Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research
ISSN (Print): 1949-4270 - ISSN (Online): 1949-4289

Research article    |    Open Access
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2021, Vol. 16(2) 330-353

Evaluation of Teachers' Motivation and Curriculum Autonomy Levels

B. Barış Yıldız, Gökhan Günay & Fatih Mutlu Özbilen

pp. 330 - 353   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.345.15

Publish Date: May 27, 2021  |   Single/Total View: 266/678   |   Single/Total Download: 379/1.220

PDF Download

Abstract

The aim of this research is to evaluate teachers' motivation and curriculum autonomy levels. The research is quantitative and descriptive and designed according to the survey model. The sample of the research consisted of 340 teachers who have been reached by simple random sampling method who have been worked in public primary and secondary schools in Istanbul. Motivation Scale developed by Gagné, Forest, Gilbert, Aube, Morin, and Malorni (2010) and adapted into Turkish by Çevik and Köse (2017) has been used to determine teachers' motivation levels. Teachers' curriculum autonomy levels have been determined with The Teacher Autonomy Scale developed by Yolcu (2019). According to the research results, teachers' motivation and curriculum autonomy levels are high. It has been examined whether the motivation and curriculum autonomy levels of teachers differ significantly according to the variables gender, professional seniority, educational status and the number of projects participated in professional life. It has been found that the levels of motivation differ significantly according to gender and the levels of curriculum autonomy differ according to number of projects participated in professional life. Finally, the research has revealed that there is a medium-level, positive and significant relationship between teachers' motivation and curriculum autonomy levels.

Keywords: Motivation, Teacher Motivation, Curriculum Autonomy

How to Cite this Article?

APA 7th edition
Yildiz, B.B., Gunay, G., & Ozbilen, F.M. (2021). Evaluation of Teachers’ Motivation and Curriculum Autonomy Levels. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(2), 330-353. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.345.15

Harvard
Yildiz, B., Gunay, G. and Ozbilen, F. (2021). Evaluation of Teachers’ Motivation and Curriculum Autonomy Levels. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(2), pp. 330-353.

Chicago 16th edition
Yildiz, B. Baris, Gokhan Gunay and Fatih Mutlu Ozbilen (2021). "Evaluation of Teachers’ Motivation and Curriculum Autonomy Levels". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 16 (2):330-353. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.345.15

