachers leave the classroom : understanding recruitment and
retention in today’s schools. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-maymon, Y., & Kaplan, H. (2007). Autonomous motivation for
teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99(4), 761–774. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.761
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2016). Self-determination theory-- formal theory: SDT’s six mini
theories. Retrieved March 20, 2016, from http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/theory/
Ryan, R. M., & Weinstien, N. (2009). Undermining quality teaching and learning. Theory and
Research in Education, 7(2), 224–233. http://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104327
Saeki, E., Pendergast, L., Segool, N. K., & Embse, N. P. Von Der. (2015). Potential psychosocial
and instructional consequences of the Common Core state standards: Implications for
research and practice. Contemporary School Psychology, 19, 89–97.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-014-0043-5
Sánchez-Oliva, D., Morin, A. J. S., Teixeira, P. J., Carraça, E. V., Palmeira, A. L., & Silva, M.
N. (2017). A bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling representation of the
structure of the basic psychological needs at work scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
98, 173–187. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.12.001
Schaefer, L., Long, J. S., & Jean Clandinin, D. (2012). Questioning the research on early career
teacher attrition and retention. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 58(1), 106–121.
Schunk, D., Meece, J., & Pintrich, P. (2014). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
164
applications (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of job stress
and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied Psychology, 57(SUPPL. 1), 152–171.
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00359.x
Schwarzer, R., Schmitz, G. S., & Daytner, G. (1999). Teacher self-efficacy scale. Berlin.
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00359.x
Seferoglu, S., Yildiz, H., & Yucel, U. (2014). Teachers’ burnout: Indicators of burnout and
investigation of the indicators in terms of different variables. Egitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 348–
364. http://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.2515
Sheldon, K. M., & Biddle, B. J. (1998). Standards, accountability, and school reform: Perils and
pitfalls. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 164–180.
Sheppard, B. H. (2008). The effect of noninstructional workload tasks upon instructional time for
classroom teachers in public schools in an urban school district. ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with
strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99(3), 611–625. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.611
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does school context matter? Relations with teacher
burnout and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 518–524.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.12.006
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of
relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059–1069.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
165
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2014). Teacher self-efficacy and perceived autonomy: Relations
with teacher engagement, job satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion. Psychological
Reports, 114(1), 68–77. http://doi.org/10.2466/14.02.PR0.114k14w0
Smith, S. (2016). The future of artificial intelligence In eLearning systems. Retrieved May 1,
2016, from https://elearningindustry.com/future-artificial-intelligence-in-elearning-systems
Stoddard, C., & Kuhn, P. (2008). Incentives and effort in the public sector: Have US education
reforms increased teachers’ work hours? Economics of Education Review, 27(1), 1–13.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.07.012
Stone, D. N., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Beyond talk: Creating autonomous motivation
through self-determination theory.
Sugden, N. A. (2010). Relationships among teacher workload, performance, and well-being.
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 219–n/a. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/839139385?accountid=25704
Tabs, E. (2004). Teacher Attrition and Mobility. National Cenre for Education Statistics.
Retrieved from http://www.councilofcollaboratives.org/files/2004301.pdf
Trépanier, S.-G., Fernet, C., Austin, S., Forest, J., & Vallerand, R. J. (2014). Linking job
demands and resources to burnout and work engagement: Does passion underlie these
differential relationships? Motivation and Emotion, 38, 353–366.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-013-9384-z
Van den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2010).
Capturing autonomy, competence, and relatedness at work: Construction and initial
validation of the Work-related Basic Need Satisfaction scale. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 981–1002. http://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X481382
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
166
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
167
Appendices
Appendix A
Research Question Alignment Matrix
Research Question Theoretical Framework Data Instrument Question
1. How do teachers
perceive
intensification’s
role in their non-
instructional
workload?
Apple’s Intensification
Theory (Apple, 1986)
Track A– Questions 20-32, 38-40
Track B– Questions 25-37, 43-45
2. Do teachers
perceive an impact
from non-
instructional work
tasks on their
personal and work
lives?
Apple’s Intensification
Theory (Apple, 1986)
Self-Efficacy Theory
(Bandura, 1997)
Self-Determination Theory
(Ryan & Deci, 2000)
Track A– Questions 20-34, 38-40
Track B– Questions 25-39, 43-45
3. How do teachers
perceive the impact
of non-instructional
workload, if any, on
their feelings of
self-efficacy and
self-determination?
