Download ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTITY, SELF-CONCEPT, AND

ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTITY, SELF-CONCEPT, AND COMMITMENT
AMONG TEACHERS IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA
by
Debra Ann Collins Boutwell
Ed.S., The University of West Florida, 2000
M.A., The University of West Florida, 1983
B.M., William Carey College, 1978
A dissertation submitted to the
Department of Curriculum Studies and Educational Leadership
College of Professional Studies,
The University of West Florida
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
2003
The dissertation of Debra Ann Collins Boutwell is accepted:
_________________________________________
Sherri L. Zimmerman, Committee Member
__________________
Date
_________________________________________
Alice D. Barlar, Committee Member
__________________
Date
_________________________________________
Arthur H. Olson, Committee Member
__________________
Date
_________________________________________
Christine K. Pierce, Committee Member
__________________
Date
_________________________________________
George M. Barry, Committee Chair
__________________
Date
Accepted for the Department/Division:
_________________________________________
Rex E. Schmid, Chair
__________________
Date
Accepted for the College:
__________________________________________
Janet K. Pilcher, Dean
__________________
Date
Accepted for the University:
__________________________________________
Carl A. Backman, Associate Vice President
Academic Affairs
ii
__________________
Date
DEDICATION
To the teachers of Okaloosa County School District who taught me as a child and
an adult, I wish for you the recognition and respect that you so much deserve, and I thank
you for being the professionals that you truly are.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION................................................................................................................ iii
LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................... vii
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................1
A. Organizational Identity .................................................................2
B. Self-Concept .................................................................................6
C. Organizational Identification ........................................................9
1. Organizational Identification: Commitment to Work...........11
2. Social Identity Theory...........................................................12
3. School Identity in Our Society..............................................12
D. Research Questions.....................................................................15
E. Definition of Terms.....................................................................15
CHAPTER II.
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ..................................................17
A. Organizational Identity ...............................................................18
B. Definition of Self-Concept..........................................................21
C. Theoretical Models of Self-Concept...........................................23
D. Organizational Identification ......................................................26
1. Social Identity Theory...........................................................28
2. Evolution and Organizational Identity..................................29
CHAPTER III.
METHOD .........................................................................................32
A. Purpose of the Study ...................................................................32
B. Research Design..........................................................................34
1. Design ...................................................................................35
2. Participants............................................................................36
3. Human Subjects Protection...................................................38
C. Data Collection Procedures.........................................................39
1. Quantitative Analysis Component ........................................40
a. Research Question 1 .......................................................40
b. Organizational Identity ...................................................40
iv
c. Self-Concept ...................................................................42
d. Sociability .......................................................................46
e. Job Competence ..............................................................46
f. Nurturance.......................................................................46
g. Intelligence......................................................................47
h. Sense of Humor...............................................................47
i. Organizational Identification ..........................................49
2. Qualitative Analysis Component ..........................................52
a. Research Question 2 .......................................................52
b. Interview Question 1 and Analysis .................................53
c. Interview Question 2 and Analysis .................................53
d. Interview Question 3 and Analysis .................................53
e. Interview Question 4 and Analysis .................................54
f. Interview Question 5 and Analysis .................................54
g. Interview Question 6 and Analysis .................................54
h. Interview Question 7 and Analysis .................................54
i. Interview Question 8 and Analysis .................................55
3. Data Analysis Procedure.......................................................55
4. Researcher.............................................................................56
CHAPTER IV.
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA ............................59
A. Overview of the Study ................................................................59
1. Purpose of the Research........................................................59
2. Research Questions...............................................................60
3. Quantitative Instruments.......................................................60
4. Qualitative Interview Survey ................................................61
B. Description of Participants..........................................................62
C. Procedures for Data Analysis......................................................64
D. Characteristics of Teacher Respondents for Quantitative
Instruments..................................................................................65
E. Characteristics of Teacher Respondents From the
Qualitative Survey ......................................................................68
F. Measures of Central Tendency for Quantitative Instruments .....68
G. Analysis for Research Question 1...............................................77
1. Independent Variable Model for Predicting
Organizational or Teacher Commitment ..............................79
2. Regression Model for Predicting Teacher Commitment ......79
H. Analysis for Research Question 2...............................................81
I. Summary .....................................................................................86
CHAPTER V.
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................89
A. Overview and Purpose of This Study .........................................89
B. Conclusions.................................................................................90
1. Research Question 1 .............................................................91
v
C.
D.
E.
F.
2. Research Question 2 .............................................................93
Implications From This Study in Reference to the
Research Literature .....................................................................96
Recommendations for Future Research ....................................102
1. Population and Sample .......................................................103
2. Method ................................................................................103
3. Inclusion of Other Variables...............................................103
Recommendations for Practitioners..........................................104
Summary ...................................................................................107
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................108
APPENDIXES ..............................................................................................................117
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Demographic Information Regarding Participating Schools..............................37
2.
Sample of Items From the Global Self-Worth Domain of the Adult
Self-Perception Profile........................................................................................45
3.
Reliability Coefficients, Means, and Standard Deviations for the Domain
of Global Self-Worth on the ASPP.....................................................................48
4.
Research Design..................................................................................................57
5.
Number of Teachers per School who Completed the Quantitative
Instruments and Volunteered for Interview Survey............................................63
6.
Demographic Data for Teachers Completing the Quantitative Instruments
(n = 140)..............................................................................................................66
7.
Years in Teaching for Respondents Completing the Quantitative
Instruments..........................................................................................................66
8.
Number of Years Teaching at Present School for Teachers Completing
the Quantitative Instruments ...............................................................................67
9.
Number of Extra Hours Worked per Week for Teachers Completing the
Quantitative Instruments.....................................................................................67
10. Mean Score Values for the Quantitative Instruments .........................................69
11. Mean Values for Organizational Identity by OID Item (N = 223) .....................70
12. Mean Values for Self-Concept by ASPP Item (N = 223) ...................................72
vii
13. Mean Values for Commitment by OCQ Item (N = 223) ....................................75
14. Correlation Coefficients of Organizational Commitment (OCQ), School
Identity (OID), and Self-Concept (ASPP) ..........................................................78
15. Univariate Tests of Significance for Organizational or Teacher
Commitment From School Identity and Self-Concept .......................................79
16. Multiple Correlation Coefficients for the Independent Variables of School
Identity (OID) and Self-Concept (ASPP) on the Dependent Variable of
Teacher Commitment (OCQ) .............................................................................80
17. Qualitative Interview Survey: Mean Values for Teachers’ Self-Reported
Commitment Level, Professional Self-Concept, Extra Hours Worked per
Week, and Number of Years Teaching...............................................................82
18. Correlations Between the Variables: School Commitment, Professional,
Self-Concept, Extra Hours Worked, and Years in Teaching Included in the
Qualitative Interview Survey ..............................................................................83
F1. Compilation of Interview Results .....................................................................139
viii
ABSTRACT
ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTITY, SELF-CONCEPT, AND COMMITMENT AMONG
TEACHERS IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA
Debra Ann Collins Boutwell
Effects of school identity and teacher self-concept as indicators to commitment
were examined. A total of 223 elementary, middle, and high school teachers from 7
northwest Florida schools completed instruments and interviews. Teachers’ school
(organizational) identities, measured by the Organizational Identification Scale, were
combined with their self-concepts, measured by the Adult Self-Perception Profile, to
predict 63% in the variance of commitment at work, measured by the Occupational
Commitment Questionnaire. Findings indicated a significant relationship between school
identity and teacher commitment (.78), between teacher self-concept and commitment
(.21), but not between school identity and teacher self-concept (.13). Teachers valued
most highly interactions with students; 66% noted the need to be recognized, praised, and
respected as professionals.
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Positive outcomes may result from the relationship between the organizational
identity of our workplace and our self-image. These outcomes have the power not only to
increase economic productivity, but also to accentuate our emotional well-being
(Ashforth & Mael, 1992; Mael, 2001). Social identity theory proposes that a person can
acquire a more positive social identity through an association with workplaces that have
positive identities (Ashforth & Mael; Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail, 1994; Gatewood,
Gowan, & Lautenschlager, 1993). These findings attribute influence on self-affirmation
and self-worth from the organizational workplace and the individual’s perception of that
organizational identity. Since people’s self-concepts and work behaviors are affected by
their perceived organizational identities, social identity theory is an important concept to
study and to understand.
Identification is a powerful human tendency to tie one’s identity to larger entities.
When we identify with a company, a country, or a movement, we believe that the
organization’s activities reflect on us, and that our activities reflect on the
organization. (Mael, 2001, p. 2)
In economically developed nations, 75% to over 90% of those who work do so for an
organization. These employees typically spend 40 hours a week in a workplace for 30 to
1
2
50 years (Serksnyte, 1999). The organizational behavior of millions of people is affected
by their degree of identification with the workplace.
Schools are work organizations in which educators and their employers may
experience reciprocal outcomes resulting from the interaction of organizational identity
and self-concept. I examined the interaction of educators’ organizational identities and
their self-concepts as they relate to commitment at work. The results of this study may
reflect the findings from the business world that there is a direct relationship between
employees’ organizational identities and their commitment at work or, perhaps, lead to
different outcomes. The psychology of social identity theory is powerful because it
implies that what members think about their work organizations can change their
behavior and perception of self (Dutton et al., 1994).
Organizational Identity
Findings from business organizations have indicated that an employee’s cognitive
connection with the business organization is derived from the images that are in the mind
of the employee (Dutton et al., 1994). The first image is known as the perceived
organizational identity and is what the employee believes is distinctive, central, and
enduring about the organization. The second image is a construed external image that the
employee believes outsiders think about the organization. The employee’s perceived
attributes of the organization, which arise from perceived organizational identity and
construed external image, interacts with the employee’s own self-concept to produce the
construct of organizational identification. When an employee’s organizational identity is
strong, the individual’s self-concept may have many of the same characteristics as the
3
organization, and organizational identification is strengthened from the positive
relationship between organization identity and self-concept. In other words, what defines
the organization as a social group also defines the self-concept for employees who
strongly identify with their workplace. This positive congruent relationship between
organizational identity and self-concept strengthens the organizational identification of
the employees. Strong organizational identification leads to behavioral attitudes in
employees such as (a) commitment, (b) longevity, and (c) loyalty.
When a person’s self-concept and the perceived organizational identity are strong
and similar, that person becomes more engaged and committed because the cognitive and
emotive connection provides for self-expression and goal-oriented behavior (Shamir,
1991). People may be drawn to organizations that reflect their values and self-concept
because they can express themselves and secure an attachment. This exchange enables us
to recognize ourselves and be recognized through the cognitive identities between
organization and self (Serksnyte, 1999). O’Reilly, Chatman, and Caldwell (1991, 1996)
found that people with high organizational identities that complement their perceived
self-image had lower turnover rates and reported high intentions to stay committed to
their work. This high degree of internalization of the organization is the result of the
degree of congruence between organizational identity and self-concept; the greater the
congruence, the greater the degree of satisfaction and commitment. People with high
levels of organizational identification define themselves and their work organization with
the same attributes. Individuals develop a sense of who they are and develop goals and
attitudes in relation to what they do at work.
4
There is a reciprocal quality between the identity of a work organization and an
employee’s self-concept. The more a positive organizational identity accentuates a
member’s self-concept, the stronger his organizational identification (Ashforth & Mael,
1992; Mael, 2001). This is true for employees who associate with an organization that has
an attractive organizational image. The affiliation between the organizational identity and
employees’ self-concept allows the employees to see themselves with the same positive
qualities, thus strengthening self-worth. Mael and Ashforth (1992) found that oneness or
belongingness to an organization defines the employee and enhances self-esteem. The
greater the distinctiveness of a positive organizational image relative to other
organizations, the stronger a member’s organizational identification. The member’s
organizational identification strengthens as the organization gains distinctiveness among
its organizational competitors.
In their study of universities, O’Reilly et al. (1996) found that the degree of
perceived organizational identity affects tenure and intensity of commitment to the
organization. The longer employees stay, the greater the degree of pride and ownership
and increased organizational identity that the members feel. Cooperation and
commitment to the organization as a whole rather than concerns of self-preservation are
evident when people strongly identify with the organization.
People are motivated to maintain a cognitive consistency between their selfconcept and a strong organizational identity. Employees will seek more contact with an
organization to increase this consistency if the organizational image is diminished for any
reason (Festinger, 1957). Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance states that a person’s
emotional well-being is affected by the congruence of the organizational identification
5
and self-perceptions. For instance, when a strong organizational identity is confronted
with an unfavorable circumstance, the employees will try to resolve the incongruence in
order to maintain balance with their self-concept. If the inconsistency or negative
attribute cannot be reconciled or altered, the employee with strong organizational
identification will experience negative personal outcomes such as depression or stress.
Kahn (1990) found that employees will disengage themselves from prior roles of work
ethic or exit if the inconsistency is not resolved. Schwartz (1987) found that people who
identify strongly with their work organizations will personally experience threats and
negative happenstance. Festinger noted, “The important point to remember is that there is
pressure to produce consonant relations among cognitions and to avoid or reduce
dissonance” (p. 9).
Although it is a predecessor, organizational identity is unlike organizational
identification (commitment) because organizational identity does not require a history of
interaction. In a study conducted with the U.S. Army, Ashforth and Mael (1992) found
that new recruits had a higher organizational identity with the Army than that of
experienced enlisted soldiers. Therefore, a positive organizational identity did not require
a long tenure, career success, or any sustained experiences with the company. The
construed external image of an organization can develop an immediate and strongly
perceived organizational identity with new members. One’s psychological attachment to
an organization can be an extension of interpersonal attachment based on an external
construed image and can exist outside interpersonal interaction. Organizational identity
based upon perceived and construed image allows people to identify with the
organization and their desired or perceived self-concept.
6
Behaviorists studying the business community have emphasized social identity
theory with regard to the interworkings of organizational identity and self-concept
because this favored principle benefits both the individual and business. LaMastro (2002)
wrote that quality organizations are concerned about corporate culture because it helps to
sustain the commitment of individual members to the good of the organization.
Employees actually internalize the values of their workplace and they define themselves
in terms of their membership to that particular organization, thus creating the employees’
organizational identification. Employees reciprocate the organization with favorable
attitudes and behaviors such as (a) commitment, (b) job attendance, and (c) increased
levels of performance.
Self-Concept
In the 19th century, William James (1890/1963) defined self-concept as the
response to successes and failures in areas that one has deemed important to one’s selfworth. James’ description of self-concept is contingent upon the outcomes from situations
that a person has identified as important to his definition of self. A person’s self-concept
depends on perceived successes or failures in self-appointed domains. These domains
may be in varied areas such as (a) physical attractiveness, (b) competence, (c) athletic
ability, (d) affiliation, and (e) approval from others. James proposed that self-concept
fluctuates in relation to events and circumstances in the domains of perceived
importance.
In its widest possible sense, however, a man’s self is the sum total of all that he
can call his, not only his body and his psychic powers, but his clothes and his
7
house, his wife and children, his ancestors and friends, his reputation and works,
his lands and horses, and yacht and bank account. All these things give him the
same emotions. If they prosper he feels triumphant, if they dwindle and die away
he feels cast down--not necessarily in the same degree for each thing but in much
the same way for all. (James, p. 188)
It is the person’s interpretation of the event that affects a sense of personal worth; a
subjective evaluation that directly impacts one’s level of self-concept (Crocker & Wolfe,
2001).
Erikson (1982) suggested that in late life, individuals develop a mature selfrepresentation or self-concept by confronting and resolving their goals and achievements
with their successes and failures. Mature adults move from representations of self that are
poorly differentiated in youth to a defined inward orientation (Labouvie-Vief et al.,
1994). In childhood and adolescence there is an outward orientation and the assimilation
of societal expectations. Later, self-concept becomes more flexible and is integrated with
subjective experiences. According to Labouvie-Vief et al., self-representation scores peak
at middle age and are lowest in preadolescent and older adult-age groups. There may be a
strong correlation between age, career, and organizational identity in that the middle age
of life has the highest self-concept scores. Erikson wrote,
From here we could once more follow the stages of development and study the
way in which in languages the fatherhoods and motherhoods, the sisterhoods and
brotherhoods of the “we” come to share a joined identity experienced as most
real. But here also it is necessary to amend the very concept of a reality which, as
8
I complained at the beginning, is all too often seen as the “outerworld” to be
adjusted to. (p. 88)
This also is the stage when people are most likely to have associated with work
organizations, to be work-oriented, and to have formed significant organizational
identities.
A theoretical perspective of self-concept was developed by Shavelson, Hubner,
and Stanton (1976) who wrote that a person’s self-perceptions are formed through
experiences with and interpretations of his environment. Self-concept is an outcome of
perceptions but also a mediating variable that is continually affected by internal and
external influences. The study of self-concept has supported multidimensional aspects in
that it can be a system of personal nature or shared by a group (Marsh, Craven, & Debus,
1997). In addition to horizontal extensions of self-concept, it also is defined
hierarchically with (a) inferences about the self in specific situations at the base; (b)
broader extensions to social, physical, and academic levels in the middle; and (c) at the
apex, a global self-concept (Byrne, 1996).