References
  1. Akhtar, S. N. (2013). The relationship between teacher motivation and students’ academic achievement at secondary school level (Unpubished doctoral dissertation). University of Education, Lahore. [Google Scholar]
  2. Akhtar, S. N., Iqbal, M., & Tatlah, I. A. (2017). Relationship between intrinsic motivation and students’ academic achievement: A secondary level evidence. Bulletin of Education and Research, 39(2), 19-29. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ayral, M., Özdemir, N., Türedi, A., Yılmaz-Fındık, L., Büyükgöze, H., Demirezen, S., Özarslan, H., & Tahirbegi, Y. (2014). Öğretmen özerkliği ile öğrenci başarısı arasındaki ilişki: PISA örneği. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 207-218. [Google Scholar]
  4. Barlı, Ö., Bilgili, B., Çelik, S., & Bayrakçeken, S. (2005). İlköğretim okul öğretmenlerinin motivasyonları: Farklılıkların ve sorunların araştırılması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(1), 391-417. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bastick, T. (2000). The measurement of teacher motivation: Cross-cultural and gender comparisons. Paper presentation at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research: New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ben-Peretz, M. (1980). Teachers’ role in curriculum development: An alternative approach. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'education, 5(2) 52-62. [Google Scholar]
  7. Behroozi, A., & Osam, Ü. V. (2016). Teacher autonomy from the perspective of Iranian English teachers. Journal of Teaching and Education, 5(2), 91-98. [Google Scholar]
  8. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (11. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  9. Can, S. (2015). Investigation of the motivation level of teachers working at state schools in relation to some variables. International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(3), 153-161. [Google Scholar]
  10. Canbolat, Y. (2020). Türkiye’de ortaöğretim öğretmenlerinin mesleki özerkliği: Var olan ve olası politikaların bir analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 45(202), 141-171. doi: 10.15390/EB.2020.7833 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Collier, J. (2002). What is autonomy? In International Journal of Computing Anticipatory Systems: CASY 2001-Fifth International Conference, Liege, Belgium, 13-18 August. [Google Scholar]
  12. Çermik, H., Doğan, B., & Şahin, A. (2010). Sınıf öğretmenliği öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik mesleğini tercih sebepleri. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28 (2), 201-212. [Google Scholar]
  13. Çevik, A., & Köse, A. (2017). Öğretmenlerin okul kültürü algıları ile motivasyonları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(2), 996-1014. [Google Scholar]
  14. Çiftçi, N. (2017). Öğretmenlerin algılarına göre motivasyon kaynaklarının belirlenmesi (Unpublished master’s thesis), Maltepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul. [Google Scholar]
  15. Çobanoğlu, F., & Barutçu, A. (2020). Okullarda takım liderliği ve öğretmen motivasyonu. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13(75), 545-553. [Google Scholar]
  16. Çolak, İ., & Altınkurt, Y. (2017). Okul iklimi ile öğretmenlerin özerklik davranışları arasındaki ilişki. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 23(1), 33-71. [Google Scholar]
  17. Çolak, İ., Altınkurt, Y., & Yılmaz, K. (2017). Öğretmenlerin özerklik davranışları ile iş doyumları arasındaki ilişki. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), 189-208. [Google Scholar]
  18. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182-185. doi: 10.1037/a0012801 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation a literature review. System, 23(2), 165-174. doi: 10.1016/0346-251X(95)00005-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Emiroğlu, O. (2017). Öğretmen motivasyon kaynaklarına ilişkin okul yöneticisi ve öğretmen görüşleri (Unpublished doctoral thesis), KKTC Yakın Doğu Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Lefkoşa. [Google Scholar]
  21. Ertürk, R. (2016). Öğretmenlerin iş motivasyonları. Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(3), 1-15. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gagné, M., Forest, J., Gilbert, M.H., Aube, C., Morin, E. & Malorni, A. (2010). The motivation at work scale: Validation evidence in two languages. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(4), 628-646. doi: 10.1177/0013164409355698 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Gokce, F. (2010). Assessment of teacher motivation. School Leadership and Management, 30(5), 487-499. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2010.525228 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. Gorozidis, G., & Papaioannou, A. G. (2014). Teachers’ motivation to participate in training and to implement innovations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2013.12.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Gurganious, N. J. (2017). The relationship between teacher autonomy and middle school students’ achievement in science (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Walden University, Minnesota. [Google Scholar]
  26. Han, J., & Yin, H. (2016). Teacher motivation: Definition, research development and implications for teachers. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1217819, Doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1217819 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hayden, S. S. (2011). Teacher motivation and student achievement in middle school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Walden University, College of Education, Minnesota. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hong, W. P., & Youngs, P. (2016). Why are teachers afraid of curricular autonomy? Contradictory effects of the new national curriculum in South Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(1), 20-33. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2014.959471 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  29. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Huang, J. (2005). Teacher autonomy in language learning: A review of the research. In K. R. Katyal, H. C. Lam & X. J. Ding (Eds.), Research studies in education (Volume 3, pp. 203-218). Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong. [Google Scholar]