Apple’s Intensification
Theory (Apple, 1986)
Self-Efficacy Theory
(Bandura, 1997)
Self-Determination Theory
(Ryan & Deci, 2000)
Track A– Questions 20-40
Track B– Questions 25-45
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at
Work Scale
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
168
4. What role does a
loss of self-efficacy
and self-
determination, if
any, play in a
teacher’s decision
to continue in the
teaching
profession?
Self-Efficacy Theory
(Bandura, 1997)
Self-Determination Theory
(Ryan & Deci, 2000)
Track A– Questions 17-40
Track B– Questions 22-45
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at
Work Scale
Demographic Questions Survey- Questions 1-6
Track A– Questions 7, 10-16
Track B– Question 10, 13-19
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
169
Appendix B
Survey and Scales
1. Study Information and Consent
2. What is your gender?
a. Female
b. Male
c. Non-binary
d. Prefer not to say
3. What is your current age?
a. Under 30
b. Between 31-40
c. Between 41-50
d. Over 50
e. Prefer not to say
4. With which race/ethnicity do you identify? (Choose any that apply)
a. African American/Black
b. Asian American/Asian
c. Alaskan American
d. Pacific Islander
e. Caucasian/White/Anglo
f. Latino/Hispanic/Chicano
g. American Indian
h. Other (Please specify)
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
170
5. What is you highest level of completed education?
a. Associate
b. Bachelor
c. Graduate certificate
d. Master
e. Doctorate
f. Post-doctorate
6. Are you currently a teacher?
a. Yes
b. No
If yes – track A (current teacher)
If no – track B (former teacher)
Track A Survey/Interview (Current Teachers)
7. Do you work in:
a. Public
i. Traditional Public School
ii. Charter School
iii. Magnet School
iv. Other
b. Private
i. Private Day School
ii. Private Boarding School
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
171
iii. Other
If A, i-iv, track A1 (Publicly institution)
If B, i-iii, track A2 (Private institution)
8. Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
9. Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work Scale
Track A1 (Current Public)
10. How long have you been a teacher?
a. 0-5 years
b. 6-10 years
c. Over 10 years
11. What grade/s do you teach?
12. What subjects do you teach?
13. Do you work primarily as a special education teacher?
a. Yes
b. No
14. In which school district do you teach?
15. What percentage of the students at your school receive free/reduced price meals?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
172
16. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school come from a minority or
non-white background?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
17. Describe in your own words your reasons for becoming a teacher.
18. What parts, if any, of the job currently reaffirm your decision to enter and remain in the
teaching profession?
19. What parts, if any, of the job cause you to re-evaluate that decision to enter and remain a
teacher?
20. Thinking about your typical work day, do you arrive early to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
21. How often do you arrive early to work to get tasks accomplished?
22. What tasks do you complete when you arrive early?
23. Approximately how much time do you spend per week before your start time getting
work done?
24. Thinking about your typical work day, do you stay late to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
25. How often do you stay late (after your contracted end time) to get tasks accomplished?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
173
26. What tasks do you complete when you stay late?
27. Approximately how much time per week do you spend staying late to get work done?
28. Thinking about your typical work day, do you use your lunch or other break times to
work on job-related issues?
a. Yes
b. No
29. What tasks do you work on during your lunch or other break times?
30. During the school year, do you work from home during the weekdays, weekends, or
holidays to complete work-related tasks?
a. Yes
b. No
31. How much time do you spend each month working during the weekdays, weekends, and
holidays?
32. What tasks do you complete when you work from home?
33. Describe the ways, if any, that you interact with your colleagues to discuss challenges at
work, successes, or collaboratively plan activities for your students.
34. Do you feel that you have sufficient time to interact with your colleagues? Please explain
your response.
35. In your work, do you feel that you have autonomy and control over how and what you
teach your students?
a. Yes, a significant amount.
b. Some, but not much.
c. No, very little to none.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
174
36. Please elaborate on your choice above.
37. In what ways, if any, do standards, high-stakes testing, district curriculum requirements,
or other accountability measures influence or change the way you work? (These can be
from the school, district, state, or federal levels.)
38. Do you feel that you have enough time in the day to complete all the tasks and work
needed to be an effective teacher? Please explain your response.
39. If there anything else that you would like to share about your non-instructional workload
and the teaching profession.
40. Is there anything else that you would like to share about the teacher experience that you
think would benefit the study?