There is another description of self-concept as a global model that is relatively
unidimensional. Rosenberg’s (1979) global scale of self-concept is sometimes referred to
as self-esteem but refers to generalized characteristics that describe the person’s overall
state. These self-perceptions that add up to a self-concept are based upon responses that
take into account measures of importance, saliency, certainty, and ideal standards. Scales
for measuring global self-concept base their responses on immediate experience, mood,
or the contents of short-term memory rather than requiring cognitive processing of
searching for and weighting relevant information from various hierarchical scales for
9
academic, social, and general self-concepts. Byrne (1984) claimed that global selfconcept scales measure a generalized conglomeration of attributes and are more stable
than specific components of hierarchical self-concept scales that reflect multiple items.
For the purpose of this study, self-concept will be referred to as a global model that is
unidimensional and representing an overall personal assessment based on self-perception.
Organizational Identification
Organizational identification is a powerful cognitive schema that has both positive
and negative impacts in rapidly changing environments (Albert & Whetten, 1985; Mael,
2001). A highly positive organizational identification can provide a psychological anchor
during times of threat or challenge to an organization. Employees will dedicate
themselves to the preservation of the organization’s image in order to maintain cognitive
harmony. Any predicament that assaults the image of an organization will be met with
motivation and determination to preserve the positive organizational image because selfconcept is so thoroughly tied to the corporate image (Dutton et al., 1994). This loyalty
and commitment are the key constituencies that come from organizational identification
(Mael). This psychological interaction between organizations and the way people
perceive themselves creates a common destiny in which both experience the successes
and failures of the organization and its members.
Steele (1998) proposed that the greater the attractiveness of the perceived
organizational identity, the stronger a person’s organizational identification. The
employee’s perception of his organization adds or subtracts from the continuity of selfconcept over time. The organization exerts power over the self-concept of its members
10
that becomes a concern when the organizational identity is weak or suffering. An
example of an organization’s mistake affecting its employees is the Exxon Corporation in
the aftermath of the Valdez oil spill. Exxon employees reported many instances of
withdrawal from societal functions and a sense of personal loss of their self-image and
worth because of the public outrage over the incident. These employees formerly had
held a high organizational identification based on the positive interactions of
organizational identity and self-concept which had since been assaulted by negative
circumstances (Fanning, 1990).
Organizational leaders are instrumental in articulating and proclaiming what is
distinctive, central, and enduring about their organization. Elsbach and Kramer (1998), in
their study of members’ responses to organizational identity threats, concluded that the
communication that the leader provides is critical; whether it is empirically valid is less
important than the fact that it is established. The influential process creates a collective
identity for the members and established organizational identity for its members through
rituals, symbols, ceremonies, and stories. When the organizational identity is
strengthened, members categorize themselves into a social group and increase their
commitment because of a strengthened organizational identification. This psychological
attachment occurs when members adopt the defining characteristics of the organization-what is distinctive, central, and enduring--as extensions of their own self-concept. Steele
(1998) wrote that people often will tolerate inconsistencies between the organization and
self-perceptions by affirming other valued dimensions of themselves and ignoring the
differences.
11
Organizational Identification: Commitment to Work
According to Pratt (1998), organizational identification is a complex perceived
construct that is derived from the individual’s beliefs, attitudes, and emotions. Those
beliefs, attitudes, and emotions are exhibited behaviorally within the realm of the
organization through the level of one’s work commitment. This loyalty to the
organization results from a psychological internalization of organizational identity and
self-concept. The close reciprocal relationship between self and organization requires
increased understanding because of the impacting relationship in an environment of
change (Gioia, Schultz, & Corley, 2000). Increasingly, organizations are affected by
social, environmental, and economic changes that often are turbulent and far-reaching to
employees. The organizational identification of employees as measured by their
commitment to work is of profound importance in dealing with reactive and proactive
changes in the organization.
According to Mowday, Porter, and Steers (1982), organizational commitment is
characterized by (a) internalization by the member of the organization’s goals and values,
(b) the member’s willingness to exert considerable effort, and (c) the member’s strong
desire to maintain membership in the organization. Researchers have attempted to predict
the extrinsic elements of commitment at the individual employee level such as turnover
rate, work performance, and attendance (Mathieu & Zajac, 1980; Mowday, Steers, &
Porter, 1979). The predecessor of commitment is the connection between the individual
employee and the organization.
Commitment is the behavioral measure of organizational identification.
Identification is the human tendency to associate with a larger entity that may be an
12
organization, movement, or group because the identity of the larger entity reflects on the
individual and the individual reflects on the larger entity (Dutton et al., 1994). When a
sense of self is tied to the organization, loyalty and commitment are the resulting
products. When stress, strain, and negative affectivity are reflective from work and self,
job satisfaction and commitment are minimized (Decker & Borgen, 1993).
Social Identity Theory
The psychology of social identity theory implies that human behavior can be
changed by amending the organizational image. The organizational image or identity is
what the member believes to be central, enduring, and distinctive about the organization.
The strength of a member’s organizational identification reflects the degree to which the
construct of organizational identity has coalesced with the member’s self-concept. When
organizational identity is strong there is a large part of the organization’s characteristics
that are synonymous with the member’s personal characteristics. This coalescence, in
turn, creates a strong organizational identification in the member and produces a
psychological connection between the organization’s successes and failures and the
individual member’s value of self-worth (Ashforth & Mael, 1992).
School Identity in Our Society
Public schools are scrutinized by the media, parents, and legislators--essentially
everyone--due to the fact that most of them have been there and have an opinion. The
public’s past experiences with their education reinforce the idea that they know what
constitutes good and poor school experiences even though, realistically, their experiences
13
are limited to each one’s perspective. The media compare students’ test scores with those
of other countries in an attempt to portray the image that schools no longer measure up in
academic achievement (Berliner & Biddle, 1995).
National leaders propose that student achievement has fallen in America (Bennett,
1992), that American schools fail in comparative studies with other countries (Murphy &
Schiller, 1992), and that, while this travesty supposedly exists, America spends more
money on education than those nations with higher achievement scores (Berliner &
Biddle, 1995). Our legislators mandate more and more accountability measures to ensure
that teachers are held responsible and that all students will have learned the same things
by the same preappointed day. In January of 2002, President Bush signed the No Child
Left Behind Act that requires all states to (a) create standards, (b) test children’s
academic achievement based on those standards, and (c) grade school performance in
terms of what students achieve on the test of standards (U.S. Department of Education,
2002).
In many states, schools are assigned a grade from an A to an F based upon the
performance of one grade level on a single criterion-referenced test (U.S. Department of
Education, 2002). In an effort to improve schools, state legislatures have passed other
laws mandating schools to have parents and other community members serve on school
advisory councils to help make decisions about budgets, curriculum, and issues regarding
student performance.
There is dissension over the public school’s organizational identity, but when it
comes to the public evaluation of the nation’s community schools, the story changes. For
the first time in the 33 year history of the Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the public’s
14
attitudes toward public schools, a majority of respondents graded their community
schools as an A or B (Rose & Gallup, 2001). There appears to be a national trend to score
public schools higher as one has more involvement, such as having children attending the
schools. There is a tendency for respondents involved with a public school to score it
higher than other schools where there is no personal connection. This tendency leads to
the questions (a) How do the teachers in those same public schools rate themselves and
their schools? and (b) Does their organizational identity and self-concept predict their
commitment (also known as organizational identification)?
Social identity theory has been studied and applied to corporate areas of America
with positive results (Balmer, 1998). Schools, too, are organizations with defining
characteristics that include construed external images and organizational identities with
distinct, central, and enduring educational cultures. Can findings from the corporate
world be applied to educational settings, or are schools different from other work
organizations? Does a teacher’s perception of his school (organizational identity) and the
teacher’s self-concept relate positively or negatively to his school identification as
measured by level of commitment? Can we assume that the greater the correlation
between the attributes educators use to define themselves and the attributes they use to
define their schools, the stronger the organizational identification and work commitment?
With so many pressures on educators from budget cuts, the media, legislators, and the
students themselves, do educators have organizational identities and self-concept scores
similar to those of the business community? Do the additional external factors not present
in many occupations impact educators’ occupational environments? Therefore, the
problem of this study was to determine whether a teacher’s organizational identity, as
15
measured by the Organizational Identification Scale (Becker, 1992), interacts with a
teacher’s self-concept, as measured by the Adult Self-Perception Profile (Messer &
Harter, 1986), to indicate the teacher’s commitment-at-work score as measured by the
Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1979).
Research Questions
1. How does a teacher’s organizational identity, as measured by the
Organizational Identification Scale (OID) combine with a teacher’s selfconcept, as measured by the Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP), to indicate
a teacher’s commitment at work score, as measured by the Organizational
Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)?
2. What intrinsic elements of the school organization and the teaching profession
(organizational identity) do teachers value in relation to their level of work
commitment (organizational identification)?
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined as applicable to this study:
Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP). A self-report scale created by Messer and
Harter (1986) and used in this study to measure teachers’ self-concept.
Commitment. Commitment at work is the result of the teacher’s appraisal of the
extent to which the work environment fulfills his individual needs.
Construed external image. What a teacher or employee believes outsiders think
about the school or organization.
16
Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ). An instrument designed to
reflect the degree of teacher internalization of organizational identity and self-concept
(Porter et al., 1979).
Organizational identification. The degree to which a teacher’s self-concept
contains the same attributes as the teacher’s organizational identity. Organizational
identification reflects (a) work satisfaction, (b) commitment to the organization, and (c)
the degree to which a teacher prefers and enjoys working at that particular school
(Ashforth & Mael, 1989)
Organizational identity. The cognitive connection that the teacher has with the
school. The organizational identity is formed from images that the teacher believes are
distinctive, central, and enduring to the organization (Albert & Whetten, 1985).
Organizational Identity Scale (OID). Scale constructed to measure organizational
identity (Becker, 1992).
Self-concept. A personal identity that encompasses attributes such as disposition,
abilities, and values. A person’s self-concept is formed through experiences and
interpretations of one’s environment (James, 1890/1963).
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Employee commitment refers to the psychological attachment to the workplace
due to the combined cognitive images of organization and self (Allen & Meyer, 1990;
O’Reilly et al., 1996). Commitment is known in social identity theory as organizational
identification and is a result of the coalesced positive constructs of a member’s
organizational identity and self-concept. Identification is the product of a member
adopting attitudes and behaviors that are congruent with the organization. Therefore,
when an employee has a strong organizational identification, the attributes that an
employee uses to define himself or herself also define the organization. The constructs of
organization theory and self-concept strengthen an organizational identification and may
lead to potential benefits from the social interactions of all employees and their
workplaces (Dutton et al., 1994; Mael, 2001).
According to Mael (2001), organizational identification has at least five potential
benefits. Mael’s findings indicate that organizational identification (a) enhances selfconcept and (b) allows people to transcend themselves which is conducive to mental
health when we regard the needs of others instead of our own needs and desires. This
self-actualization process lends itself to the third and fourth potential benefits of
organizational identification; that of providing (c) meaningful purpose in life, and (d) a
17
18
sense of belonging that blurs the lines between person and entity. The final benefit of
organizational identification is that (e) it raises aspirations and provides impetus for one
to maximize his potential.
Organizational Identity
Although the degree of strength varies based upon the subjective evaluation of the
organizational member, organizational identity is the image an individual has that
represents what an organization means to that person. What is central, distinctive, and
enduring about the organization makes up the intrinsic elements of organizational identity
(Albert & Whetten, 1985). Employees of organizations find a sense of distinctiveness
when the organization provides a defined social identity. Ashforth and Mael (1989, 1992)
and Mael (2001) have conducted numerous studies, the findings of which indicated there
are benefits of a strong organizational identity--employees focus on tasks that benefit the
whole and have stronger commitments and longevity of employment. Employees also
benefit from a strong organizational identity on a personal level with increased feelings
of self-concept and a sense of personal worth. Members vary in how much they identify
with their work organizations and, when they identify strongly, the attributes they use to
define the organizations also define them (Gatewood et al., 1993). In addition to the
psychological factors, the economic benefits of committed employees are significant to
the success of any organization.
Festinger’s (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance postulates that people are
motivated to maintain consistency between their self-perceptions and their behaviors.
When presented with evidence contrary to their viewpoint, or if confronted with having
19
to react in conflict with their values, they experience cognitive dissonance. In music,
harmony and dissonance are antonyms; harmony being two or more notes that sound
pleasing when played together and dissonance being two or more notes that sound
unpleasant when played together. Cognitive dissonance is an unpleasant state of tension
due to a pair of cognitions, or two elements of knowledge, that are psychologically
uncomfortable to a person. If a person’s organizational identity and self-concept collide
or conflict, cognitive dissonance results. Festinger’s theory states that people are
motivated to reduce dissonance and will work to resolve the inconsistency. The greater
the degree of dissonance, the greater the pressure to reduce the dissonance in order to
avoid psychological discomfort.
Individuals will try to resolve cognitive dissonance in one of three ways: (a) by
maintaining consonant cognitions through substantive change in the organization, (b) by
reducing the importance of the dissonant cognitions, or (c) by changing the personal
cognitions and focusing on other dimensions of the self and the relationship between
themselves and the business (Aronson, 1968). Using the context of an organization,
suppose an employee finds out that his company makes a large profit from using lowpaid workers in a foreign country. The individual feels uncomfortable with the situation
but is a dedicated employee. This individual can resolve this cognitive dissonance by
attempting to change the situation, thus, reinforcing his consonant, preexisting values.
The employee also could reduce the importance of dissonant cognitions by rationalizing
that the company actually pays a higher salary to the foreign workers than other
companies and the practice keeps these workers from starving even though working
conditions are not optimal. Or, the employee could maintain the importance of consonant
20
cognitions by accepting this as standard business practice; deciding that the practice is
not deplorable and that the ends do justify the means.
Organizational identity is a powerful cognitive schema that propels members to
resolve inconsistencies and seek solutions to issues that threaten their cognitive schemas
of self-concept and organizational image (Dutton & Dukerich, 1991). However,
organizational environments are not static; the work environment is a major source of
influence on employee behavior. A recent trend of organizations to rely on temporary
workers greatly influences the organizational identity of internal workers (Chattopadhay
& George, 2001). Some organizational identities have experienced high velocity change
while others are more subtle; however, the fact is, that all organizational members must
adjust to changing conditions.
Strong organizational identities can make change more resistant and difficult to
achieve. When members’ organizational identity and self-worth are positive and high,
external pressure may be ignored or resisted due to the comfort and emotional security of
employees (Bartunek, 1984). This cognitive resistance to change can be accounted for by
strong organizational identities that consist of tangible and intangible attributes of the
organization. It is easier for organizations to achieve greater success in changing tangible
substantive organizational identity attributes than intangible attributes (Reger, Gustafson,
DeMarie, & Mullane, 1994). While intuitive leaders seek to increase organizational
identity in their organizations, they must understand the change process dynamics. Gioia
and Chittipeddi (1991) described current organizational identity as being who they are
and an organization’s ideal as who they want to be. The difference between the perceived
reality and the ideal goal is called the identity gap and is defined by Reger et al. as the
21
cognitive distance between the perception of current and ideal identities. Small identity
gaps usually are met with cognitive apathy while large identity gaps are addressed most
likely with opposition. Successful organizational identity change, optimally speaking,
should have a moderate identity gap. This dynamic change process is described as a
process in which tangible substantive attributes are destroyed while new tangible
substantive attributes simultaneously are introduced that contain one or more of the
inherent intangible traits of the organization.
Definition of Self-Concept
Everyone assumes they know what self-concept means, yet a search of literature
for a universally accepted definition of the construct yielded 17 different conceptual
dimensions on which self-concept definitions could be categorized (Burns, 1979; Byrne,
1984; Hansford & Hattie, 1982; Shavelson et al., 1976; Wells & Marwell, 1976; Zirkel,
1971). In addition to a multitude of mutually exchangeable words for self-concept, such
as self-esteem, self-image, and self-worth, many studies were focused on intrinsic
elements of self-concept, such as academic, social, and physical attributes (Byrne, 1984,
1990, 1996). When intrinsic elements of self-concept are defined, they can be further
evaluated in terms of descriptive or evaluative elements. Agreeing with the statement, “I
like my body,” would be a descriptive evaluation of the physical element of a person’s
self-concept. “My body is as good as anyone else’s,” is an evaluative judgment based
upon the subject’s comparative analysis of the physical element of self-concept (Byrne,
1996, p. 3).
22
Synonymous with self-concept are other ambiguous descriptors of the same
human attribute such as (a) self-efficacy, (b) self-esteem, (c) self-worth, (d) self-image,
(e) self-perception, (f) self-respect, and (g) self-estimation. Self-concept research was
affected detrimentally by at least five factors in the past: (a) lack of a universally
accepted definition, (b) assumed congruency between different terms for self-concept, (c)
lack of dissemination of meaning between similar concepts, (d) informal versus formal
notions of self-concept, and (e) lack of theoretical models. Before 1976, an abundance of
research was conducted with regard to self-concept but with little attention paid to
theoretical models, scales with content validity, and consistency (Shavelson et al., 1976).
