Motivational Factors Influencing Teaching Choice: Measurement, Comparisons, and Consequences

• In Event: International Comparative Studies of Teacher Motivation and How They Matter

Abstract

Purpose. What are future teachers’ primary motivations to teach and do these differ across contexts? Are there identifiable motivational profiles and do they differ according to demography or context? (How) do initial teaching motivations predict to later outcomes following entry to the profession, for teachers and their students?

Framework. Initial motivations were measured by the FIT-Choice Scale (introduced by Authors, 2003), developed to assess the primary motivations of teachers to teach, grounded in Eccles’ et al. expectancy-value theory (1983). It taps “altruistic”-type motivations emphasised in the teacher education literature as well as more personally utilitarian and intrinsic motivations, ability-related beliefs and the negative motivation to teach as a “fallback”. Theory and measures are first presented, then comparative findings across more than 15 cultural settings to discover how context matters for teacher motivation. Longitudinal findings reveal how motivations matter for early career Australian teachers.

Methods. As well as our large-scale studies in Australia, the US and UK, others were in more than 10 countries. We examine differences in motivations in light of cultural and career features. Then, we present longitudinal findings from Australian data tracking experiences of 688 teachers since entry to teacher education (of the 1643 who qualified to teach, from T1 N=2007; another retained 97 had quit teaching/never taught; thus 48% retention).

Results. A common measurement platform enabled comparisons across settings. Ability motivations and intrinsic value (primary predictors in the underpinning expectancy-value model) were mostly highest-rated, but lower in collectivist cultures where career choice may be less based on individual interests/abilities. “Altruistic” social utility values were lower in more egalitarian cultures, where perceived need to achieve social equity is likely lower. Personal utility values were moderate, and consistently less high than intrinsic, ability or social utility motivations. Consistent with our studies, fallback career was rated low elsewhere, revealing teaching to be a career of choice. It thus seems there are “core” teacher motivations, and, context shapes prominence of individualistic, collectivistic, or personally utilitarian motivations.

Different motivational “types” were identified by hierarchical cluster analysis in Australian, US and UK samples, with differences readily interpretable from career pathway structures. Individuals with most positive seeming profiles were discovered to be most psychologically vulnerable, in longitudinal findings which revealed how motivations matter for early career Australian teachers’ diverse behavioural, engagement and burnout self-reports. Outcomes were consistently predicted by a subset of initial motivations (ability, intrinsic value, social utility value, and fallback career—negatively) in structural equation models. Personal utility values were not predictive, contrary to popular belief these are “unworthy” motivations. Motivations were moderately stable from entry to teacher education up to 8 years’ teaching.

Significance. Caution must be exercised before simple application of our findings to selection into teacher education. The fact that motivations are moderately stable through teacher education into early career teaching, also means they are subject to change, and possibly, amenable to intervention. More work is needed concerning contextual moderators and mediators which affect motivations—particularly those which may frustrate beginning teachers’ positive and productive initial motivations to teach.

Authors

• Helen M.G. Watt, Monash University

• Paul W. Richardson, Monash University