Track A2 (Current Private)
10. How long have you been a teacher?
a. 0-5 years
b. 6-10 years
c. Over 10 years
11. What grade/s do you teach?
12. What subjects do you teach?
13. Does your school primarily serve students who require learning support?
a. Yes
b. No
14. In which city and state do you teach?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
175
15. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school receive financial aid to
attend?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
16. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school come from a minority or
non-white background?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
17. Describe in your own words your reasons for becoming a teacher.
18. What parts, if any, of the job currently reaffirm your decision to enter and remain in the
teaching profession?
19. What parts, if any, of the job cause you to re-evaluate that decision to enter and remain a
teacher?
20. Thinking about your typical work day, do you arrive early to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
21. How often do you arrive early to work to get tasks accomplished?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
176
22. What tasks do you complete when you arrive early?
23. Approximately how much time do you spend per week before your start time getting
work done?
24. Thinking about your typical work day, do you stay late to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
25. How often do you stay late (after your contracted end time) to get tasks accomplished?
26. What tasks do you complete when you stay late?
27. Approximately how much time per week do you spend staying late to get work done?
28. Thinking about your typical work day, do you use your lunch or other break times to
work on job-related issues?
a. Yes
b. No
29. What tasks do you work on during your lunch or other break times?
30. During the school year, do you work from home during the weekdays, weekends, or
holidays to complete work-related tasks?
a. Yes
b. No
31. How much time do you spend each month working during the weekdays, weekends, and
holidays?
32. What tasks do you complete when you work from home?
33. Describe the ways, if any, that you interact with your colleagues to discuss challenges at
work, successes, or collaboratively plan activities for your students.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
177
34. Do you feel that you have sufficient time to interact with your colleagues? Please explain
your response.
35. In your work, do you feel that you have autonomy and control over how and what you
teach your students?
a. Yes, a significant amount.
b. Some, but not much.
c. No, very little to none.
36. Please elaborate on your choice above.
37. In what ways, if any, do standards, high-stakes testing, district curriculum requirements,
or other accountability measures influence or change the way you work? (These can be
from the school, district, state, or federal levels.)
38. Do you feel that you have enough time in the day to complete all the tasks and work
needed to be an effective teacher? Please explain your response.
39. Is there anything else that you would like to share about your non-instructional workload
and the teaching profession?
40. Is there anything else that you would like to share about the teacher experience that you
think would benefit the study?
Track B Survey/Interview (Former Teachers)
10. Have you ever been a teacher?
a. Yes
b. No
If no, thank you and end of survey.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
178
If yes, continue track B.
11. Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
12. Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work Scale
Track B1 (Former Public)
13. Do you currently work in education but in another capacity?
a. Yes
b. No
14. What is your current job title?
15. How long were you a teacher?
a. 0-5 years
b. 6-10 years
c. Over 10 years
16. What grade/s did you teach?
17. What subject did you primarily teach?
18. Did you work primarily as a special education teacher?
a. Yes
b. No
19. In which city and state did you teach?
20. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school received free/reduced price
meals?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
179
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
21. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school came from a minority or
non-white background?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
22. Describe in your own words the reasons you had for becoming a teacher.
23. Prior to leaving the profession, what parts of the job, if any, reaffirmed your decision to
enter and remain in the teaching profession?
24. In contrast, prior to leaving the profession, what parts of the job, if any, caused you to re-
evaluate your decision to enter and remain a teacher?
25. On a typical day when you were a teacher, did you arrive early to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
26. When you were a teacher, how often do you arrive early to work to get tasks
accomplished?
27. What tasks did you complete when you arrive early?
28. Approximately how much time did you spend per week before your start time getting
work done?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
180
29. On a typical day when you were a teacher, did you stay late to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
30. How often did you stay late (after your contracted end time) to get tasks accomplished?
31. What tasks did you complete when you stayed late?
32. Approximately how much time per week did you spend staying late to get work done?
33. Thinking about your typical work day, did you use your lunch or other break times to
work on job-related issues?
34. What tasks did you work on during your lunch or other break times?
35. When you were a teacher, did you work from home during the weekdays, weekends, or
holidays to complete work-related tasks during the school year?
a. Yes
b. No
36. Approximately how much time did you spend each month working during the weekdays,
weekends, and holidays?
37. What tasks did you complete when you worked from home?
38. Thinking back to when you were a teacher, describe the ways, if any, that you interacted
with your colleagues to discuss challenges at work, successes, or collaboratively plan
activities for your students.
39. When you were a teacher, did you feel that you had sufficient time to interact with your
colleagues? Please explain your response.
a. Yes
b. No
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
181
40. When you were a teacher, did you feel that you had autonomy and control over how and
what you taught your students?
a. Yes, a significant amount.
b. Some, but not much.
c. No, very little to none.