Researchers designed measures of self-concept to address issues specific to their studies,
thus denying any opportunity for replication. These studies were not based on a
theoretical model; they made assumptions about self-concept consisting of
unidimensional traits (Byrne, 1996). Since that time, researchers have yielded a literature
base rich in methodology with substantive results indicating self-concept as a
multidimensional construct.
In their review of self-worth literature, Crocker and Wolfe (2001) concluded that
self-esteem is the strongest predictor of life satisfaction in the United States, outranking
other variables such as income, education, physical health, and marital status. The selfesteem movement of the 1970s assumed that children’s self-esteem could be increased
through programs designed to compliment uniqueness and originality in human
personality. Crocker and Wolfe’s review of the literature provided little evidence that low
self-esteem is the cause of social problems; rather, it is an outcome of a lack of personal
23
success. The research-based literature suggested that an increase in self-worth, selfconcept, and self-esteem is a result of actual accomplishments within social settings.
Self-concept is an outcome from psychological and educational situations as well
as an impetus facilitating the attainment of other desired outcomes, such as academic
performance and social competence (Markus & Wurf, 1987). Self-concept is a
hypothetical construct and not directly measurable unless defined. Therefore, construct
validity must be established with universally acceptable definitions in order to justify its
impact on humans. Self-concept in its broad definition of the psychological construct
includes cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991; Wells
& Marwell, 1976). Self-concept can be differentiated from self-esteem which is more
limited and is an evaluative component of self-concept (Byrne, 1996).
Theoretical Models of Self-Concept
Conceptual frameworks of self-concept often are referred to as theoretical models
that are dependent upon the viewpoint of the researcher as to the definitional aspects
(Byrne, 1996). Before 1980, very few self-concept measuring instruments were linked to
any theory. Self-concept was seen then as a unidimensional construct and the designed
instrumental measurements provided a global overall estimation of a level of selfconcept. Marsh (1986, 1998) wrote that most self-concept measures substantiated the
multidimensional nature of self-concept. As a result, the two broad perspectives are (a) a
unidimensional approach to self-concept as a global overall assessment of human selfworth and (b) a multidimensional approach that depicts self-concept as a conglomerate of
academic, social, physical, and general subscales.
24
The unidimensional approach (known as the nomological model) represents the
oldest, most traditional description of self-concept (Byrne, 1996). This model derives its
results from measuring different areas such as academic, social, physical, and emotional
aspects that are given equal weight, and the summation represents an overall self-concept
index score. The nomothetic model, thus, makes the assumption that the single score
derived from this additive combination of equally weighted aspects of self represents a
person’s self-concept. Critics contend that the nomothetic model contradicts the
definitional construct of self-concept in that it is a generalization rather than a
representative measure of individualized attributes (Harter, 1990).
The multidimensional approach to measuring self-concept has several theoretical
models to support the incorporation of various influencing factors (Byrne, 1996). Some
of these models measure self-concept using domain-specific areas that are interpreted as
separate and intercorrelated constructs. One multidimensional approach (the
compensatory model) actually has domains with an inverse effect rather than a
proportional measure (Marx & Winne, 1980). For instance, this model assumes that a low
score on physical self-concept often is associated with a high score on academic selfconcept as typically stereotyped by the smart nerd. Inversely, the compensatory model
indicates that a high score on physical self-concept is related to a low score on academic
self-concept as typically displayed by the dumb jock. According to Mark and Winne,
when the academic and social aspects of self-concept differ, this model compensates the
overall self-concept score. This compensatory model maintains that people will
compensate a low-score area with another aspect of self in order to maintain a sense of
25
well-being. Their framework allows people to evaluate themselves based upon their
perceptions of self in relation to their strengths and weaknesses.
The most extensively validated multidimensional model of self-concept is the
hierarchical model developed by Shavelson et al. (1976) who proposed that the
hierarchically ordered structure model could be tested empirically. The
multidimensionality of this model is that the many facets are simultaneously
intercorrelated and independent. This hierarchical model is the most empirically tested
and validated of all self-concept multidimensional models (Byrne, 1996).
Self-concept is hierarchical, with perceptions of personal behavior in specific
situations at the base of the hierarchy, moving to inferences about the self in broader
domains (e.g., social, physical, and academic) at the middle of the hierarchy, and a global
self-concept at the apex (Marsh & Young, 1998, p. 512).
The apex of self-concept is a stable measurement, but as one descends the
hierarchy, scores become less stable because situation-specific occurrences from the base
affect the social, physical, and academic measurements of self in the middle. Situations
can change the conceptual inferences of self although many instances that are
inconsistent with a person’s global self-concept would be required. The theoretical basis
of this multidimensional model is that self-concept is comprised of domain-specific
aspects constituted by individualized subscales that can be used as separate constructs or
to form a conglomerate score (Byrne, 1996).
26
Organizational Identification
As based on Festinger’s (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance, people are
motivated to maintain consistency between their self-perceptions and their behaviors
which translates in the cognitions of organizational identity and self-concept. When
employees strongly identify with their organization, their cognitions are harmonious, and
the attributes they use to describe the organization also define them individually as a
person (Gatewood et al., 1993). When the self-concept is congruent to the organizational
identity due to the alignment of cognitive processes of two constructs, a degree of
organizational identification results.
Organizational identification is the degree to which an employee’s perception of
self (self-concept) reflects the employee’s organizational identity. Organizational
scholars have accepted theoretically that membership in a social organization shapes the
self-concept of its members (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Kramer, 1991; Mael, 2001; Tajfel
& Turner 1986; Van Maanen & Barley, 1984). These researchers postulate that a
person’s self-concept is shaped by his interactions and affiliations with the organization
of which the person is a member. The strength of one’s organizational identification is
based upon the member’s self-concept having coalesced with what the member believes
is distinctive, central, and enduring about the organization. This strength of
organizational identification indicates to what degree the employee envisions himself as
part of the organization and is, therefore, the impetus of the individual’s commitment to
that organization (Chatman, 1991; O’Reilly et al., 1991, 1996). These three studies’
results indicated that the greater the degree of fit between the person and the
organization, the greater congruity between the perceived organizational identity and the
27
person’s self-concept. When this value congruency occurred, people reported high
intentions to stay with an organization and actually stayed longer than those who did not
have as high a value-congruency integration.
Identification, according to Mael (2001), is a complex construct that draws on
one’s beliefs, attitudes, and emotions; its direct emotional and behavioral ramifications
are seen in employee commitment to the organization. An employee’s initial thoughts
and beliefs derived from both the organization and self are transformed into attitudinal
and behavioral changes in the employee. Institutional and organizational identities shape
social relationships, determine attitudinal interactions, and predict employee behavior and
commitment (Serksnyte, 1999). Organizational identification is the framework in which
social action takes place, the outcomes of which are dependent on the level and degree of
interactions between the institution and the employee.
Commitment was characterized by Mowday et al. (1982) by three factors: (a) a
strong belief in and acceptance of the goals and values of the organization, (b) a
willingness to expend efforts for the good of the organization, and (c) a strong desire to
continue employment in the organization. The findings of numerous studies testify to the
positive power of organizational identification and indicate strong relationships between
commitment and (a) work attendance, (b) loyalty, and (c) longevity with the organization
(LaMastro, 2002). There is an inverse relationship between commitment and turnover
intention, thus, making organizational identification an economically vital element to an
organization’s success. According to LaMastro, other studies have produced varying
results regarding the relationship between commitment and actual job performance
28
although increased attendance and company longevity are vital elements to the
effectiveness of an organization.
Organizational research findings consistently support the postulate that employees
who have a strong level of perceived organizational support reciprocate with increased
attitudes and behaviors that benefit the organization (LaMastro, 2002). Levels of
commitment differentiated through evidence in the literature regarding an employee’s
organizational and professional commitment. Organizational and professional
commitment is not inherently synonymous, and empirical findings indicate they may be
distinct entities. LaMastro studied the organizational identification of teachers in relation
to a measure of their perceived organization’s support levels and their degree of
organizational commitment. The study results indicated that teachers, unlike previous
research populations, evidence no distinction between organizational and professional
commitment, meaning that their degree of commitment to their school and the education
profession was essentially the same.
Social Identity Theory
Social identity theory relates to the attributes of organizational identity and selfworth to the creation of organizational identification. The greater the consistency between
a person’s self-perception and the attributes of a person’s work organization, the stronger
that person’s organizational identification (Dutton et al., 1994). Social identity theorists
assert that people seek to accentuate their own distinctiveness by attaching to
organizations that they perceive as compatible and complimentary to their selfperceptions. People generally want to maintain or improve their self-concept over time
29
and through involvement with different situations. Dutton et al. noted that members
assess the attractiveness of an organizational image based upon how well the image
“preserves the continuity of their [members’] self-concept, provides distinctiveness, and
enhances self-esteem” (p. 246).
The more an organization enhances its members’ self-concepts, the stronger the
employees’ organizational identification becomes because the members define
themselves with the characteristics indicative of the organization. People construct their
organizational identities from person-to-person relationships, person-to-company
relationships, and person-to-society relationships (Serksnyte, 1999). Social identity
construction enables one to relate to one’s environment through an intricately intertwined
process that includes one’s immediate environment, organization, and society at large.
The benefits to an organization to increase identification are numerous.
Employees who identify with the organization (a) expend greater effort, (b) participate in
extra-role activities, and (c) serve as supportive promoters of the organization (Ashforth
& Mael, 1992; Dutton et al., 1994; Mael, 2001; Pratt, 1998). Retaining an existing
employee has been estimated to be five-to-six times less expensive than recruiting and
inducting a new employee. Organizations desire the outcomes from organizational
identity--loyalty and commitment.
Evolution and Organizational Identity
Organizations, including schools, have to deal with increasingly complex and
turbulent environments in regards to economics, tyranny, and threat. The operational
definition of organizational identity that researchers have used for years (what is central,
30
distinctive, and enduring to a member about the character of the organization) is being
scrutinized. In recent years, identity has become a topic that is being argued because
some hold that organizations are better viewed as relatively fluid due to the change in the
economic environment of global trade (Gioia et al., 2000). Gioia et al. noted that such
analysis implies that organizational identity is an unstable concept and “this instability in
identity is actually adaptive in accomplishing change” (p. 17).
When change in an organization is intentionally initiated, leaders often employ a
visionary projection of a future image or paradigm shift image to convey their idealistic
image to members. Gioia and Thomas (1996) found that such imagined future images
often conflict with present and past images and identities of organizational members.
This conflict demands a reexamination of the current identity by the members, and the
change effort is unlikely to be successful if the existing identity or image cannot be
altered in this manner. One tactic recommended for a successful change effort is to cause
ambiguity intentionally in order to destabilize the members’ understanding or identity of
the organization. In their ambiguity-by-design plan, Gioia and Chittipeddi (1991) wrote
that because members desire resolution of the ambiguity, they often will alter their
existing interpretations of identity if leaders offer a preferred view that is acceptable to
the members’ own self-estimations.
Organizational identity actually can resist positive change efforts in that the
members want to believe that the organization is what it always has been with distinctive,
central, and enduring values. This resistance can be a negative aspect if an organization
has a high organizational identity with its members but realistically is not high in actual
performance. This strong, unrealistic organizational identity can work to the detriment of
31
the organization if it, indeed, needs to change. Members often attempt to affirm stability
in their own perceptions and may even feel threatened if the organization is portrayed in a
positive manner that is different than its established identity (Elsbach & Kramer, 1998).
Elsbach and Kramer suggested that the viable option to the success of an organization is
how instability is managed rather than the preservation of the fixed identity. A balance
must be determined to avoid faddish overreactions to temporary external influences yet
meet the demands to maintain viability in a changing society.
CHAPTER III
METHOD
Purpose of the Study
An organization depends upon the effectiveness of its members. If people define
themselves in terms of their organizational memberships, they will tend to internalize the
organization’s attributes as their own. People’s view of their organization is known as
their organizational identity which defines their self-concept (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). If
the association is strong, a member’s internalized values develop into a strong
organizational identification. People with a strong organizational identification are more
committed and have longer tenure with their organizations (O’Reilly et al., 1991). The
stronger the organizational identification, the greater a member’s cooperation with the
organization and the more likely the member will take actions that will benefit the
organization instead of those that are self-serving (Mowday et al., 1982).
The findings of studies of organizational identity and identification provide
organizational leaders more than incidental evidence of the importance of developing an
organization’s attractiveness and desirability. The distinctiveness of an organization
motivates people to maintain consistency between their self-perceptions and the
characteristics of the organization. The powerful combination of organizational identity
and self-concept creates a strong organizational identification that benefits both the
32
33
organization and the member with a reciprocal quality. People identify strongly with their
organization when their perceived self-worth resembles what they feel is central,
enduring, and distinctive about the organization. Social identity theory (Festinger, 1957)
is based on research in the business community regarding the understanding of perceived
organizational images and self-images. The successful implementation of this social
theory has created business dynasties when the intrinsic elements between people and
organizations are synchronous.
In this study I attempted to determine whether a combination of teachers’ school
(organization) identities and self-concepts indicated their school (organization)
identifications, which was defined in this study as commitment (Mowday et al., 1982).
Similar to business organizations, schools have many supporters and critics who also are
customers, who hold strong and often negative opinions. Schools as organizations and
teachers as members receive many negative opinions from administrators, parents,
communities, and even their students, who make demands on the teaching profession.
This notion that we are a nation at risk regarding our educational system has permeated
our society for the past 20 years.
Under the direction of U.S. Secretary of Education Terrel Bell, a document
entitled A Nation at Risk concerning the state of education in America was released in
1983 (Berliner & Biddle, 1995). Berliner and Biddle wrote, “A Nation at Risk charged
that American students never excelled in international comparisons of student
achievement, and that this failure reflected systematic weaknesses in our school programs
and lack of talent and motivation among our educators” (p. 3). As Berliner and Biddle
34
also noted, teachers, in a sea of controversy, low pay, and difficult working conditions,
teach from undefined motivational sources.
Working from undefined motivational sources is different from that of the
business community where employees are more likely to choose jobs based on income,
benefits, and locations. Therefore, do teachers’ self-concepts depend on their school’s
identity, or are teachers more self-actualized due to the nature and purpose of their
profession? Perhaps teachers’ self-concepts are not related to their organizational
identity, although they still have a strong organizational identification (commitment at
work) making theirs an occupation dissimilar to those of the business community. Or, as
in the business world, are teachers’ consistency between attributes they would assign to
their schools and attributes they would use to define themselves interrelated, and thus
strengthen their school identification (commitment at work)?
Research Design
This quasi-experimental, correlational, descriptive study was designed to assess
the impact of teachers’ organizational identities and self-concepts on their commitment at
work (organizational identification). In this chapter descriptions are included of (a) the
design, (b) the participants, (c) the quantitative and qualitative processes and
compilations, (d) the data collection procedures, (e) the instruments, (f) the human rights
protection for participants, and (g) the researcher.
35
Design
The design of the study included data obtained from three established and
research-based instruments: (a) the Organizational Identification Scale (OID) by Becker
(1992), (b) the Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP) by Messer and Harter (1986), and
(c) the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) by Mowday et al. (1979).
These three instruments were consolidated as one assessment instrument (Appendix A).
Each of the research-based instruments was presented individually within the
comprehensive assessment instrument with its own heading and set of instructions.
Researcher-designed items were added within construct parameters to all three of these
quantitative instruments. Limited demographic information is also included pertaining to
(a) number of years respondent has taught, (b) number of years at the current school, and
(c) number of hours per week spent working after regular hours. A qualitative interview
survey completed the data collection sources. A copy of the interview protocol is
included in Appendix B.
The variables selected for this study were
1. Organizational identity.
2. Self-concept.
3. Organizational identification (commitment level).
4. Years spent teaching.
5. Extra hours spent working.
Data collected from the three instruments were triangulated with the demographic
information and the feedback obtained from the qualitative interviews (Appendix C). The
combined relationship between the multiple regression coefficients of organizational
36
identity and self-worth were analyzed on the dependent variable of commitment. This
multivariate analysis determined the strength of the relative contributions of
organizational identity and self-worth to commitment. A measure of correlation between
the independent variables of organizational identity and self-worth also was analyzed. A
univariate analysis was analyzed from the individual regression coefficients of years
spent teaching and extra hours spent working on the dependent variable of commitment.
This analysis was conducted in an effort to find which variable has the greatest
contribution to explaining teacher commitment (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000)
Participants
The participants in this study were elementary, middle, and high school teachers
employed by the Okaloosa County School District, located in the northwest section of
Florida. All of the participants were teachers certified by the State of Florida Department
of Education who were employed full-time with the Okaloosa County School District.
The participating schools were selected by a stratified random sample that included a
replacement sampling method. Demographic information about each school is contained
in Table 1 (Florida Department of Education, 2002).
After securing permission from the Okaloosa County School District Office, the
principals of the schools were contacted to obtain their permission for the researcher to
attend a faculty meeting and administer the quantitative instruments for organizational
identity, self-concept, and organizational identification. The consent form contained a
question regarding the participant’s desire to take part in the qualitative interview
Table 1
Demographic Information Regarding Participating Schools
Percentage
of teachers
with
advanced
degrees
Average
years in
teaching
profession
Number of
students
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
Percentage
of free
and
reduced
lunch
1,615
A
B
B
N/A
106
68.2
26.4
13.3
621
B
B
A
53.0
40
62.1
20.5
120.0
2,082
C
A
A
N/A
112
81.9
43.0
16.5
Kenwood Elem.