  31. Iliya, A., & Ifeoma, L. G. (2015). Assessment of teacher motivation approaches in the less developed countries. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(22), 10-17. [Google Scholar]
  32. Julião, A. (2018). Teacher curriculum autonomy in Angola: a look at the legislative perspective. Revista Electrónica de Investigação e Desenvolvimento, 2(9). [Google Scholar]
  33. Karasar, N. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (19. baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. [Google Scholar]
  34. Keller, M. M., Neumann, K., & Fischer, H. E. (2017). The impact of physics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and motivation on students’ achievement and interest. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(5), 586-614. doi: 10.1002/tea.21378 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  35. Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26-41. doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p26 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. Kotherja, O., & Rapti, E. (2015). The importance of motivation in employees’ performance in schools. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 5(2), 117-122. doi: 10.5901/jesr.2015.v5n2p117 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  37. Lamb, T. (2008). Learner autonomy and teacher autonomy: Synthesizing an agenda. In T. Lamd & H. Reinders (Eds.), Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities, and responses (pp. 269-284). John Benjamins Publishing Company. [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, K. (2014). Competency-based curriculum and curriculum autonomy in the Republic of Korea. IBE Working Papers on Curriculum Issues No. 12. UNESCO International Bureau of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ibe.unesco.org/en/document/competency-based-curriculum-and-curriculum-autonomy-republic-korea-ibe-working-papers Retrieved date 25.12.2020. [Google Scholar]
  39. Little, D. (1995). Learning as dialogue: The dependence of learner autonomy on teacher autonomy. System, 23(2), 175-181. doi: 10.1016/0346-251X(95)00006-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. McMillan, J. H., & Forsyth, D. R. (1991). What theories of motivation say about why learners learn. New directions for teaching and learning, 45(2), 39-51. doi: 10.1002/tl.37219914507 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  41. Meece, J. L., Glienke, B. B., & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 351-373. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. Mello, H., Dutra, D. P., & Jorge, M. (2008). Action research as a tool for teacher autonomy. DELTA: Documentação de estudos em lingüística teórica e aplicada, 4(2), 113-128. doi: 10.1590/S0102-44502008000300007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  43. Memişoğlu, S. P., & Kalay, M. (2017). İlkokul ve ortaokullarda görev yapan öğretmenlerin örgütsel bağlılık ve motivasyonları arasındaki ilişki (Bolu ili örneği). Electronic Turkish Studies, 12(4), 367-392. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.11379 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  44. Moomaw, W. E. (2005). Teacher-perceived autonomy: A construct validation of the teacher autonomy scale (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). College of Professional Studies, University of West Florida. [Google Scholar]
  45. Namunga, N. W. (2017). The relationship between teacher and student motivation and the quality of teaching and learning in secondary schools. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications , 7(2), 428-434. [Google Scholar]
  46. Neves de Jesus, S., & Lens, W. (2005). An integrated model for the study of teacher motivation. Applied Psychology, 54(1), 119-134. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00199.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  47. Özbilen, F. M., Günay, G., & Yıldız, B. B. (2020). Evaluation of teachers’ motivation and participation levels in professional development activities. International Journal of Educational Studies and Policy (IJESP), 1(1), 15-35. [Google Scholar]
  48. Öztürk, İ. H. (2011). Öğretmen özerkliği üzerine kuramsal bir inceleme. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(35), 82-99. [Google Scholar]
  49. Pearson, L. C., & Moomaw, W. (2005). The relationship between teacher autonomy and stress, work satisfaction, empowerment, and professionalism. Educational Research Quarterly, 29(1), 38-54. [Google Scholar]
  50. Pearson, L. C., & Moomaw, W. (2006). Continuing validation of the teaching autonomy scale. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(1), 44-51. doi: 10.3200/JOER.100.1.44-51 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  51. Revee, J., & Su, Y. L. (2014). Teacher motivation. In M. Gagné (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory (pp. 349-362). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  52. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self‐regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self‐determination, and will?. Journal of personality, 74(6), 1557-1586. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  53. Saka, O. (2004). Araştırma evreleri II: Araştırmalarda deneklerin seçimi. Türkiye Acil Tıp Dergisi, 4(2), 81-85. [Google Scholar]
  54. Sarı, M., Canoğulları, E., & Yıldız, E. (2018). Öğretmenlerin okul yaşam kalitesi algıları ile mesleki motivasyon düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 47, 387-409. doi: 10.21764/maeuefd.364454 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  55. Sari, H., & Yetkiner, A. (2020). Relationships between job satisfaction, motivation and life satisfaction in the teachers: A structural equation modeling study. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(3), 211-222. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2020.248.16 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  56. Schellenbach-Zell, J., & Gräsel, C. (2010). Teacher motivation for participating in school innovations-supporting factors. Journal for Educational Research Online, 2(2), 34-54. [Google Scholar]
  57. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Muller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8, 23-74. [Google Scholar]
  58. Sehrawat, J. (2014). Teacher autonomy: Key to teaching success. Hartıyam International Journal Of Education & Researcha: Quarterly Peer Reviewed International Journal of Research& Education, 4(1), 2277-1255. [Google Scholar]