41. Please elaborate on your choice above.
42. Thinking back to when you were a teacher, in what ways, if any, did standards, high-
stakes testing, district curriculum requirements, or other accountability measures
influence or change the way you worked? (These can be from the school, district, state, or
federal levels.)
43. When you were a teacher, did you feel that you had enough time in the day to complete
all the tasks and work needed to be an effective teacher? Please explain your response.
44. Is there anything else that you would like to share specifically about what you
experienced with non-instructional workload and the teaching profession.
45. Is there anything else that you would like to share about the teacher experience and what
led you to leave the profession that you think would benefit the study?
Track B2 (Former Private)
13. Do you currently work in education but in another capacity?
a. Yes
b. No
14. What is your current job title?
15. How long were you a teacher?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
182
a. 0-5 years
b. 6-10 years
c. Over 10 years
16. What grade/s did you teach?
17. What subject did you primarily teach?
18. Did your school primarily serve students who required learning support?
a. Yes
b. No
19. In which city and state did you teach?
20. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school received discounted or free
tuition?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
21. Approximately what percentage of the students at your school came from a minority or
non-white background?
a. Under 25%
b. Between 25-50%
c. Between 50-75%
d. Over 75%
e. I don’t know.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
183
22. Describe in your own words the reasons you had for becoming a teacher.
23. Prior to leaving the profession, what parts of the job, if any, reaffirmed your decision to
enter and remain in the teaching profession?
24. In contrast, prior to leaving the profession, what parts of the job, if any, caused you to re-
evaluate your decision to enter and remain a teacher?
25. On a typical day when you were a teacher, did you arrive early to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
26. When you were a teacher, how often do you arrive early to work to get tasks
accomplished?
27. What tasks did you complete when you arrive early?
28. Approximately how much time did you spend per week before your start time getting
work done?
29. On a typical day when you were a teacher, did you stay late to get work done?
a. Yes
b. No
30. How often did you stay late (after your contracted end time) to get tasks accomplished?
31. What tasks did you complete when you stayed late?
32. Approximately how much time per week did you spend staying late to get work done?
33. Thinking about your typical work day, did you use your lunch or other break times to
work on job-related issues?
a. Yes
b. No
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
184
34. What tasks did you work on during your lunch or other break times?
35. When you were a teacher, did you work from home during the weekdays, weekends, or
holidays to complete work-related tasks during the school year?
a. Yes
b. No
36. Approximately how much time did you spend each month working during the weekdays,
weekends, and holidays?
37. What tasks did you complete when you worked from home?
38. Thinking back to when you were a teacher, describe the ways, if any, that you interacted
with your colleagues to discuss challenges at work, successes, or collaboratively plan
activities for your students.
39. When you were a teacher, did you feel that you had sufficient time to interact with your
colleagues? Please explain your response.
a. Yes
b. No
40. When you were a teacher, did you feel that you had autonomy and control over how and
what you taught your students?
a. Yes, a significant amount.
b. Some, but not much.
c. No, very little to none.
41. Please elaborate on your choice above.
42. Thinking back to when you were a teacher, in what ways, if any, did standards, high-
stakes testing, district curriculum requirements, or other accountability measures
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
185
influence or change the way you worked? (These can be from the school, district, state, or
federal levels.)
43. When you were a teacher, did you feel that you had enough time in the day to complete
all the tasks and work needed to be an effective teacher? Please explain your response.
44. Is there anything else that you would like to share specifically about what you
experienced with non-instructional workload and the teaching profession.
45. Is there anything else that you would like to share about the teacher experience and what
led you to leave the profession that you think would benefit the study?