619
B
A
A
23.6
36
65.5
36.1
16.6
Lewis MS
658
A
A
A
29.5
33
63.5
41.9
12.7
Mary Esther
Elem.
516
B
A
A
29.6
37
60.0
43.7
17.9
School grade
School
Crestview HS
Cherokee Elem.
Fort Walton
Beach HS
Teaching staff
Number of Percentage
instructional
teachers
Note. HS = high school; MS = middle school; Elem. = elementary school; N/A = not available.
38
survey. Subjects who answered in the affirmative were contacted by the researcher and
interviewed in a private setting that was agreeable to both the participant and the
researcher.
Human Subjects Protection
Permission to conduct this study was obtained from The University of West
Florida (UWF) Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects and the Okaloosa County
School District (Appendix D). Before the quantitative instruments were administered, the
researcher presented an oral explanation of the study and each participant received an
introductory letter explaining the study which included an informed consent form that
described the benefits and risks per human subject’s protocol. A copy of the letter, as
well as a verbatim transcript of the researcher’s oral explanation, was included in the
application to the UWF Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects. Participants
were assured anonymity and guaranteed that their responses were reported as an
aggregate score only. Because there was no place provided for respondents to write their
names on the quantitative instruments, they were asked to return their completed
assessments and informed consent forms in separate collection baskets provided to assure
confidentiality. If requested by any of the teachers, arrangements were made for the
return of their assessments and consent forms to the researcher through the district’s
courier service. Each teacher’s assessment was coded only to determine the level of the
school (elementary, middle, or high). Completion of the quantitative instruments was an
indication of permission to use and publish the results.
39
Data Collection Procedures
The researcher administered the quantitative instruments at each school’s faculty
meeting during the first semester of the 2002-2003 school year. The researcher’s
introductory remarks regarding this study were phrased to allow participants to gain
insight to the general purpose but not to any specifics that might have influenced their
responses on the quantitative instruments. Following the introductory remarks, the
researcher read the following:
Thank you for helping me today with a survey for my dissertation research. The
business community has long studied the effects of social identity theory. This
theory proposes that an employee’s organizational identity, that is, how the
employee perceives his business organization, influences the values that employee
has for himself or herself. Schools are organizations that are affected by many
external influences that are beyond our control. In my study, I intend to
investigate the effects of organizational identity and self-concept on work
commitment and whether the results will be similar to those of the business
community. In other words, this research project should measure how teachers
view their schools and themselves, and how those views affect commitment
levels. This assessment has 73 items, and your answers are completely
anonymous. I also have distributed to you an Introductory Letter to Participants
and an Informed Consent Form. Please keep the letter for your information as it
provides contact numbers for me and my supervisor. Please sign and place the
Consent Form in the box by the door as you exit, keeping it separate from your
40
completed assessment. This procedure will ensure that there is no connection
between you and your responses. Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Mean scores were determined for each participant in (a) organizational identity,
(b) general self-concept, and (c) commitment at work (organizational identification). The
mean scores from each teacher, the number of years they had taught, and the number of
hours they worked after regular hours were analyzed to determine whether there were
correlations among their levels of identity, self-concept, and commitment.
For the quantitative component of the study (N = 223), the dependent variables
were (a) the teachers’ organizational identification scores (commitment), (b) their number
of years in teaching, and (c) the number of extra hours they worked. The independent
variables were (a) the teachers’ organizational identity and (b) their self-concept scores.
For the statistical analysis, the accepted significance level of .05 was used. Data from the
qualitative interviews of 34 teachers were collected and analyzed.
Quantitative Analysis Component
Research Question 1. How does a teacher’s organizational identity, as measured
by the Organizational Identification Scale (OID), combine with a teacher’s self-concept,
as measured by the Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP), to indicate a teacher’s
commitment at work score, as measured by the Organizational Commitment
Questionnaire (OCQ)?
Organizational identity. A teacher’s organizational identity was measured through
the use of the OID developed by Becker (1992). This scale was constructed to measure
organizational identity and has been used as the evaluative component in a significant
41
number of organizational business studies (Ashforth & Mael, 1989, 1992; Becker, 1992;
Dutton & Dukerich, 1991; Gatewood et al., 1993). In those studies, the word
organization was substituted with the name of the relevant business. In the current study,
the word school was substituted for the word organization.
The responses to the OID items are on a 7-point, Likert-type scale ranging from
strongly disagree to strongly agree. The OID items designed to measure organizational
identity are:
1. When someone criticizes my school, it feels like a personal insult.
2. When I talk about my school, I usually say we rather than they.
3. My school’s successes are my successes.
4. When someone praises my school, it feels like a personal compliment.
5. I feel a sense of ownership for my school.
6. If the values of this school were different, I would not be as attached to my
school.
7. My attachment to this school is based primarily on the similarity of my values
and those represented by my school.
8. Since starting this job, my personal values and those of this school have
become more similar.
9. The reason I prefer this school to others is because of what it stands for; that
is, its values.
The OID has demonstrated good psychometric properties and has been used in a
wide range of military research (Ashforth & Mael, 1992), college alumni (Mael &
Ashforth, 1992), and generalized business employees (Becker, 1992). The OID has a
42
coefficient alpha of .74 in military research, .80 for college alumni, and .81 for employed
business students (Ashforth & Mael; Mael & Ashforth).
The researcher created 13 additional items to ensure statistical reliability. The
items listed below were written using the operational definition of organizational identity
to include internal and external organizational images.
1. The community appreciates this school and recognizes its importance.
2. I find that this school is distinctively different than other schools.
3. I am proud of this school’s accomplishments.
4. Others see this school as a great organization.
5. There are many things about this school that are enduring to me.
6. When someone criticizes my school, I become defensive.
7. This school is more than a place where students are educated.
8. I am proud to tell people where I work.
9. When compared to other schools, this school is an example of educational
excellence for which I feel a part.
10. When my school has a problem, I feel personal responsibility.
11. Others see this school as an example of educational excellence.
12. The students of this school are proud to attend here.
13. Parents would rather have their children at this school than at any other.
Self-Concept. Teachers’ self-concepts were measured by the ASPP developed by
Messer and Harter (1986). The ASPP is a 50-item self-report scale that contains 12
subscales; 11 of the subscales relate to domains of everyday life, and the 12th is a
measurement of overall, general self-worth. The 11 subscales related to domains of
43
everyday life include (a) sociability, (b) job competence, (c) nurturance, (d) athletic
ability, (e) physical appearance, (f) being an adequate provider, (g) morality, (h)
household management, (i) intimate relationships, (j) intelligence, and (k) sense of
humor.
As a measurement of multiple self-concept domains, Messer and Harter (1986)
designed the ASPP’s global self-concept scale to be measured directly and independently
of the other subscales. “By measuring global self-worth independently of competence and
adequacy judgments, we can address the relationship between self-worth and domainspecific self-perceptions” (Byrne, 1996, p. 190).
The ASPP framework varies from other self-concept instruments used for
research and is based on the formulation of 19th century psychologist, William James
(1890/1963). James proposed that self-esteem or concept is a product of the ratio of one’s
success to one’s pretensions. In other words, if one is successful in what one deems
important, then a high self-concept will result. Conversely, if one is not successful in an
area one considers important, a low self-concept will result. Many instruments designed
to measure self-concept are unidimensional; many domains are evaluated and added
together to produce an overall self-concept score (Byrne, 1996). The designers of these
instruments assumed that all domains are equally important. Other self-concept
instruments that designers claim to be multidimensional ultimately produce a score for
overall self-concept by totaling the subscale scores with no weighting. The ASPP scale
allows for individual perceptions of different domains’ importance to be accounted for as
an individualized assessment. In the ASPP, Messer and Harter (1986) developed an
44
instrument that is psychometrically sound and reflects the complexity of a
multidimensional adult self-concept.
For the purposes of the current study, the only ASPP domains included in the
survey instrument were (a) global self-worth, (b) sociability, (c) job competence, (d)
nurturance, (e) intelligence, and (f) sense of humor. On the ASPP, global self-worth is
considered independent of the other domains and not an aggregate score. The global selfworth domain was formulated by Messer and Harter (1986) on the premise that feelings
of worth should be tapped directly by asking questions regarding self-worth, not
assuming that this score is derivative of feelings regarding self-perceptions in all the
other ASPP domains. The ASPP was designed to measure global self-worth with items
that encourage the respondent to measure his perceptions of liking the kind of person he
is in an overall sense.
The overall global self-concept scale on the ASPP consisted of 6 statements; the
other domains added a total of 19 statements, making a total of 25 items. The item format
was a forced-choice scale with a range of four points. Two statements are offered per
item suggesting that half of all people feel one way and the other half feel the other way
about the subject of the item. Messer and Harter (1986) created this self-concept
instrument in this manner to legitimize both ends of a spectrum. Respondents were asked
to indicate how true either statement was for them with a choice of really true for me or
sort of true for me. The wording of the statements was counterbalanced for negative and
positive aspects so that some items started with statements of high estimation of
competence or adequacy. The format of the global self-worth domain of the ASPP is
illustrated in Table 2. All statements on the ASPP instrument were presented in the same
45
Table 2
Sample of Items From the Global Self-Worth Domain of the Adult Self-Perception Profile
Really
true
for me
Sort of
true
for me
Sort of
true
for me
Some adults like
the way they are
leading their lives
BUT
other adults
don’t like the
way they are
leading their
lives.
Some adults are
very happy being
the way they are
BUT
other adults
would like to be
different.
Some adults
sometimes
questions whether
they are a
worthwhile person
BUT
other adults feel
that they are a
worthwhile
person.
Some adults are
disappointed with
themselves
BUT
other adults are
quite pleased
with themselves.
Some adults are
dissatisfied with
themselves
BUT
other adults are
satisfied with
themselves.
Some adults like
the kind of person
they are
BUT
other adults
would like to be
someone else.
Really
true
for me
format as appears in Table 2. Following are the statements from the ASPP domains
specifically chosen by the researcher for use in this study.
46
Sociability. Statements that measured the domain of sociability in self-concept
were
1. Some adults feel that they are enjoyable to be with BUT other adults often
question whether they are enjoyable to be with.
2. Some adults feel uncomfortable when they have to meet new people BUT
other adults like to meet new people.
3. Some adults feel at ease with other people BUT other adults are quite shy.
4. Some adults are not very sociable BUT other adults are sociable. (Messer &
Harter, 1986)
Job competence. ASPP statements that measured the domain of job competence in
self-concept were
1. Some adults are not satisfied with the way they do their work BUT other
adults are satisfied with the way they do their work.
2. Some adults feel they are very good at their work BUT other adults worry
about whether they can do their work.
3. Some adults are not very productive in their work BUT other adults are very
productive in their work.
4. Some adults are proud of their work BUT other adults are not very proud of
what they do. (Messer & Harter, 1986)
Nurturance. ASPP statements that measured the domain of nurturance in selfconcept were
47
1. Some adults see caring or nurturing others as a contribution to the future BUT
other adults do not gain a sense of contribution to the future through nurturing
others.
2. Some adults do not enjoy fostering the growth of others BUT other adults
enjoy fostering the growth of others.
3. Some adults are good at nurturing others BUT other adults are not very
nurturant.
4. Some adults do not enjoy nurturing others BUT other adults enjoy being
nurturant. (Messer & Harter, 1986)
Intelligence. The ASPP statement that measured the domain of intelligence in
self-concept were
1. When some adults don’t understand something, it makes them feel stupid
BUT other adults don’t necessarily feel stupid when they don’t understand.
2. Some adults feel that they are intelligent BUT other adults question whether
they are intelligent.
3. Some adults do not feel that they are very intellectually capable BUT other
adults feel that they are intellectually capable.
4. Some adults feel like they are just as smart as other adults BUT other adults
wonder if they are as smart. (Messer & Harter, 1986)
Sense of humor. The ASPP statements that measured the domain of sense of
humor in self-concept were
1. Some adults can really laugh at themselves BUT other adults have a hard time
laughing at themselves.
48
2. Some adults feel that they are often too serious about their life BUT other
adults are able to find humor in their life. (Messer & Harter, 1986)
Since the ASPP is the only self-concept measurement instrument that was
designed specifically for a working adult population (Byrne, 1996), it was used in this
study with teachers as a working, adult population. According to Byrne, this adds to the
validation of the measuring instrument because most other measures were developed and
tested with adolescent and college-aged populations.
Regarding instrument reliability, two normative samples’ internal consistency
reliability coefficients for all subscales ranged from .71 to .87. At the time the current
study was conducted, no test-retest had been conducted. Messer and Harter (1986)
measured the internal consistency reliability for the global self-worth scale with four
groups of adults: (a) homemakers, (b) part-time working women, (c) full-time working
women, and (d) full-time working men (Table 3). The overall reliability coefficient for
adults was .91.
Table 3
Reliability Coefficients, Means, and Standard Deviations for the Domain of Global SelfWorth on the ASPP
Reliability
M
SD
Homemakers
.92
3.27
0.59
Part-time working women
.91
3.31
0.57
Full-time working women
.88
3.40
0.56
Full-time working men
.91
3.31
0.51
Total sample
.91
3.32
0.56
Groups
Note. From Manual for the Adult Self-Perception Profile, by B. Messer and S. Harter,
1986, Denver, CO: University of Denver. Adapted with permission of S. Harter.
49
Organizational identification. Also in response to Research Question 1,
organizational identification as an index of commitment was determined through the
administration of the OCQ (Porter et al., 1979). This measurement is designed to reflect
the degree of a teacher’s internalization of organizational identity and self-concept and is
a dependent variable. The strength of a member’s organizational identification reflects
the degree to which the constructs of organizational identity has coalesced with the
member’s self-concept and resulted in the behavioral change called commitment
(O’Reilly et al., 1991). The OCQ measured commitment as the relative strength of an
individual’s identification with and involvement in a particular organization (Mowday et
al., 1982). The OCQ has demonstrated high internal consistency, with average alphas of
.90. Test and retest with 2,563 employees proved satisfactory stability, r = .72.
The OCQ item responses were on a 7-point, Likert-type scale that ranged from
strongly disagree to strongly agree. Respondents were instructed to circle the response
number that most closely approximated their agreement or disagreement with each
statement. The response values were totaled and averaged to attain an overall OCQ index.
The response scale was designed to evaluate three factors: (a) a strong belief in and an
acceptance of the organization’s goals and values, (b) a willingness to exert considerable
effort on behalf the organization, and (c) a strong desire to maintain membership in the
organization. Following are the 15 statements from the OCQ (Porter et al., 1979). As
previously noted, the word organization is replaced in each statement with the word
school.
1.
I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that normally expected in
order to help this school be successful.
50
2.
I talk up this school to my friends as a great place to work.
3.
I feel very little loyalty to this school.
4.
I would accept almost any type of job assignment in order to keep working
for this school.
5.
I find that my values and the school’s values are very similar.
6.
I am proud to tell others that I am part of this school.
7.
I could just as well be working for a different school as long as the type of
work was similar.
8.
This school really inspires the very best in me in the way of job
performance.
9.
It would take very little change in my present circumstances to cause me to
leave this school.
10. I am extremely glad that I chose this school to work for over others I was
considering at the time I joined.
11. There’s not too much to be gained by sticking with this school indefinitely.
12. Often I find it difficult to agree with the school’s policies on important
matters relating to its employees.
13. I really care about the fate of this school.
14. For me, this is the best of all possible schools for which to work.
15. Deciding to work for this school was a definite mistake on my part.
The researcher created the following 10 additional statements to ensure statistical
reliability. The same 7-point, Likert-type response scale was used, and the statements
were numbered sequentially with the items adapted from the OCQ. The researcher-
51
created items were written using the operational definition of organizational identification
(the concept of internalization of the organizational characteristics into a person’s selfconcept) and behavioral outcomes indicative of commitment.
16. I feel that it is part of a teacher’s responsibility to work beyond the regular
work day for the benefit of the school.
17. I feel that teachers should commit to their schools by sponsoring clubs and
activities.
18. My desire is to teach my classes and be left out of all other activities.
19. When my school is honored, I know that I am partially responsible for its
success.
20. I prefer working at this school over any other.
21. I have a strong commitment to this school.
22. The people in this school are like a family to me.
23. The administration appreciates what I do for this school.
24. Other teachers appreciate what I do for this school.
25. Students appreciate what I do for this school.
Data from both the OID Scale and the ASPP Scale were evaluated to determine
the potential relationship and significance of their relationship to predict teachers’
organizational identification or commitment level as measured by the OCQ. Descriptive
statistics were used to describe the samples based on the scales of the OID, ASPP, and
OCQ with frequencies, means, and standard deviations provided in aggregate and
disaggregate forms by level of instruction (elementary, middle, and high school).
Multiple regression analyses were used to determine the effects of organizational identity
52
and self-concept on commitment at work (organizational identification). Using principles
of correlation and regression, an overall effect of the two independent variables
(organizational identity and self-concept) on the dependent variable of commitment at
work will be expressed by coefficients of multiple correlations. According to Gall, Borg,
and Gall (1996), these coefficients of multiple correlations will indicate to what degree
organizational identity and self-concept commonly influence commitment at work
(organizational identification).