  59. Shome, S., & Natarajan, C. (2013). Projects in school learning: Teacher experiences. In Nagarjuna G., Arvind Jamakhandi, and Ebie M. Sam (Eds.), Proceedings of epiSTEME -5 (pp. 321-327). [Google Scholar]
  60. Silberstein, M., & Ben-Peretz, M. (1987). The concept of teacher autonomy in curriculum materials: An operative interpretation. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 3(1), 29-44. [Google Scholar]
  61. Smith, R. C. (2003). Teacher education for teacher-learner autonomy. In Symposium for Language Teacher Educators: Papers from Three IALS Symposia (CD-ROM). Edinburgh: IALS, University of Edinburgh. Retrieved from http://homepages.warwick.ac.uk/~elsdr/Teacher_autonomy.pdf Retrieved date 28.12.2020 [Google Scholar]
  62. Sucu, A. (2016). Öğretmenlerin motivasyonu ile okul yöneticilerinin öğretimsel liderlik davranışları arasındaki ilişkinin analizi (Unpublished master’s thesis). İnönü Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Malatya. [Google Scholar]
  63. Şeker, S. E. (2015). Motivasyon teorisi (Motivation theory). YBS Ansiklopedi, 2(1), 22-26. [Google Scholar]
  64. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  65. Taşkesen, S., Taşkesen, O., Bakırhan, A., & Tanoğlu, Ş. (2018). Görsel sanatlar öğretmenlerinin motivasyon düzeyleri ve motivasyonlarını etkileyen faktörler üzerine bir araştırma (Erzincan ili örneği). Erzincan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi (ERZSOSDE), 11(2), 77-85. [Google Scholar]
  66. Tohidi, H., & Jabbari, M. M. (2012). The effects of motivation in education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 820-824. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.148 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  67. Triyanto, R. A. D. H. (2016). Teacher motivation based on gender, tenure and level of education. The New Educational Review, 45(3), 199-209. doi: 10.15804/tner.2016.45.3.16 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  68. Uçar, R., & Dağlı, A. (2017). İlkokul müdürlerinin dağıtımcı liderlik davranışları ile öğretmenlerin motivasyon ve yaratıcılık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 16(60), 198-216. doi: 10.17755/esosder.289661 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  69. Ugar, Y. (2019). Okul müdürlerinin liderlik uygulamaları ile öğretmenlerin motivasyonu arasındaki ilişki (Unpublished master’s thesis), İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul. [Google Scholar]
  70. Uğraş, S., & Özen, G. (2019). Examining Teaching Motivations of Physical Education Teachers. International Journal of Education Technology and Scientific Researches, 4(10), 497-512. doi: 10.18826/ijsets.83797 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  71. Ulas, J., & Aksu, M. (2015). Development of teacher autonomy scale for Turkish teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 344-349. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  72. Urhan, F. (2018). Öğretmenlerin motivasyon düzeylerine etki eden değişkenlerin analizi (Unpublished master’s thesis), Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya. [Google Scholar]
  73. Utomo, H. B. (2018). Teacher motivation behavior: The importance of personal expectations, need satisfaction, and work climate. International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education (IJPTE), 2(2), 333-342. doi: 10.20961/ijpte.v2i2.24036 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  74. Varatharaj, R., Abdullah, A. G. K., & Ismail, A. (2015). The effect of teacher autonomy on assessment practices among Malaysian cluster school teachers. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 5(1), 31-36. [Google Scholar]
  75. Watt, H. M., & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Motivations, perceptions, and aspirations concerning teaching as a career for different types of beginning teachers. Learning and instruction, 18(5), 408-428. [Google Scholar]
  76. Worth, J., & Van den Brande, J. (2020) Teacher autonomy: How does it relate to job satisfaction and retention?, Slough: NFER. Retrieved from https://tdtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/teacher_autonomy_how_does_it_relate_to_job_satisfaction_and_retention-1.pdf Retrieved date 05.01.2021. [Google Scholar]
  77. Wu, S. M. (2015). Development and application of the measures of school value, teacher autonomy, and teacher motivation. The New Educational Review, 39(1), 240-251. [Google Scholar]
  78. Yaman, E. (2001). Öğretmenlik mesleğinin sosyo-ekonomik statüsü/bu mesleğin bir bayan mesleği haline dönüşmesi durumu ve eğitim fakültesi üzerine bir araştırma. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (2), 53-68. [Google Scholar]
  79. Yazıcı, A. S. (2016). The relationship between the teacher autonomy and learner autonomy support behaviors. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(2), 1-23. doi: 10.12973/jesr.2016.62.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  80. Yıldırım, K. (2021). Analysing the role of external policy interventions in explaining the trend of school educators’ intrinsic motivation. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(1), 306-327. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.334.17 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  81. Yılmaz, P. (2017). İlkokul öğretmenleri ve yöneticilerinin iş motivasyon düzeylerinin incelenmesi (Unpublished master’s thesis), İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi-Marmara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Yönetimi ve Denetimi Ortak Yüksek Lisans Programı, İstanbul. [Google Scholar]
  82. Yolcu, O. (2019). Ortaokul fen bilimleri öğretim programının Stufflebeam değerlendirme modeli temelinde öğretmen özerkliği açısından incelenmesi (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Aydın. [Google Scholar]
  83. Yolcu, O., & Akar-Vural, R. (2020). A scale development study on measuring science teachers’ autonomy on curriculum. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 10(1), 29-52. doi: 10.31704/ijocis.2020.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
Meta
Vol. 16 (2)
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 16 Issue 2

June 2021

All Manuscript

Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research

Copyright © 2025 Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website were created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.