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
186
Appendix C
Survey Flow
Block: Consent (2 Questions)
Standard: Demographics (5 Questions)
Standard: Teacher? (2 Questions)
Standard: Former Teacher? (3 Questions)
Standard: You fit the criteria! (1 Question)
Standard: Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Scale - Work Domain (23 Questions)
Standard: Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale (12 Questions)
Branch: New Branch
If
If Are you currently a teacher? Yes Is Selected
Branch: New Branch
If
If Do you work in: Traditional Public School Is Selected
Or Do you work in: Charter School Is Selected
Or Do you work in: Magnet School Is Selected
Or Do you work in: Other Is Selected
Standard: Current Public/Magnet/Charter School Teacher (32 Questions)
Branch: New Branch
If
If Do you work in: Private Day School Is Selected
Or Do you work in: Private Boarding School Is Selected
Or Do you work in: Other Is Selected
Standard: Current Private School Teacher (32 Questions)
Branch: New Branch
If
If Have you ever been a teacher? Yes Is Selected
Branch: New Branch
If
If Did you work in: Private Boarding School Is Selected
Or Did you work in: Private Day School Is Selected
Or Did you work in: Other Is Selected
Standard: Former Private School Teacher (35 Questions)
Branch: New Branch
If
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
187
If Did you work in: Traditional Public School Is Selected
Or Did you work in: Charter School Is Selected
Or Did you work in: Magnet School Is Selected
Or Did you work in: Other Is Selected
Standard: Former Public/Magnet/Charter School Teacher (34 Questions)
Standard: End of Survey (4 Questions)
Block: End of Survey (4 Questions)
End Survey:
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
188
Appendix D
Codes and Base Themes
Individual Codes Broader Themes Themes to Theory
Planning Lack of Time Bureaucracy
Prepping Assessments and Tests – Negative Lack of Autonomy in the Classroom
Grading Make a Difference and Change Lives Lack of Personal Time
Paperwork Impression of Current Educational System Lack of PD/Growth Opportunities
Special Education Needs Curriculum – Negative Loss of SE and SD Impacted Career Choice
Copying Student Needs and Demands Peer Time – Formal Need
Emails Lack of Resources Peer-time – Informal Work-Around
Parent Calls/Conferences Give Opportunity Perceived Impact of NI Workload
Meetings Inspire and Help Find Passion Perceived Impact of NI Workload on SE/SD
Supplementing Materials Administration/Leadership – Negative Not Feeling Valued
Data Analysis Parents – Negative Lack of Control
Other Work Duties Need for Data – Negative Persistent/Chronic NI Work Overload
Computer Non-Instructional
Tasks
Community – Negative High-stakes Testing/Accountability Measures
Tutoring Administration/Leadership – Positive Impact on Ability to Perform Job
Write Curriculum Need to Perform Other Roles
Low Pay Curriculum – Positive
Coaching Parents – Positive
Number of Students District Leadership – Negative
See Growth Extra Time a Part of Being a Good Teacher
Sharing Emotionally Draining
Teacher Relationship with
Students
Monotonous and Stressful
Create a Safe Place
Help Others
Class Aids for Non-
Instructional Tasks
Arrive Early
Lunch and Break
Stay Late
Evenings/Weekends/Holidays
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
189
Appendix E
IRB Exempt Study Approval Letter
University of Southern California University Park Institutional Review Board
3720 South Flower Street Credit Union Building (CUB) #301
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702
Phone: 213-821-5272
Fax: 213-821-5276
upirb@usc.edu
Date: Sep 27, 2017, 09:22am
Action Taken: Approve
Principal
Investigator:
David Emery
ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
Faculty
Advisor:
Patricia Tobey
OFFICE OF THE PROVOST
Co-
Investigator(s):
Project Title: Teacher Perceptions on the Impact of Non-Instructional Workload on Self-Efficacy and
Self-Determination
Study ID: UP-17-00687
Funding: N/A - no funding source listed
The University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB) designee determined that your project meets the
requirements outlined in 45 CFR 46.101(b) category (2) and qualifies for exemption from IRB review. This
study was approved on 09/27/2017 and is not subject to further IRB review.
Minor revisions were made to the application (Sections 5, 11.2 & 26.5) by the IRB Analyst.
Consent and recruitment documents are no longer required to be uploaded for exempt studies; the
IRB Administrator will not review the recruitment and consent documents uploaded, nor will the
documents be stamped valid. It is the researchers responsibility to make sure the consent document is
consistent with the study practices as stated in the application, and the document follows the
principles of the Belmont Report, which requires all potential participants to be informed of the
research study, their rights as a participant, confidentiality of their data, etc. If not, please utilize the
template Information Sheet For Exempt Research on the UPIRB and revise the template to be specific
to your study.
Please check with all participating sites to make sure you have their permission to conduct research prior to
beginning your study.
See the confidentiality definitions, for the purposes of IRB applications, below:
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
190
• Anonymous = identities are not collected and/or identifiers are not linked to subjects responses so even the
researchers cannot discern who the subjects are/responses ‘belong’ to.
• Coded = identities are linked to subjects responses via a code, which is encrypted and/or maintained
separately from the subjects responses. Oftentimes, the code and data set have a link somewhere.
• Directly identifiable = data sets are directly identifiable, subjects names or other identifiable information
are included on the data set (without encryption), so that anyone who handles the data could identify
subjects (e.g., video recordings are stored and subject’s faces are not blurred out). Also, identifiable subject
responses that are to be included when published
All submissions, including new applications, contingency responses, amendments and continuing reviews
are reviewed in the order received.