Qualitative Analysis Component
Research Question 2. What intrinsic elements of the school organization and the
teaching profession (organizational identity) do teachers value in relation to their level of
work commitment (organizational identification)?
A question on the consent form (Appendix E) asked teachers whether they were
willing to be interviewed individually. Teachers who indicated their willingness were
contacted and a time arranged to conduct the interview in privacy at their school or by
telephone. Dutton and Dukerich (1991) defined organizational identity as the employee’s
cognitive connection with the business organization that is derived from the images that
are in the mind of the employee. These images are what the employee believes is
distinctive, central, and enduring about the business. For the purpose of this study,
organizational identity is what the teacher believes is distinctive, central, and enduring
about his school. There were eight questions in the qualitative interview (Appendix B).
The researcher began each interview reading the following script:
53
Thank you for agreeing to this interview for my research. You may discontinue at
anytime but be assured that this is an anonymous interview. Your name and
school will not be part of the study and will not be used in my analysis or in the
dissertation. I am very interested in how teachers perceive their schools and
themselves and how those perceptions relate to a teacher’s strong identification
with his school. I thank you, again, for your participation.
The eight interview questions were read to the participants in a voice modulated not to
express emotion. A compilation of interview results is included in Appendix F. The
questions and analysis components for each were:
Interview question 1 and analysis. If commitment is a strong belief in the goals of
this school and a willingness to expend effort, on a scale from 1-10, one being the lowest
or least, how committed are you to this school? Respondents who answered from 1-2
formed the first level, 3-5 formed the second, 6-8 formed the third, and 9-10 formed the
fourth level. A self-reported school commitment level was established by responses to
this question.
Interview question 2 and analysis. What do you personally consider to be special
about this school that makes you want to work here? Answers to the second question
were grouped according to a respondent’s answer to the first interview question. Question
2 responses were listed by Question 1 levels regarding commitment level. When all
Question 2 responses had been assigned a level, they were analyzed for similarities and
differences.
Interview question 3 and analysis. Educators receive a lot of criticism and praise
from the public, media, and government. How do you feel about yourself with regard to
54
your profession as a teacher? This question was designed to be a measure of self-reported
professional self-concept and was used to provide a basis of understanding for the next
question.
Interview question 4 and analysis. On a scale of 1-10, one being the lowest or
least, how committed are you to the profession of education? Respondents who answered
from 1-2 formed the first level, 3-5 formed the second, 6-8 formed the third, and 9-10
formed the fourth level. This question was designed to establish a self-reported
professional commitment level.
Interview question 5 and analysis. How many extra hours do you put into your
job and does the effort benefit you? The number of hours reported were correlated with
the levels established with Interview Question 1, self-reported school commitment score,
and the levels of Question 4, self-reported professional commitment score.
Interview question 6 and analysis. Name the things that you personally consider
to be the most distinctive and enduring about teaching. This item was designed to solicit
responses reflective of the operational definition of organizational identity with regard to
teaching as a profession. The responses were listed according to the respondent’s level
established by the first interview question (school commitment level) and the level
established by the fourth interview question (professional commitment level).
Interview question 7 and analysis. What needs to happen for teachers to become
more committed? This researcher-designed interview question was intended to gain
information regarding the change aspects of the organization, either school or
professional, that respondents perceived as needed to increase commitment levels.
55
Interview question 8 and analysis. How many years have you taught? The number
of years taught were correlated with levels established with Interview Question 1, selfreported school commitment score, and the level of Question 4, self-reported professional
commitment score.
Data Analysis Procedure
The researcher determined whether the construct variables of organizational
identity and self-concept influenced a teacher’s commitment (organizational
identification) and each other. The additional independent variables of teaching tenure
and extra hours worked were analyzed to determine whether organizational identification
influenced the behavioral indicator of commitment.
The data-gathering technique included a three-part, 73-item, Likert-type
quantitative instrument (Appendix A) and an 8-item qualitative interview survey
(Appendix B). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample based on the OID
scale and the ASPP with frequencies, means, and standard deviations aggregated and
disaggregated by the level of the schools’ instruction (elementary, middle, and high
school). Statistical analyses include measures of central tendency, multiple regression
analysis, and qualitative analysis. For the quantitative component of this study, the
dependent variable was the teacher’s organizational identification score. The independent
variables were the teachers’ organizational identity and their self-concept scores. For the
statistical analysis, the accepted social studies significance level of .05 was used (Gall et
al., 1996). Data from the qualitative questions regarding what the teachers found
distinctive, central, and enduring about their school and profession were collected and
56
analyzed. The research design is presented in Table 4, and additional information
regarding the quantitative instrument components is contained in Appendix A.
Researcher
The researcher is a doctoral candidate in Curriculum and Instruction with an
emphasis in Diversity Studies at The University of West Florida. She holds a bachelor’s
degree in music with double majors in Music Therapy and Music Education. Her
internship for registration as a Music Therapist consisted of a 6-month work experience
at Mississippi State Mental Hospital and at Ellisville (MS) State School for the Mentally
Handicapped. She completed a master’s degree in Psychology at The University of West
Florida with an emphasis in Counseling. Following a 2-year full-time placement with a
licensed psychologist and successful completion of the Florida state examination, she was
licensed as a mental health counselor. She worked 4 years in private practice as a
counselor specializing in families and children. The researcher also has 22 years of
experience working in the Okaloosa County School District as a music teacher, guidance
counselor, intervention specialist, assistant principal, and district-level administrator.
Table 4
Research Design
Research question
Instrument
1. How does a teacher’s
organizational identity, as
measured by the
Organizational Identification
Scale, combined with an
index of a teacher’s selfconcept, as measured by the
Adult Self-Perception
Profile, indicate the teacher’s
commitment at-work score
as measured by the
Organizational Commitment
Questionnaire?
Organizational
Identification Scale
(OID) for
measuring
organizational
identity
Adult SelfPerception Profile
(ASPP) domains of
sociability, job
competence,
nurturance,
intelligence, sense
of humor, and
global self-worth
Organizational
Commitment
Questionnaire
(OCQ)
Number of items
Method of analysis
Literature sources
22 Likert-type
response items
Measures of central
tendency; multiple
regression analysis.
SPSS version 11
Ashforth & Mael, 1989,
1992; Dutton & Dukerich,
1991; Gatewood et al.,
1993; Mael & Ashforth,
2001
Measures of central
tendency; multiple
regression analysis.
SPSS version 11
Byrne, 1996; Marsh,
1998; Messer & Harter,
1986; Shavelson et al.,
1976
Measures of central
tendency; multiple
regression analysis.
SPSS version 11
Becker, 1992; Mael,
2001; Mowday et al.,
1979
25 ASPP items
22 Likert-type
response items
(table continues)
Research question
2. What intrinsic elements of
the school organization and
the teaching profession
(organizational identity) do
teachers value in relation to
their level of work
commitment (organizational
identification)?
Instrument
Researcherprepared
questionnaire based
on operational
definitions of
research concepts
Number of items
Method of analysis
8 researcherprepared
questions
Pearson’s
correlation and
frequency
percentages of
various themes
Literature sources
Becker, 1992; LaMastro,
2002; Mael, 2001;
Mowday et al., 1982
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA
Included in this chapter are (a) an overview of the study including the instruments
used, (b) a description of the participants, (c) a description of the procedures for data
analyses, and (d) the statistical results for the Organizational Identification Scale (OID),
the Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP), the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire
(OCQ), and the qualitative interview surveys. The qualitative data were integrated to
augment and provide related information to the results of the quantitative research
questions of this study.
Overview of the Study
Purpose of the Research
Through the statistical analyses of data gathered using three quantitative
instruments, this researcher examined the interaction of educators’ school identities and
their self-concepts as they related to commitment at work. Additional data were collected
from qualitative interview surveys and reported to identify themes and elements of school
identity as reported by the teachers.
Organizational identification strength is based upon an employee’s self-concept
having incorporated with what the employee believes is distinctive, central, and enduring
59
60
about the organization, that is, organization identity (Ashforth & Mael, 1992; Mael,
2001). The level of organizational identification indicates to what degree the employee
envisions himself or herself as part of the organization and, thus, is the impetus to the
employee’s commitment to that organization (Chatman, 1991; O’Reilly et al., 1991,
1996). Schools also are work organizations in which educators may experience reciprocal
outcomes on commitment resulting from the interaction of organizational identity and
self-concept.
Research Questions
1.
How does a teacher’s organizational identity, as measured by the
Organizational Identification Scale (OID) combine with a teacher’s selfconcept, as measured by the Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP), to
indicate a teacher’s commitment at work score, as measured by the
Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)?
2.
What intrinsic elements of the school organization and the teaching
profession (organizational identity) do teachers value in relation to their
level of work commitment (organizational identification)?
Quantitative Instruments
Three quantitative instruments were presented in one survey form (Appendix A)
and used to collect empirical data. The OID, developed by Becker (1992), assessed the
teacher’s school identity. The ASPP, developed by Messer and Harter (1986), measured
the teacher’s self-concept in the domains of (a) sociability, (b) job competence, (c)
61
nurturance, (d) intelligence, (e) sense of humor, and (f) global self-worth for an overall
unidimensional measure of self-concept. The OCQ, developed by Porter et al. (1979),
measured teachers’ strength of commitment to their school.
The OID has demonstrated good psychometric properties and has been used in a
wide range of studies involving college alumni (Mael & Ashforth, 1992), generalized
business employees (Becker, 1992), and military research (Mael & Ashforth). The OID
had a coefficient alpha of -.80 in the study of college alumni and -.74 in the military
research. The internal consistency reliabilities for the ASPP were measured utilizing four
groups of adults: (a) homemakers, .92, (b) part-time working women, .91, (c) full-time
working women, .88, and (d) full-time working men, .91. The overall reliability
coefficient for adults was .91 (Messer & Harter, 1986). The OCQ has shown evidence of
high internal consistency (average alphas of .90), satisfactory stability (e.g., 2-month
test/retest correlation, r = .72), and acceptable predictive validities (Porter et al., 1979).
Qualitative Interview Survey
The teacher interview survey (Appendix B) consisted of 8 questions that included
(a) a self-reported commitment level, (b) listing special elements of their school identity,
(c) a self-reported professional self-concept level, (d) reporting how they felt about their
professional career choice, (e) reporting elements important to the teaching profession, (f)
the number of extra hours they worked per week, (g) what needs to happen for teachers to
become more committed, and (h) the number of years they had taught. These questions
were developed by the researcher using the operational definitions of this study’s
62
research constructs of school identity, self-concept, and commitment as addressed in
chapter 1. A compilation of interview results is contained in Appendix F.
Description of Participants
The researcher collected data for 2 months, November and December of 2002.
The data were collected from 7 public schools that were selected by a stratified random
sample that included replacement sampling. The schools included 2 high schools, 2
middle schools, and 3 elementary schools within the Okaloosa County School District in
northwest Florida. Although the survey (Appendix A) was administered at the end of a
faculty meeting in every school, teachers were given the option not to participate.
A statistical analysis was completed that considered (a) sample size, (b) level of
significance, and (c) effect size. Although the effect size is beyond the researcher’s
control, the independent variables of organizational identity and self-concept are likely to
have a major effect on the dependent variable of commitment. Gall, Borg, and Gall
(1996, 2002) recommended a sample of at least 81 respondents for an analysis of
variance with a medium effect size with a .05 level of significance. Gall et al.
recommended only 33 respondents for a sample size with a large effect at the .05 level of
significance. In this study, the three quantitative instruments were completed by 223
teachers, making the power of the statistical analysis far stronger since 223 is in the range
of subjects recommended for a study with a medium effect size to a small effect size.
A summary of how many teachers completed quantitative instruments by school
and the number of teachers who volunteered to participate in the completion of the
qualitative interview survey is contained in Table 5. All teachers who consented to be
63
Table 5
Number of Teachers per School who Completed the Quantitative Instruments and
Volunteered for Interview Survey
Number of teachers who
completed quantitative
instruments
Number of teachers who
volunteered for interview
survey
High school A
47
26
High school B
56
16
Middle school A
27
13
Middle school B
32
16
Elementary school A
16
3
Elementary school B
32
15
Elementary school C
13
9
Totals
223
98
School
interviewed and who provided their home telephone numbers were interviewed by
telephone or received a voice message to contact the researcher in order to set up an
appointment. In some instances, teachers did not respond to the voice message or could
not be contacted and therefore did not participate in the study. Attempts were not made to
contact those teachers who provided a work phone number but did not specify a time to
call; the researcher did not want to interrupt the educational process. All of the interviews
were conducted in November and December 2002 which may have affected the response
rate because of teachers being away from home due to the demands of holiday shopping,
programs, and social events.
64
Procedures for Data Analysis
The correlation between teacher commitment and the combination of the two
predictor variables of organizational identity and self-concept was calculated using the
data from the three quantitative instruments. Through qualitative interview surveys,
elements of the school organization that teachers valued in relation to their levels of
commitment were recorded.
Descriptive statistics were used to describe the sample with regard to the number
of years the respondents had taught and been employed at their present school and the
number of extra hours worked per week for each teacher. Measures of central tendency
were used to describe the variables of (a) school identity, (b) self-concept, and (c)
commitment. Statistical analyses, including multiple regression, were then used to
evaluate the relationships between the variables of (a) school identity, (b) self-concept,
and (c) commitment as stated in the research question. The qualitative data collected from
the interview surveys were structured so that teachers’ responses could be recorded and
ranked in relation to their self-reported commitment levels to their schools and their
profession. Teachers’ opinions regarding what elements made their school and profession
special to them are listed with their self-reported commitment levels to their schools and
profession.
All quantitative instrument responses were analyzed using SPSS 11.0 for
Windows. Missing data were substituted with the mean score for that particular item as
calculated from all teachers’ quantitative instrument responses. This strategy was
supported by Gall et al. (1996, 2002), since the vast majority of the questions were
answered by all respondents. Missing data accounted for 2% or less of all the responses
65
for the three quantitative instruments. The quantitative instruments’ data represented 223
teachers from 7 schools. Of the teachers who completed the three quantitative
instruments, 98 (43%) indicated on their consent form their willingness to participate in
the individual qualitative interview survey. Of the 97 volunteers, 32 were available for
telephone consultation and completed the individual interview survey for the qualitative
portion of this study. There were no missing data from the qualitative interview surveys.
Characteristics of Teacher Respondents for Quantitative Instruments
All of the respondents (100%) were full-time, certified teachers who worked at one of the
seven randomly selected schools within the Okaloosa County School District in
northwest Florida. Teacher aides, substitute teachers, part-time teachers, and
administrators were excluded from this study. Summary descriptive statistics are
presented in Table 6. Teachers were asked how many years they had spent in teaching,
how many years at their present school, and how many extra hours per week they
worked. Of the 223 teachers who completed the quantitative instruments, 83 (37.21%)
did not provide the requested demographic information. It was not determined why such
a large percentage did not complete the demographic information; perhaps they felt that
their anonymity would be compromised or they did not notice the gridded response
section. As shown in Table 7, the majority of the teacher respondents had taught a range
of .5 to 30+ years (M = 15.07, SD = 9.92). The range for the number of years taught at
their present school was .5 to 32 (M = 8.77, SD = 8.08). The mean number of years taught
reflected an experienced teaching population (Table 8). As shown in Table 9, the amount
of extra hours worked per week by teachers ranged from 1 to 50 (M = 13.07, SD = 8.53).
Table 6
Demographic Data for Teachers Completing the Quantitative Instruments (n = 140)
Demographic
Years spent teaching
Years at present school
Extra hours worked per week
M
SD
15.06
9.92
8.77
8.08
13.07
8.53
Table 7
Years in Teaching for Respondents Completing the Quantitative Instruments
Years spent teaching
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative count
5 years or less
29
20.71
29
6-10 years
32
22.86
61
11-15 years
20
14.29
81
16-20 years
16
11.43
97
21-25 years
20
14.29
117
26-30 years
17
12.14
134
6
4.28
140
Over 30 years
Table 8
Number of Years Teaching at Present School for Teachers Completing the Quantitative
Instruments
Years spent at present school
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative count
5 years or less
65
46.43
65
6-10 years
30
21.43
95
11-15 years
20
14.29
115
16-20 years
8
5.71
123
21-25 years
9
6.43
132
26-30 years
6
4.29
138
Over 30 years
2
1.43
140
Table 9
Number of Extra Hours Worked per Week for Teachers Completing the Quantitative
Instruments
Frequency
Percentage
Cumulative
count
5 hours or less
31
22.14
31
6-10 hours
36
25.71
67
11-15 hours
34
24.29
101
16-20 hours
23
16.43
124
More than 20 hours
16
11.43
140
Number of extra hours worked per week
68
Characteristics of Teacher Respondents From the Qualitative Survey
The qualitative interview survey respondents had taught a range of .5 to 36 years
(M = 17.64, SD = 11.73). These respondents worked from 4 to 30 extra hours per week
(M = 13.09, SD = 7.8).