Attachments: Information Sheet for Exempt or Flex-Exempt Studies, dated 03-29-2013.doc
Social-behavioral health-related interventions or health-outcome studies must register with clinicaltrials.gov
or other International Community of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) approved registries in order to be
published in an ICJME journal. The ICMJE will not accept studies for publication unless the studies are
registered prior to enrollment, despite the fact that these studies are not applicable “clinical trials” as defined
by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For support with registration, go to www.clinicaltrials.gov or
contact Jean Chan (jeanbcha@usc.edu, 323-442-2825).
This is an auto-generated email. Please do not respond directly to this message using the "reply" address. A
response sent in this manner cannot be answered. If you have further questions, please contact iStar Support
at (323) 276-2238 or istar@usc.edu.
The contents of this email are confidential and intended for the specified recipients only. If you have
received this email in error, please notify istar@usc.edu and delete this message.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
191
Appendix F
Recruitment Letter
Greetings,
My name is David Emery. I am a doctoral candidate at the University of Southern California. As
part of the doctoral work for my dissertation, I am conducting a study to explore work trends
among teachers and former teachers. You are invited to participate in the study. If you agree to
participate, you will complete a survey that should take approximately 20-30 minutes to
complete.
Participation in the study is voluntary. Your name, address, and any other identifiable
information will not be linked to your response. Your relationship with your institution will not
be affected by your participation in this study. The focus is on your experiences with work tasks
and not on your work-site specifically.
Follow this link to the Survey:
Take the Survey
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:
https://usceducation.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_a03UkzIgvY0FQMZ
Best,
David Emery
Date of Preparation
11/30/2017
IRB Approval
9/27/2017
UP-17-00687
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
192
Appendix G
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale
Ralf Schwarzer, Gerdamarie S. Schmitz, & Gary T. Daytner, 1999
1. I am convinced that I am able to successfully teach all relevant subject content to even the most
difficult students.
2. I know that I can maintain a positive relationship with parents even when tensions arise.
3. When I try really hard, I am able to reach even the most difficult students.
4. I am convinced that, as time goes by, I will continue to become more and more capable of helping
to address my students‘ needs.
5. Even if I get disrupted while teaching, I am confident that I can maintain my composure and
continue to teach well.
6. I am confident in my ability to be responsive to my students‘ needs even if I am having a bad
day.
7. If I try hard enough, I know that I can exert a positive influence on both the personal and
academic development of my students.
8. I am convinced that I can develop creative ways to cope with system constraints (such as budget
cuts and other administrative problems) and continue to teach well.
9. I know that I can motivate my students to participate in innovative projects.
10. I know that I can carry out innovative projects even when I am opposed by
skeptical colleagues.
Response format:
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
193
(1) not at all true, (2) barely true, (3) moderately true, (4) exactly true
The first step in developing a new instrument to measure teacher self-efficacy was the identification of
different job skills within the teaching profession. Four major areas were identified: (a) job
accomplishment, (b) skill development on the job, (c) social interaction with students, parents, and
colleagues, and (d) coping with job stress. For each of these four domains teachers may hold different
self–efficacy expectations. These major areas appear to be of vital importance for successful teaching.
The second step included the development of 27 items to assess these four major areas of the teaching
profession. All items were constructed by explicitly following Bandura‘s social cognitive theory (Bandura,
1997; Schwarzer, 1992, 1993). The theory argues for a certain semantic structure for self–efficacy
items. First, the subject should be "I" since the aim is to assess an individual's subjective belief. An item
should contain verbs like "can", or "be able to", making clear that the item asks for succeeding because of
personal competence. Furthermore, items have to contain a barrier since there is no use in asking for
self–efficacy expectancies for actions that are not difficult to perform or that might just be routine.
Explicitly mentioning a barrier implies a certain grade of difficulty. Most people with a driver's license, for
example, will not find it difficult to drive and will thus have a rather high self–efficacy belief in this area; but
driving by night through a blizzard on icy country roads with no living soul in sight should be a different
matter. Instead of a barrier can also a resource that helps to perform a demanding task can also be used
to imply the grade of difficulty.
The pool of 27 items was part of a lengthy questionnaire being administered three times to approximately
300 German teachers within the nationwide field study Self-Efficacious Schools. The aim was to extract a
parsimonious instrument of about 10 items to economically assess efficacy beliefs within the four areas
mentioned above. The primary focus during the reduction if the items was on optimizing the validity of
the instrument rather than maximizing the internal consistency.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
194
Thus, Cronbach's alpha in the three samples was found to be between .76, and .82, test-retest
reliability resulted in .67 (N = 158), and .76 (N = 193) respectively, for the period of one year. For the
period of two years it was found to be .65 (N = 161).
As expected, the more specific instrument of Teacher Self–Efficacy yielded higher associations with
several other personal attitudes than the General Self–Efficacy scale. This can be regarded as a first
indication for discriminant validity of the new instrument. Moreover, the time teachers spent voluntarily
with their students was strongly associated with their Teacher Self–Efficacy.
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self–efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Schwarzer, R. (ed.) (1992). Self–efficacy. Thought control of action. Washington, DC:
Hemisphere.
Schwarzer, R. (1993). Streß, Angst und Handlungsregulation (3. Auflage). Stuttgart:
Kohlhammer.
Schmitz, G.S. (1998). Entwicklung der Selbstwirksamkeitserwartungen von
Lehrern. [Development of teacher's self-efficacy beliefs]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 2, 140-157.
Schmitz, G.S. & Schwarzer, R. (2000). Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern:
Längsschnittbefunde mit einem neuen Instrument [Perceived self-efficacy of teachers:
Longitudinal findings with a new instrument]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 14 (1), 12-
25.
Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a
predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. APPLIED
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
195
PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW,57, 152–171 (Special Issue:
Health and Well-Being). doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00359.x
Freie Universität Berlin
Abteilung für Gesundheitspsychologie
Habelschwerdter Allee 45, 14195 Berlin, Germany
FAX +49 30 838 55634
health@zedat.fu-berlin.de
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
196
Appendix H
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work Scale
Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction at Work Scale
Scale Description
Central to self-determination theory is the concept of basic psychological needs that are assumed
to the innate and universal. According to the theory, these needs--the needs for competence,
autonomy, and relatedness--must be ongoingly satisfied for people to develop and function in
healthy or optimal ways (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Many of the propositions of SDT derive from the
postulate of fundamental psychological needs, and the concept has proven essential for making
meaningful interpretations of a wide range of empirically isolated phenomena.
This 21-item scale addresses need satisfaction at work and has been used often (Deci, Ryan,
Gagné, Leone, Usunov, & Kornazheva, 2001; Ilardi, Leone, Kasser, & Ryan, 1993; Kasser,
Davey, & Ryan, 1992). The scale has evolved and changed since its first use in Kasser, Davey,
and Ryan (1992).
Please use the following references when using this scale: (Deci, Ryan, Gagné, Leone, Usunov,
& Kornazheva, 2001; Ilardi, Leone, Kasser, & Ryan, 1993; Kasser, Davey, & Ryan, 1992).
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human
needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagné, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P.
(2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former
Eastern Bloc country. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, in press.
Ilardi, B. C., Leone, D., Kasser, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Employee and supervisor
ratings of motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and
adjustment in a factory setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1789-1805.
Kasser, T., Davey, J., & Ryan, R. M. (1992). Motivation, dependability, and employee-
supervisor discrepancies in psychiatric vocational rehabilitation settings. Rehabilitation
Psychology, 37, 175-187.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
197
Basic Need Satisfaction at Work
When I Am At Work
The following questions concern your feelings about your job during the last year. (If you have
been on this job for less than a year, this concerns the entire time you have been at this job.)
Please indicate how true each of the following statement is for you given your experiences on
this job. Remember that your boss will never know how you responded to the questions. Please
use the following scale in responding to the items.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