Measures of Central Tendency for Quantitative Instruments
In order that an inference from the sample statistics could be made to a general
population of teachers, confidence intervals were calculated for the variables of (a)
organizational identity, (b) self-concept, and (c) commitment. The mean for each variable
was calculated based upon each total instrument from all 7 schools.
Organizational identity was measured using the OID, developed by Ashforth and Mael
(1989), which included items created by the researcher. Self-concept was measured by
six domains of the ASPP, developed by Messer and Harter (1986), and included the
domains of (a) sociability, (b) job competence, (c) nurturance, (d) intelligence, (e) sense
of humor, and (f) global self-worth. Commitment was measured by the OCQ, developed
by Porter et al. (1979), which also included researcher-developed items. The mean score
values for each survey instrument were computed and are presented in Table 10.
Frequency distributions for each item from the three surveys are presented in Tables 11
(OID), 12 (ASPP), and 13 (OCQ).
Teachers rated their schools’ identities with a mean of 5.82, which according to
Becker (1992) is a strong indicator of high organizational identity. The OID reflects low
organizational identity with a score of 1 to 3, medium organizational identity with a score
of 4, and high organizational identity with a score of 5 to 7. The OID item that teachers
69
Table 10
Mean Score Values for the Quantitative Instruments
M
SD
OID
5.82
0.78
ASPP
3.31
0.43
OCQ
5.27
0.80
Instrument
Note. Organizational identity (OID): A score of 1 to 3 indicates low identification, 5 to 7
indicates high identification. Self-concept (ASPP): A score of 1 to 2 indicates low selfconcept, 3 to 4 indicates high self-concept. Commitment (OCQ): A score of 1 to 3
indicates low organization commitment, 5 to 7 indicates high commitment.
from all 7 schools rated highest was Item 2: “When I talk about my school, I usually say
‘we’ rather than ‘they’.” The mean for this item was 6.47 which indicated very strong
agreement with this statement. The lowest rated OID item was Item 8, “Since starting this
job, my personal values and those of this school have become more similar.” The mean
for this item was 4.93, indicating neutral or medium agreement but not a low indicator of
organizational identification. Mean values by OID item are presented in Table 11.
Teachers rated their self-concepts with a mean of 3.31 which, based on the ASPP,
is a strong indicator of self-concept (Messer & Harter, 1986). The ASPP item on which
teachers from all 7 schools rated themselves the highest was Item 14. The teachers
indicated that “Some adults are proud of their work” was really true for them. The item’s
mean of 3.68 indicated a strong level of self-concept. The lowest ratings for an ASPP
item was Item 13, “Some adults are not very sociable but other adults are sociable.” Even
though it was the lowest scored item (mean of 3.03), the score indicated a strong level of
70
self-concept at the “sort of true for me” level. Mean values by ASPP items are presented
in Table 12.
Table 11
Mean Values for Organizational Identity by OID Item (N = 223)
Item
M
SD
1.
When someone criticizes my school, it feels like a
personal insult.
6.44
0.89
2.
When I talk about my school, I usually say “we”
rather than “they.”
6.47
0.98
3.
My school’s successes are my successes.
6.17
1.12
4.
When someone praises my school it feels like a
personal compliment.
6.28
1.08
5.
I feel a sense of ownership for my school.
6.09
1.12
6.
If the values of this school were different, I would not
be as attached to my school.
5.61
1.46
7.
My attachment to this school is primarily based on
the similarity of my values and those represented by
my school.
5.53
1.34
8.
Since starting this job, my personal values and those
of this school have become more similar.
4.93
1.57
9.
The reason I prefer this school to others is because of
what it stands for, that is, its values.
5.43
1.49
10.
The community appreciates this school and
recognizes its importance.
5.76
1.26
11. I find this school is distinctively different than other
schools.
5.50
1.28
12.
6.45
0.83
I am proud of this school’s accomplishments.
(table continues)
Item
M
SD
13.
Others see this school as a great organization.
5.63
1.22
14.
There are many things about this school that are
enduring to me.
5.63
1.15
15.
When someone criticizes my school, I become
defensive.
5.75
1.31
16.
This school is more than a place where students are
educated.
6.33
0.96
17.
I am proud to tell people where I work.
6.36
1.03
18.
When compared to other schools, this school is an
example of educational excellence for which I feel a
part.
5.99
1.08
19.
When my school has a problem, I feel personal
responsibility.
5.18
1.28
20.
Others see this school as an example of educational
excellence.
5.51
1.22
21.
The students of this school are proud to attend here.
5.57
1.11
22.
Parents would rather have their children at this school
than any other.
5.30
1.21
Table 12
Mean Values for Self-Concept by ASPP Item (N = 223)
ASPP item
M
SD
1.
Some adults are not
satisfied with the way
they do their work
BUT
other adults are
satisfied with the way
they do their work.
3.31
0.87
2.
Some adults feel
uncomfortable when
they have to meet new
people
BUT
other adults like to
meet new people.
3.01
0.96
3.
Some adults feel that
they often are too
serious about their lives
BUT
other adults are able
to find humor in their
lives.
3.17
0.93
4.a
Some adults like the
way they are leading
their lives
BUT
other adults don’t like
the way they are
leading their lives.
3.38
0.78
5.a
Some adults feel they
are very good at their
work
BUT
other adults worry
about whether they
can do their work
3.48
0.73
6.
Some adults do not
enjoy nurturing others
BUT
other adults enjoy
being nurturant.
3.21
0.97
7.
When some adults don’t BUT
understand something, it
makes them feel stupid
other adults don’t
necessarily feel
stupid when they
don’t understand.
3.09
0.77
8a
Some adults are very
happy being the way
they are
BUT
other adults would
like to be different.
3.16
0.89
9a
Some adults feel at ease
with other people
BUT
other adults are quite
shy.
3.08
0.94
(table continues)
ASPP item
BUT
SD
3.38
0.84
10.
Some adults sometimes
question whether they
are a worthwhile person
11.
Some adults are not very BUT other adults are very
productive in their work
productive in their
work.
3.40
0.80
12.
Some adults feel that
they are intelligent
3.33
0.77
13.
Some adults are not very BUT other adults are very
sociable
sociable.
3.03
0.93
14.a
Some adults are proud
of their work
BUT
other adults are not
very proud of what
they do.
3.68
0.51
15.
Some adults are
disappointed with
themselves
BUT
other adults are quite
pleased with
themselves.
3.23
0.76
16.
Some adults do not feel
that they are very
intellectually capable
BUT
other adults feel they
are intellectually
capable.
3.27
0.83
17.a
Some adults can really
laugh at themselves
BUT
other adults have a
hard time laughing at
themselves.
3.36
0.07
18.a
Some adults see caring
for nurturing others as a
contribution to the
future
BUT
other adults do not
gain a sense of
contribution through
nurturing others.
3.56
0.63
19.
Some adults are
dissatisfied with
themselves
BUT
other adults are
satisfied with
themselves.
3.39
0.71
20.a
Some adults feel they
BUT
are just as smart as other
adults
other adults wonder if
they are as smart.
3.31
0.78
BUT
other adults feel that
they are a worthwhile
person.
M
other adults question
whether they are very
intelligent.
(table continues)
74
ASPP item
a
M
SD
21.
Some adults do not
enjoy fostering the
growth of others
BUT
other adults enjoy
fostering the growth
of others.
3.52
0.75
22.a
Some adults like the
kind of person they are
BUT
other adults would
like to be someone
else.
3.43
0.72
23.a
Some adults feel they
are enjoyable to be with
BUT
other adults often
question whether they
are enjoyable to be
with.
3.23
0.77
24.a
Some adults feel they
have a good sense of
humor
BUT
other adults wish
their sense of humor
was better.
3.36
0.80
25.a
Some adults feel they
are good at nurturing
others
BUT
other adults are not
very nurturing.
3.54
0.70
Indicates the item was inverted for scoring purposes.
An overall score of 3 or less on the OCQ reflects a lower commitment to the
organization’s goals, a score of 5 reflects higher commitment, and a score of 4 reflects
neither high nor low commitment (Mowday et al., 1979; Porter et al., 1979). The teacher
respondents rated their overall commitment at a mean of 5.27 which indicated a high
level of commitment. The item on the OCQ that teachers from all 7 schools rated the
strongest was Item 15, “Deciding to work for this school was a definite mistake on my
part.” The mean of 6.36 indicated a strong level of disagreement since the item had been
written as a reversed item for balancing purposes. The OCQ item with the lowest score
was Item 18, “My desire is to teach my classes and be left out of all of the other
75
activities.” Since this item was written using a negative connotation, the scores were
inverted for analysis of the results. This item’s mean of 3.28 indicated a moderately high
agreement since the item was written in a reversed form. Mean values by OCQ item are
presented in Table 13.
Table 13
Mean Values for Commitment by OCQ Item (N = 223)
Item
I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond
that normally expected in order to help this school be
successful.
M
6.28
SD
0.95
2.
I talk up this school to my friends as great to work
for.
5.96
1.16
3.a
I feel very little loyalty to this school.
5.35
2.09
4.
I would accept almost any type of job assignment in
order to keep working for this school.
3.46
1.93
5.
I find that my values and the school’s values are
very similar.
5.45
1.39
6.
I am proud to tell others that I am part of this school.
6.13
1.04
7.a
I could just as well be working for a different school
as long as the type of work was similar.
3.95
1.85
8.
This school really inspires the very best in me in the
way of job performance.
5.39
1.34
9.a
It would take very little change in my present
circumstances to cause me to leave this school.
4.57
1.94
10.
I am extremely glad that I chose this school to work
for over others I was considering at the time I joined.
5.71
1.37
1.
(table continues)
76
Item
There is not too much to be gained by sticking with
this school indefinitely.
M
5.03
SD
1.82
12.a
Often I find it difficult to agree with this school’s
policies on important matters relating to its
employees
4.53
1.83
13.
I really care about the fate of this school.
6.32
1.03
14.
For me, this is the best of all possible schools for
which to work.
5.62
1.36
15. a Deciding to work for this school was a definite
mistake on my part.
6.36
1.26
16.
I feel that it is part of a teacher’s responsibility to
work beyond the regular work day for the benefit of
the school.
4.87
1.77
17.
I feel that teachers should commit to the school by
sponsoring clubs and activities.
4.56
1.69
18.
My desire is to teach my classes and be left out of all
of the other activities.
3.28
1.90
19.
When my school is honored, I know that I am
partially responsible for its success.
5.87
1.13
20.
I prefer working at this school over any other.
5.72
1.40
21.
I have a strong commitment to this school.
6.09
1.16
22.
The people in this school are like a family to me.
5.24
1.50
23.
The administration appreciates what I do for this
school.
5.38
1.53
24.
Other teachers appreciate what I do for this school.
5.19
1.40
25.
Students appreciate what I do for this school.
5.37
1.37
a
11.
a
Indicates the item was inverted for scoring purposes.
77
Analysis for Research Question 1
How does a teacher’s organizational identity, as measured by the Organizational
Identification Scale (OID) combine with a teacher’s self-concept, as measured by the
Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP), to indicate a teacher’s commitment at work score,
as measured by the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)?
Multiple regression analysis was used to determine the correlation between
teacher commitment from the combination of the constructs of school identity and
teacher self-concept. Using the principles of correlation and regression, multiple
regression and other multivariate analyses have become some of the most powerful and
appropriate measures for scientific behavioral research (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000).
Kerlinger and Lee’s opinion was based on the premise that almost all behavioral research
problems are multivariate in nature and cannot be solved with the traditional bivariate
approach. Educational research in student achievement has become increasingly analyzed
with multiple variants that work together and sometimes against each other. Multiple
regression allows the researcher to analyze the common and separate influences of two or
more variables on the dependent variable.
The overall effect of school identity and teacher self-concept on teacher
commitment was calculated by squaring the correlation coefficients. As presented in
Table 14, the correlations between teacher commitment (dependent variable) and the
independent variables of school identity and self-concept were .78 and .21, respectively.
Both correlations to teacher commitment were significant at the .05 level. The correlation
between school identity and self-concept was .13, indicating that they were not
78
significantly correlated quantifiable variables. The two independent variables were not
found to be related.
Table 14
Correlation Coefficients of Organizational Commitment (OCQ), School Identity (OID),
and Self-Concept (ASPP)
Variables
Y (OCQ)
Y
X1
X2
1.00
Commitment
X1 (OID)
.78
1.00
.21
.13
School identity
X2 (ASPP)
1.00
Self-concept
Research literature from the business community supports a strong relational link
between organizational identity and self-concept (Ashforth & Mael, 1992; Mael, 2001).
The results of this study with teachers did not support this finding which has been
established and replicated many times in the business community. Teachers’ school
identity scores did not have a significant relationship with their self-concept scores.
Findings of this study include identification of a significant relationship between school
identity and teacher commitment and a significant relationship between teacher selfconcept and teacher commitment.
79
Independent Variable Model for Predicting Organizational or Teacher Commitment
Both independent variables (organization or school identity and self-concept)
were significant predictors of organizational or teacher commitment. As shown in Table
15, the most significant of the two was school identity as measured by the OID. The
positive coefficients when combined indicted that the higher in favor teacher school
identity and teacher self-concept were, the higher the teacher commitment.
Table 15
Univariate Tests of Significance for Organizational or Teacher Commitment From
School Identity and Self-Concept
Regression model
df
F
p
OID school identity
1
345.80
.00
ASPP self-concept
1
7.40
.01
Error
220
Teachers’ separate measures of school identity (OID) and self-concept (ASPP)
accounted for 63% of the variance in the prediction of teacher commitment (OCQ). This
overall effect of the two independent variables (school identity and self-concept) on the
dependent variable of commitment at work indicated a fairly strong degree of prediction
from these independent variables on the dependent variable.
Regression Model for Predicting Teacher Commitment
Contained in Table 16 are the results of the analysis of the regression model.
These results indicate that the combined quantifiable variables of school identity (OID)
80
and self-concept (ASPP) are, as a whole, significant predictive indicators to the
dependent variable of teacher commitment (OCQ). The positive coefficients of school
identity and self-concept indicated that the higher teacher attitudes were in both variables,
the higher their total commitment. Of the two independent variables, school identity
(OID) made the greater contribution in predicting teacher commitment (OCQ). Although
statistically significant, self-concept (ASPP) made a lesser contribution to the combined
prediction equation for teacher commitment (OCQ). Said another way, teacher
commitment (OCQ) is more highly correlated with school identity (OID) than with
teacher self-concept (ASPP) as indicated by its higher coefficient and lower p value.
Table 16
Multiple Correlation Coefficients for the Independent Variables of School Identity (OID)
and Self-Concept (ASPP) on the Dependent Variable of Teacher Commitment (OCQ)
Understandardized
β
Coefficients
standard error
t
p
-.12
8.32
-.01
.99
School identity (OID)
.89
.05
18.60
.00
Self-concept (ASPP)
.21
.08
2.72
.01
Model
Constant
The researcher found that a teacher’s school (organizational) identity as measured
by the OID combined with a teachers’ self-concept as measured by the ASPP did
correlate well with a teacher’s commitment at work score as measured by the OCQ.
School identity contributed more than self-concept to a teacher’s commitment level
although both are correlational factors to commitment.
81
Analysis for Research Question 2
What intrinsic elements of the school organization and the teaching profession
(organizational identity) do teachers value in relation to their level of work commitment
(organizational identification)?
The first research question of this study was designed to determine whether
organizational or teacher commitment was influenced by school identity and teacher selfconcept. This association was validated in this study through established quantitative
methods. Research Question 2 was designed to discover themes and relationships at the
case level to describe the intrinsic elements pertaining to the previously discussed
constructs through qualitative methods.
In order to establish construct validity of the qualitative survey instrument, the
researcher used the operational definitions of the constructs to create the interview
questions (Appendix B). No causal relationships will be suggested because a comparative
description will be used to describe the teacher-reported elements in a disaggregated
manner in relation to the teacher-estimated levels of commitment. The questions were
read to each respondent verbatim during each interview for reliability purposes.
Teachers who volunteered for the qualitative interview survey wrote their
telephone numbers on the original quantitative instrument consent form (Appendix E).
The researcher contacted the volunteers for the interview survey (Appendix B), and they
were interviewed individually by telephone or in person by appointment. If the teacher
was not at home when called, the researcher left a message whenever possible. Teachers
were requested to return the researcher’s call when it was convenient for them. A total of
32 teachers were interviewed. The researcher used the same wording for the introduction
82
and the 8 qualitative interview questions. Teacher responses were written verbatim as
often as possible. A compilation of the information collected from these qualitative
interviews is presented in Appendix F.
The researcher originally intended to disaggregate the qualitative interview survey
responses based on four levels of self-reported ratings of commitment and professional
self-concept that were rated from 1-10. After analyses of the responses, it was found that
no teacher reported a score less than 5 on the self-reported commitment scale or the selfreported professional self-concept scale. Since there was no information for the lower
two levels, the researcher established means, standard deviations, and Pearson’s
correlations for the (a) self-reported commitment level, (b) self-reported professional
self-concept, (c) extra hours worked per week, and (d) number of years in teaching (Table
17). Findings that addressed Research Question 2 are reported by frequency and
percentages of various themes recorded from teachers.