not at all somewhat very
true true true
1. I feel like I can make a lot of inputs to deciding how my job gets done.
2. I really like the people I work with.
3. I do not feel very competent when I am at work.
4. People at work tell me I am good at what I do.
5. I feel pressured at work.
6. I get along with people at work.
7. I pretty much keep to myself when I am at work.
8. I am free to express my ideas and opinions on the job.
9. I consider the people I work with to be my friends.
10. I have been able to learn interesting new skills on my job.
11. When I am at work, I have to do what I am told.
12. Most days I feel a sense of accomplishment from working.
13. My feelings are taken into consideration at work.
14. On my job I do not get much of a chance to show how capable I am.
15. People at work care about me.
THE EFFECT ON TEACHER CAREER CHOICES
198
16. There are not many people at work that I am close to.
17. I feel like I can pretty much be myself at work.
18. The people I work with do not seem to like me much.
19. When I am working I often do not feel very capable.
20. There is not much opportunity for me to decide for myself how to go about my work.
21. People at work are pretty friendly towards me.
Scoring Information. Form three subscale scores by averaging item responses for each
subscale after reverse scoring the items that were worded in the negative direction. Specifically,
any item that has (R) after it in the code below should be reverse scored by subtracting the
person’s response from 8. The subscales are:
Autonomy: 1, 5(R), 8, 11(R), 13, 17, 20(R)
Competence: 3(R), 4, 10, 12, 14(R), 19(R)
Relatedness: 2, 6, 7(R), 9, 15, 16(R), 18(R), 21
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study explored the gap between Apple’s theory of intensification, the source of significant changes in the way that teachers work, and the theories of self‐efficacy and self‐determination, which have been linked to teacher burnout, turnover, and attrition. Understanding the connections between these theories is important because attrition rates have remained at nearly 50% for teachers with 0-5 years of teaching experience, negatively influencing students and schools. The study design utilized a mixed‐methods approach, using both closed and open‐ended questions, and two previously validated scales. As a multiple case‐study and retrospective look at the perceptions of 67 current and former teachers, study participants provided data on how they perceive intensification on their non‐instructional workload and how that workload impacts their personal and work lives, including whether a perceived loss of self‐efficacy and self‐determination plays a role in their decision to continue in the teaching profession. Qualitative and quantitative findings indicated that current and former teachers perceive a significant impact from intensification on their non‐instructional workload, and they feel the effects of that workload on the personal time they have available and the way in which they work. Further, the qualitative and quantitative findings indicated that intensification’s non‐instructional workload negatively impacts a teacher’s self‐efficacy and self‐determination, indicating strong connections between the theories, the source of the non‐instructional workload and the relationship that workload has to high levels of teacher attrition through perceived self‐efficacy and self‐determination. The findings describe only this study sample and do not indicate causal relationships in other populations.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Examining the impact of continuation high schools on students' self-efficacy
PDF
Teacher self-efficacy and instructional coaching in California public K-12 schools: effective instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher...
PDF
Best practices general education teachers implement to foster a positive classroom environment
PDF
What is the relationship between self-efficacy of community college mathematics faculty and effective instructional practice?
PDF
Better together: teacher attrition, burnout, and efficacy
PDF
The impact of the mindful method Youth Empowerment Seminar (YES!) on students' self-efficacy, self-regulation, and academic performance for becoming college- and career-ready
PDF
Instructional coaching in California public K-12 school districts: instructional coaching programs in elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher self-efficacy with educational...
PDF
Exploring primary teachers' self-efficacy and technology integration in early reading instruction
PDF
High school single-gender science classrooms, minority females, and perceptions of self-efficacy
PDF
Instructional coaching, educational technology, and teacher self-efficacy: a case study of instructional coaching programs in a California public K-12 school district
PDF
Factors influencing teachers' differentiated curriculum and instructional choices and gifted and non-gifted students' self-perceptions
PDF
An exploratory study on flipped learning and the use of self-regulation amongst undergraduate engineering students
PDF
Examining perspectives of academic autonomy in community college students: a quantitative study
PDF
Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction
PDF
How effective professional development in differentiated instruction can save Hawaii's Catholic schools
PDF
The perception of teachers’ pedagogy of technology integration: a case study of second‐grade teachers
PDF
Employing cognitive task analysis supported instruction to increase medical student and surgical resident performance and self-efficacy
PDF
Teachers' pedagogy and perceptions of technology integration: a mixed‐methods case study of kindergarten teachers
PDF
What is the relationship between early childhood teachers' training on the development of their teaching self-efficacy?
PDF
Teacher efficacy and classroom management in the primary setting
Asset Metadata
Creator
Emery, David Lewis
(author)
Core Title
The effect on teacher career choices: exploring teacher perceptions on the impact of non‐instructional workload on self‐efficacy and self‐determination
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
04/05/2018
Defense Date
03/12/2018
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
intensification,non‐instructional workload,OAI-PMH Harvest,self‐determination,self‐efficacy,teacher attrition
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Tobey, Patricia (
committee chair
), Combs, Wayne (
committee member
), Crispen, Patrick (
committee member
)
Creator Email
david.emery@gmail.com,davideme@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-491273
Unique identifier
UC11266891
Identifier
etd-EmeryDavid-6151.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-491273 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-EmeryDavid-6151.pdf
Dmrecord
491273
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Emery, David Lewis
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
intensification
non‐instructional workload
self‐determination
self‐efficacy
teacher attrition