Table 17
Qualitative Interview Survey: Mean Values for Teachers’ Self-Reported Commitment
Level, Professional Self-Concept, Extra Hours Worked per Week, and Number of Years
Teaching
M
SD
Self-reported commitment level
8.60
1.43
Self-reported professional self-concept
9.21
1.23
Extra hours worked per week
13.09
7.80
Number of years in teaching
17.64
11.73
Variable
83
When the 32 teachers interviewed were asked to use a scale of 1-10 to indicate
how committed they were to their school, the mean response was 8.60. The teachers were
highly committed to their schools with only 3 of the 32 indicating the lowest recorded
scores of a 5 or 6; 19 teachers indicated scores of 9 or 10 on the 10-point scale. The 32
teachers had a mean of 17.64 years in teaching.
Correlations between each of the variables of (a) self-reported school commitment
level, (b) self-reported professional self-concept, (c) extra hours worked per week, and
(d) number of years in teaching were calculated from the qualitative interview responses.
These correlations are reported in Table 18.
Table 18
Correlations Between the Variables: School Commitment, Professional, Self-Concept,
Extra Hours Worked, and Years in Teaching Included in the Qualitative Interview Survey
Variable
A
School
commitment
B
Professional
self-concept
C
Extra hours
worked
D
Years in
teaching
* p < .05.
A
B
C
D
1.00
.27
.36*
.14
1.00
.25
-.22
1.00
-.23
1.00
84
The only two variables with a statistically significant correlation were school
commitment (A) and extra hours worked (C). Although this was a weak positive
relationship, it indicated that the strength of a teacher’s school commitment related to a
higher number of extra hours worked per week. This finding indicates that teacher
longevity apparently does not relate to a higher professional self-concept or to an increase
in the extra hours worked per week.
In response to Interview Question 2, teachers listed what they personally
considered special about their schools that made them want to work there (Appendix B).
This question was designed to provide a description of the intrinsic elements that made
their schools special thus creating its image and identity. The question allowed teachers
to verbalize what characteristics of their schools contributed to their levels of
commitment to those schools. A compilation of the teachers’ responses indicates
1. Thirty-eight percent of the teachers mentioned that their school was special
because it did the right things for children or included the mention of students.
2. Thirty-four percent listed the concept of working with peers in terms of
collegiality, friendships, or the teamwork with fellow teachers.
3. Twenty-one percent listed their schools’ administration as one of the things
they considered special about their schools.
For this study, since school identity was the largest contributing factor to increased
teacher commitment in the quantitative analysis, it can be said that the school
organizational identity elements that were most important to these teachers were (a) the
students, (b) working with other teachers, and (c) the administration.
85
After being asked how they felt about themselves with regard to being a teacher
(Question 3), and in order to establish a self-reported professional self-concept, teachers
were asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 how committed they were to the profession of
education (Question 4). The resulting mean of 9.21 was even higher than the selfreported school commitment score of 8.6. Question 4 was intended to establish a measure
of professional identity that was not necessarily school-based but rather a numerical
measure with regard to the teachers’ satisfaction with a career choice.
Teachers were asked how many extra hours they worked every week (Question
5). While the range was from 4 to 30 hours-per-week, the mean was 13.09 hours.
Additional findings include the following:
1. Elementary teachers worked a mean of 10.37 extra hours per week (SD =
5.83).
2. Middle school teachers worked a mean of 12.20 extra hours per week (SD =
5.49).
3. High school teachers worked a mean of 14.47 extra hours per week (SD =
8.90).
After teachers had reported in Question 4 the level of their professional selfconcept on an ordinal scale, they were asked to name the things that they personally
considered to be the most distinctive and enduring about the profession of teaching
(Question 6). All of the teachers (100%) included a reference to the learning process of
students as being important to their identity with the profession of teaching. They all also
mentioned intrinsic reasons such as fulfillment rather than extrinsic reasons for their
commitment to the teaching profession.
86
As previously mentioned, the result for professional self-concept produced a high
mean of 9.21 on a 10-point scale when teachers were asked about how they felt about
themselves as teachers and their commitment to the profession. Teachers also were asked
in Question 7, “What needs to happen for teachers to become more committed?” Only 1
of the 32 respondents said that teachers “are so committed now, we could not be more
committed.” Of the 32 interviewed, 22% mentioned more accountability, 19% mentioned
more support, 25% mentioned increased financial compensation, and 66% mentioned that
teachers need to be recognized, praised, and respected as professionals in order to
increase their commitment. One veteran teacher with 30 years experience said,
Besides money, they [teachers] have to feel and be told that they are valuable.
They don’t feel warmth and support of the community. I touch the future--I teach.
Most teachers have to say that to themselves to keep going everyday. You don’t
do it for the principals or parents. It’s the kid on the second row. . . . I was happy
to say my mother was a teacher, but I don’t think my kids are.
Findings indicated that in addressing Research Question 2, the intrinsic elements
of the school organization that teachers valued were (a) the students, (b) working with
other teachers, and (c) the administration. The strongest element that these teachers
valued in their career profession of teaching was their interaction with and impact upon
students.
Summary
Teachers’ school identity strength, meaning what the teachers believed was
distinctive, central, and enduring about their school, and a measure of the teachers’ self-
87
concept indicated organizational identification. Teachers identified themselves as part of
their organization and thus an impetus to their commitment to that school. Teachers from
northwest Florida experienced positive, reciprocal outcomes on commitment resulting
from the interaction of school identity and self-concept, just as is experienced in the
business community (Dutton et al., 1994).
Findings of this study indicated that there was a high measure of internalization of
the organization as evidenced in commitment from the congruence between
organizational identity and self-concept; the greater the congruence, the greater the
strength of commitment. People with high levels of organizational identification define
themselves and their work organization with the same attributes. Individuals develop a
sense of who they are and develop goals and attitudes in relation to what they do at work
(O’Reilly et al., 1996).
A teacher’s school identity as measured by the OID combined with his selfconcept as measured by the ASPP, indicated that teacher’s commitment-at-work score as
measured by the OCQ at a significant level. Based upon the findings of this study, the
hypothesis of Research Question 1 is accepted.
Results from the qualitative interview survey instrument (Appendix B) indicated
that the teachers in this study were strongly committed to their schools and even more
strongly committed to the education profession. The intrinsic elements of the school
organization that teachers valued were (a) the students, (b) working with other teachers,
and (c) the administration. The strongest element that these teachers valued in their career
profession of teaching was their interaction with students. For teachers to become more
88
committed, these interview survey respondents emphasized that teachers need to be
recognized, praised, and respected as professionals.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overview and Purpose of This Study
This study was conducted in order to gain increased knowledge about the
organizational identity, self-concept, and commitment among teachers in a northwest
Florida school district. Social identity theory (Dutton et al., 1994) proposes that a person
can acquire a more positive social identity through an association with a workplace that
has positive identities. Organizational research attributes influence on an employee’s selfworth from the organizational workplace and the individual’s perception of that
organizational identity. When a positive internalization occurs within employees from
their coalesced organizational identities and self-concepts, desirable outcomes such as
commitment, longevity, motivation, attendance, and job satisfaction increase (Becker,
1992; Mowday et al., 1979, 1982). Since employees’ self-concepts and work behaviors
are affected by their perceived organizational identities, social identity theory is an
important concept to study and understand. Schools also are work organizations in which
educators may experience reciprocal outcomes resulting from the interaction of school
identity and self-concept contributing to teacher commitment. The interaction of
educators’ organizational identities and their self-concepts as they relate to the
commitment level at work known as organizational identification were examined in this
89
90
study. Organizational identification is the degree to which a teacher’s self-concept
contains the same attributes as the teacher’s organizational identity (Ashforth & Mael,
1989; Kramer, 1991; Mael, 2001; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Van Maanen & Barley, 1984).
The results from this study with teachers partially reflected the research findings from the
business world, but also indicated different outcomes specific to this teaching population.
The quantitative instruments’ data represented 223 teachers from 7 schools in
northwest Florida’s Okaloosa County. All of the respondents were full-time certified
teachers. Teacher aides, substitute teachers, part-time teachers, and administrators were
excluded from this study.
The qualitative interview survey results represented 32 of the 223 teachers who
participated in quantitative portion of the study. The researcher contacted the volunteers
for the interview survey, and they were interviewed by appointment either by telephone
or in person.
Conclusions
Data were obtained for Research Question 1 from three established quantitative
instruments (Appendix A): (a) the Organizational Identification Scale (OID) assessed
teachers’ school identity, (b) the Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP) measured their
self-concept, and (c) the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) measured
teachers’ strength of commitment to their schools. Analyses of these data evolved from
descriptive statistics to describe the sample, measures of central tendency, Pearson’s
product-moment correlations, and multiple regression.
91
Data for addressing Research Question 2 were obtained from a researcherdesigned qualitative interview survey (Appendix B). The interview survey consisted of
seven questions for teachers that included (a) a self-reported commitment level, (b) a
listing of special elements of their school’s identity, (c) a self-reported professional selfconcept level with how they felt about their professional career choice,(d) elements that
are important to the profession of teaching, (e) extra hours worked per week, (f) what
needs to happen for teachers to become more committed, and (g) their number of years in
teaching. Analyses of data included descriptive statistics to describe the sample
population, Pearson’s product-moment correlations, and percentage occurrence of themes
or topics from the answers within each question.
Research Question 1
How does a teacher’s organizational identity, as measured by the Organizational
Identification Scale (OID) combine with a teacher’s self-concept, as measured by the
Adult Self-Perception Profile (ASPP), to indicate a teacher’s commitment at work score,
as measured by the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ)?
The respondents had taught a range of .5 to 32 years (M = 15.07, SD = 9.92). The
range for the number of years taught at their present schools was .5 to 32 years (M = 8.77,
SD = 8.77). The mean number of years taught reflected an experienced teaching
population. The amount of extra hours worked per week by teachers ranged from 1 to 50
(M = 13.07, SD = 8.53).
The overall effect of school identity and teacher self-concept on teacher
commitment was calculated. The correlations between teacher commitment (dependent
92
variable) and the independent variables of school identity and self-concept were .78 and
.21, respectively. Both correlations of school identity and self-concept to teacher
commitment were significant are the .05 level. The correlation between school identity
and self-concept, the two independent variables, was .13 indicating that they are not
significantly correlated quantifiable variables. For the teachers in this study, the
independent variables of school identity and self-concept were not related to each other
but were both significantly related to the dependent variable of teacher commitment.
Teachers’ separate measures of school identity and self-concept accounted for
63% of the variance in the prediction of teacher commitment. This overall effect of the
two independent variables (school identity and self-concept) on the dependent variable of
commitment at work indicated a fairly strong degree of prediction from these
independent variables on the dependent variable.
The elements within organizational identity, or in this case, school identity, are
what makes the organization distinctive, central and enduring (Balmer, 1998). The
distinctive element refers to what distinguishes the organization from others. What is
central to an organization is the essence of it and what that organization represents. The
enduring element of organizational identity involves the degree of sameness over time.
Teachers’ school identity strength, meaning what the teacher believes is distinctive,
central, and enduring about their schools, and a measure of the teachers’ self-concepts
indicates organizational identification. Organizational identification is the impetus to
commitment and is based upon the degree of strength that teachers envision themselves
as part of the school. Based on the findings of this study, northwest Florida teachers, like
93
those in the business community, experienced positive reciprocal outcomes on
commitment resulting from the interaction of school identity and self-concept.
Research Question 2
What intrinsic elements of the school organization and the teaching profession
(organizational identity) do teachers value in relation to their level of work commitment
(organizational identification)?
The qualitative interview survey respondents had taught a range of .5 to 36 years
(M = 17.64, SD = 11.73). These respondents worked from 4 to 30 extra hours per week
(M = 13.08, SD = 7.80).
This research question was designed to discover, through qualitative methods,
themes and relationships at the case level in order to describe the intrinsic elements
pertaining to the previously discussed constructs. The intrinsic elements of school
identity (what is distinctive, central, and enduring to the teachers) were recorded.
Teachers were asked to give self-rated levels of school and professional commitment
because of the potential difference in an allegiance to one’s organization and one’s career
choice (Moore, Henderson, & Chawla, 1994). The intrinsic elements important to
teachers with regard to the profession of teaching were recorded, as well as the extra
hours they worked each week, and the number of years they had been teaching. Teachers
also were asked what would be required for teachers to become more committed.
Correlations among the self-reported levels of school commitment, self-reported
levels of professional self-concept, extra hours worked, and years in teaching were
calculated from the qualitative interview survey responses. The only two variables with a
94
correlation at the significant level (.05) were school commitment and extra hours worked
per week. Although this was a weak positive relationship, it indicated that the strength of
a teacher’s school commitment related to a higher number of hours worked per week.
There actually was a weak negative correlation among years in teaching and the two
variables of professional self-concept and extra hours worked per week. This finding
indicated that teacher longevity neither related to a higher professional self-concept nor to
an increase in the extra hours worked per week.
The 32 teachers who were interviewed had a mean of 17.64 years of teaching
experience. When asked how committed they were to their school on a scale of 1-10, a
mean of 8.60 was established. The teachers who volunteered to participate in the
interview process were highly committed to their schools with only 3 of the 32 teachers
indicating the lowest recorded score of 5 or 6 and 19 teachers indicating the highest score
of 9 or 10 on the 10-point scale.
After establishing what level of commitment teachers had for their schools, they
were asked what they personally considered special about their schools that made them
want to work there. This interview question was intended to provide a list of the intrinsic
elements of organizational identity regarding their schools; the elements that made their
schools distinctive, central, and enduring. This question allowed teachers to verbalize
what characteristics of their school contributed to their level of commitment to their
schools. Analyses of the responses indicated the following:
1. Thirty-eight percent of the teachers mentioned that a school was special
because it did the right things for kids or included the mention of students.
95
2. Thirty-four percent listed the concept of working with peers in terms of
collegiality, friendships, or teamwork.
3. Twenty-one percent listed their schools’ administration as one of the things
they considered special about their schools.
In order to establish a self-reported professional self-concept, teachers were asked
to rate on a score of 1-10 how committed they were to the profession of education. The
mean of 9.21 was even higher than the self-reported school commitment score of 8.60.
This interview survey question was designed to establish a measure of professional
identity that was not necessarily school-based but was a numerical measure regarding
teachers’ satisfaction with their career choice. Teachers in this study had a higher mean
indicator of personal commitment (9.21) to the career of teaching than to their schools
(8.60).
Teachers were asked how many extra hours they worked every week. The range
was from 4 to 25 hours; the mean was 13.09 hours. Analysis of the findings indicated the
following total extra hours worked per week by school-level for each group of teachers:
1. Elementary teachers worked a mean of 10.37 extra hours (SD = 5.83).
2. Middle school teachers worked a mean of 12.20 extra hours (SD = 5.49).
3. High school teachers worked a mean of 14.47 extra hours (SD = 8.90).
Teachers were asked to name the things that they personally considered important
about the profession of teaching. Intrinsic factors rather than extrinsic factors were listed
by these teachers. All of them (100%) made reference to the learning process of their
students as being important. They all felt that they made a difference and enjoyed seeing
the “light come on” in children as they learn. No one mentioned extrinsic factors such as
96
having summers off, early dismissal times, fringe benefits, location, promotion
opportunities, or extended holiday breaks.
Teachers were asked what needs to happen for teachers to become more
committed. Only 1 of the 32 teachers said that teachers are “so committed now, we could
not be more committed.” The remaining responses included the following:
1. Twenty-two percent mentioned more accountability.
2. Nineteen percent mentioned more support.
3. Twenty-five percent mentioned increased financial compensation.
4. A majority (66%) stated that to increase their commitment, teachers need to
be recognized, praised, and respected as professionals.
The researcher found that in addressing Research Question 2, the intrinsic
elements of the school organization that teachers valued were (a) the students, (b)
working with other teachers, and (c) the administration. The strongest element the
teachers valued in their career profession of teaching was their interaction with students.
According to these highly committed teachers, what it will take for teachers to become
more committed is praise, recognition, and respect as a professional.
Implications From This Study in Reference to the Research Literature
The study of employee commitment in the business community is one of the most
researched variables in personnel research (Moore et al., 1994). Most studies have been
designed to determine the predictive human responses to commitment; the outcomes of
employee behavior. Commitment has been related significantly to an organization’s
financial success (Benkhoff, 1997), job satisfaction (Mowday et al., 1982), motivation
97
(Mowday et al., 1979), and attendance (Mathieu & Zajac, 1980). The reason commitment
has been so popular as a research subject is its assumed impact on performance. This
study was designed to determine whether a teacher’s school identity and self-concept
predicted commitment. After this relationship was verified, then the intrinsic elements of
school identity and self-concept were examined through qualitative methods to identify
their relationship to high levels of teacher commitment.
Previous research findings have indicated that when a person’s self-concept and
perceived organizational identity are strong and similar, the member becomes more
engaged and committed because these elements provide for self-expression and goaloriented behavior (Shamir, 1991). O’Reilly et al. (1996) found that people with high
organizational identities that complemented their perceived self-images had lower
turnover rates and reported high intentions to stay committed to their work. This
researcher did find there was a high degree of internalization of the organization as
evidenced in commitment from the congruence between school identity and self-concept.
In fact, teachers’ measures of school identity (OID) and self-concept (ASPP) accounted
for 63% of the variance in the prediction of teacher commitment (OCQ).
This high degree of internalization of the organization was the result of the degree
of congruence between organizational identity and self-concept. According to O’Reilly et
al. (1996), the greater the congruence the greater the degree of satisfaction and
commitment. People with high levels of organizational identification define themselves
and their work organization with the same attributes. Individuals develop a sense of who
they are and develop goals and attitudes in relation to what they do at work. Unlike the
business community and previous research in social identity theory, this was not true for
98
the teachers in this study. The correlation between school identity (OID) and self-concept
(ASPP) was .13, indicating that they were not significantly correlated quantifiable
variables. The item with the lowest OID score was, “Since starting this job, my personal
values and those of this school have become more similar.” The mean of 4.93 indicated a
more neutral agreement from teachers that the same attributes that defined the school also
defined them. In this study, although the combination of strong school identity and selfconcept indicated stronger commitment levels in teachers, there was not a significant
degree of correlation between school identity and self-concept as measured by the
quantifiable variables. This finding could be an inherent teacher characteristic of
dissimilarity between teachers and school values, meaning that it has always been this
way, or that teachers may have felt that the school’s values had changed and theirs had
not.
According to Dutton and Dukerich (1991), the employees’ perceived attributes of
the organization interact with their own self-concept to produce the construct of
organizational identification. A strong organizational identification leads to behavioral
attributes in employees such as commitment, longevity, and loyalty. In the business
community, what defines the organization as a social group also defines the self-concept
of employees who identify strongly with their workplace. Teachers’ school identity
scores did not have significant relationships with the self-concept scores. For teachers in
this study, what defined the school as an organization did not correlate with the teachers’
self-concepts. Roland Barth (1990), a senior lecturer at Harvard and former public school
educator, has conducted extensive research in school reform. In his book Improving
Schools From Within, Barth wrote,
99
Public educators--superintendents, teachers, principals--have never
enjoyed highly revered positions in American society. Yet in difficult
times they have been fueled by a sense of their own mission and public
recognition of the social usefulness of their work . . . . Schools face not
only a crisis in public confidence but, more dangerous, a crisis in selfconfidence. (p.11)
Findings of this study indicated a high level of self-concept in teachers with a
mean of 3.31 on the 4-point scale of the ASPP. However, self-concept did not
significantly correlate with a teachers’ school identity and although a significant indicator
of teacher commitment, it was the least contributing factor in the multiple regression
analysis on teacher commitment.
Identification is an integrated behavioral outcome that draws upon the beliefs,
attitudes, and emotions of the employee (Pratt, 1998). These beliefs, attitudes, and
emotions are exhibited behaviorally through a level of work commitment. This
commitment to the organization results from a psychological internalization of
organizational identity and self-concept. This study found significant correlations
between school identity and teacher commitment at .78 and between self-concept and
teacher commitment at .21. This study used the OCQ develop by Mowday et al. (1979)
who wrote that commitment was the relative strength of an individual’s identification
with and involvement in a particular organization. The teachers in this study had a strong
level of commitment to their schools as evidenced by their (N = 223) mean score of 5.27
on a 7-point, Likert-type scale on the OCQ.
100
Findings from the qualitative interview survey of this study indicated that the 32
teachers interviewed were strongly committed to their schools and even more to the
profession of education. In a study of health and law enforcement workers, Moore et al.
(1994) found that although correlated, there was a difference between organizational
commitment and occupational commitment.
Fred Mael (2001; Mael & Ashforth, 1995, 2001), principal research scientist for
the American Institute for Research, has studied extensively organizational identification
and its impact on various organizations from businesses to college alumni organizations.
Mael has concluded that individuals who identify with an organization assume the group
characteristics as their own. This process involves internalization of the perceived values
of the group. In the qualitative interview survey used in the current study, 32 teachers
were asked to name the things that they personally consider to be most distinctive and
enduring about the profession of teaching. All of the teachers (100%) included a
reference to the learning processes of students as important to their identity with the
profession of teaching. Mael and Ashforth concluded that, “Individuals develop a sense
of who they are, what their goals and attitudes are, and what they ought to do, from their
group memberships” (p. 311). All 32 teachers who participated in the qualitative
interviews of this study mentioned intrinsic reasons rather than extrinsic reasons for their
commitment to the profession of teaching.
In both the 31st and 32nd Annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Polls on the public’s
attitudes toward the public schools, respondents said that the teaching staff was the most
important factor in improving student achievement or selecting a school for their children
(Rose & Gallup, 2001; Tayman, 2000). Both polls indicated overwhelmingly from the
101
community responses the importance of good teachers. In this study, although the
teachers were very highly committed to their profession and their schools, 66% of them
felt that teachers need to be recognized, praised, and respected as professionals in order to
increase their commitment. Based on the findings of this study, public opinion regarding
the worth of teachers and the teachers’ external identities are somehow not congruent.
Qualitative teacher interviewee 7 said in response to a question of what needs to
happen for teachers to become more committed, “The need to feel support of
administration and the public. Good teachers are quitting early because they are not given
enough support.” Interviewee 19 said, “Our society needs to support education and what
we are teaching. Give the teachers more control in the classroom. I am a professional.
Trust my judgment. Appreciate what I do.” Interviewee 24 said, “We don’t feel that we
are taken seriously and held with high esteem in the community. The salary doesn’t
reflect a professional image. When you give your all and all you get is criticism . . . I
don’t see how many teachers keep going.”
The results from the qualitative interview survey indicated that the intrinsic
elements of the school organization that the teachers valued were (a) the students, (b)
working with other teachers, and (c) the administration. The strongest element that
teachers valued in their career profession of teaching was their interaction with students.
These are the intrinsic elements of school identity and self-concept that teachers indicated
contributed to their commitment.
Findings from both the quantitative instruments (Appendix A) and the qualitative
interview survey (Appendix B) indicated extremely high levels of commitment from the
teachers in this study. The creators of the OCQ (Mowday et al., 1982) defined
102
commitment as the strength of an individual’s identification with an organization which,
in turn, is said to be composed of one’s (a) strong belief in and acceptance of the
organization’s goals and values, (b) willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf the
organization, and (c) a strong desire to maintain membership in the organization. The
teachers in this study, despite feelings of being under appreciated, (a) strongly supported
their schools’ goals and values, (b) exerted considerable effort as evidenced by the extra
hours worked, and (c) willingly exerted considerable effort on behalf the organization.
They did their job because of the intrinsic rewards gained from their students’ responses
to their instructional practices.
Recommendations for Future Research
Commitment is one of the most popular research topics in organizational behavior
studies (Benkhoff, 1997). Mathieu and Zajac (1980) concluded from their findings that,
“Although higher levels of commitment may relate to improved job performance in some
situations . . . the present findings suggest that commitment has very little direct influence
on performance in most instances” (p. 184). Contrary to those findings, Benkhoff, using
the OCQ and sales targets of bank employees, found that commitment was related
significantly to performance as indicated by the financial success of bank branches. In
Benkhoff’s study, the most significant factor of commitment contributing to performance
was the employees’ attitudes toward their supervisors. While this researcher’s study did
not measure teacher performance in relation to their commitment levels, the findings do
present areas for exploration by other research studies of teachers related to student
achievement. Additional suggested areas for future inquiry follow.
103
Population and Sample
1. Studies that utilize samples of teachers from other locations (rural, suburban,
and urban) could be analyzed to compare levels of school identity, selfconcept, and commitment.
2. Studies utilizing a population of teachers from school districts that do not have
high accountability rankings based on state and national assessments should
be conducted to determine the impact on teacher commitment.
Method
1. This study examined the selected variables of (a) school identity, (b) selfconcept, and (c) commitment during a particular point in time. A longitudinal
study involving measures of commitment during the implementation of the No
Child Left Behind Act could yield important results as teachers’ evaluations
and pay become connected to their students’ achievement scores.
2. Disaggregation of commitment scores by school within an intense qualitative
study design could provide more insight to effective individual school
practices rather than a collective summation of important school identity
intrinsic elements.
Inclusion of Other Variables
1. Other variables that affect teacher commitment that could be studied using a
multiple regression model include (a) job stress, (b) level of perceived
administrative support, (c) attendance, (d) longevity, and (e) job satisfaction.
104
2. More research should be conducted that contributes to an increased
understanding within the educational profession to determine whether teacher
commitment is related to their job performance. Measures of teacher
effectiveness could be utilized or, more importantly, annual student gains in
achievement could be used to determine if teacher commitment predicts
increased student achievement.
3. Learning more about the outcomes of teacher commitment would necessitate
further study into what contributes to teacher commitment. Variables such as
(a) salary, (b) hours, (c) level of input into decisions, (d) staff development,
(e) degree of teacher collegiality, (f) size of school, and (g) perceived levels of
administrative support should be analyzed.
4. Measuring teacher commitment in relation to the leadership style of the
principal could provide insight for instructional leaders.
5. Student measures of perceived teacher commitment and characteristics of high
internalization of school identity and self-concept could be useful.
Recommendations for Practitioners
The findings of this study have implications for both school administrators and
teachers. The importance of school identity (what is central, distinctive, and enduring
about the school) plays a major role in predicting teacher commitment. According to the
operational definition of organizational identity, schools must (a) stand for something, (b)
have unique characteristics, and (c) have tradition with an established culture (Dutton et
al., 1994). The leader of the school, the principal, must ably perform multiple duties and
105
successfully accomplish tasks from instructional leader to the plant manager. However,
the most important duty for the principal is to provide an atmosphere conducive to
increasing student achievement by increasing the organizational identification among the
teachers. More than new buildings, computer programs, small class ratios, or a myriad of
educational programs, teachers are the critical element with the greatest impact on
student achievement. The teachers in this study identified the students, collegiality, and
their administrators as the most important elements for their school identity. The
implication for these teachers to educational leaders is to (a) create a safe, orderly place
for students; (b) provide opportunities for teacher collaboration; and (c) be supportive of
the teaching staff. Collegiality is more than teacher lounge talk. Collegiality is (a) the
practice of sharing what instructional practices are working, (b) analyzing and criticizing
procedures, (c) aligning curriculum, and (d) refining the practice of intervention
strategies. Providing opportunities for teacher collaboration is imperative in order to
define and perfect a viable curriculum. Based on this researcher’s calculations, most high
school teachers at the end of a 30-year career will probably have taught over 27,000
classes. Of those 27,000 classes, there probably has been another adult in the room less
than 30 times, and that adult most likely was an administrator. There are great potential
benefits from opening the closed doors of the classrooms for teachers to observe, interact,
and refine the art and science of effective teaching through collegiality.
Teachers’ self-concepts do not coalesce with the school identities as in the
business community, perhaps because of more extensive external criticism from media,
parents, administrators, and legislators. It possibly is self-protection for teachers not to
value themselves in relation to the image of their school. However, the teachers in this
106
study were extremely committed and indicated high levels of their schools’ identities. Yet
66% of the teachers mentioned their need for more appreciation, praise, and respect. All
(100%) of the interviewed teachers identified the reason they teach is their students’
behavioral responses when they learn--seeing “the light come on.” Teachers commit to
their profession for intrinsic reasons; they may never gain the respect that they deserve
from the community because many will continue to teach regardless of how they are
treated. It has almost become an unhealthy enabling relationship in which teachers are
held by the public as important to their children but are not esteemed with the
professional respect they deserve.
Although most teachers would never consider taking drastic action, they will have
to become individual agents; instead of chartered schools, they could become chartered
teachers. Teachers could then negotiate their terms based upon their skills in producing
student achievement. This type of action may be what it will take to gain professional
respect in the work community. But, because the intrinsic elements of teaching are so
powerful to teachers, they will continue to be educators for the privilege of truly
changing lives.
As the shortage of teachers becomes more critical and the need to reach a
diversified population of students increases, it is important to examine the indicators of
teacher commitment. With national legislation in place that makes schools in all states
accountable for their instructional effectiveness, it is imperative to provide the
environment for teachers to learn and implement the best prescriptive strategies so that no
child is left behind. We must not only retain our teachers, but recruit more dedicated
teachers to meet the needs of America’s children.
107
Summary
Teachers who participated in this study were highly committed to their schools
and to the education profession. The teachers I interviewed wanted to continue the
interview long past the 8 questions. These teachers wanted to improve education even
though they felt unappreciated. They had an uncanny resiliency to the external sources of
pressure and still strongly expressed their commitment to the teaching profession.
The northwest Florida teachers who participated in this study did experience, as in
the business community, positive reciprocal outcomes on commitment resulting from the
interaction of their school identity and self-concept. Teachers’ school identities combined
with their self-concepts to predict their commitment. School identity was a stronger
contributor to commitment than self-esteem. The organizational (school) identity
elements that these teachers valued were working with the students, collegiality, and the
administration. The strongest element teachers valued in their career profession of
teaching was their interaction with students. For educators to become more committed,
interview respondents emphasized that teachers need to be recognized, praised, and
respected as professionals. The general consensus regarding the need for respect was best
summed up by a teacher who said, “The public needs to value us. First, value education
by raising our salaries. Then they will not say we just teach because we can’t do anything
else. To be respected as a professional is very important.”
REFERENCES
Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity. Research in Organizational
Behavior, 7, 263-295.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of
Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
Aronson, E. (1968). Dissonance theory: Progress and problems. Chicago: Rand
McNally.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization.
Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39.
Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1992, August). The dark side of organizational
identification. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of
Management, Las Vegas, NV.
Balmer, J. M. T. (1998). Corporate identity: There is much more to it than meets the eye.
International Studies of Management and Organization, 28, 12-31.
Barth, R. S. (1990). Improving schools from within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bartunek, J. M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring:
The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355-372.
108
109
Becker, T. E. (1992). Foci and bases of commitment: Are they distinctions worth
making? Academy of Management Journal, 35, 232-244.
Benkhoff, B. (1997). Ignoring commitment is costly: New approaches establish the
missing link between commitment and performance. Human Relations, 50, 701726.
Bennett, W. L. (1992). The devaluing of America: The fight for our culture and our
children. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and attack
on America’s public schools. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-esteem. In J. Robinson, P. Shaver,
& L. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological
attitudes (pp. 115-160). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Burns, R. B. (1979). The self-concept: Theory, measurement, development, and behavior.
New York: Longman.
Byrne, B. M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review
of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54, 427-456.
Byrne, B. M. (1990). Methodological approaches to the validation of academic selfconcept: The construct and its measures. Applied Measurement in Education, 3,
185-207.
Byrne, B. M. (1996). Measuring self-concept across the life-span. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Chatman, J. A. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in
public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459-484.
110
Chattopadhay, P., & George, E. (2001). Examining the effects of work externalization
through the lens of social identity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 781788.
Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review,
108, 593-623.
Decker, P. J., & Borgen, F. H. (1993). Dimensions of work appraisal: Stress, strain,
coping, job satisfaction, and negative affectivity. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 40, 470-478.
Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. H. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: The role of image
and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Review, 34,
517-554.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. H., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and
member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 239-263.
Elsbach, K. D., & Kramer, R. M. (1998). Members’ responses to organizational threats:
Encountering and countering the Business Week rankings. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41, 442-476.
Erikson, E. (1982). The life cycle completed. New York: Norton.
Fanning, D. (1990, August 19). Coping in industries that the public hates. New York
Times, p. F25.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. New York: Harper and Row.
Florida Department of Education. (2002). School indicators report. Tallahassee, FL:
Author.
111
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research (6th ed.). White
Plains, NY: Longman.
Gall, M. D., Borg W. R., & Gall, J. P. (2002). Educational research (7th ed.). Boston:
Pearson.
Gatewood, R. D., Gowan, M. A., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (1993). Corporate image,
recruitment image, and initial job choices. Academy of Management Journal, 36,
414-427.
Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sense-making and sense-giving in strategic
change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 443-448.
Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M., & Corley, K. G. (2000). Organizational identity, image, and
adaptive instability [Electronic version]. Academy of Management Review, 25, 6381.
Gioia, D. A., & Thomas, J. B. (1996). Identity, image, and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly,
41, 370-403.
Hansford, B. C., & Hattie, J. A. (1982). Self-measures and achievement: Comparing a
traditional review of the literature with a meta-analysis. Australian Journal of
Education, 26, 71-75.
Harter, S. (1990). Causes, correlates, and the functional role of global self-worth: A lifespan perspective. In R. Sternberg & J. Kolligan, Jr. (Eds.), Competence
considered (pp. 67-97). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
James, W. (1963). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
(Original work published 1890)
112
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and
disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.
Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations in behavioral research (4th ed.). New
York: Harcourt.
Kramer, R. (1991). Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of
categorization processes. In L. Cummings & B. Shaw (Eds.), Research in
organizational behavior (Vol. 13, pp. 191-228). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Labouvie-Vief, G., Orwell, L., Murphey, D., Chiodo, L., Krueger, C., Goguen, L., et al.
(1994). Self and others in emotional development: A coding manual. Unpublished
manuscript, Wayne State University at Detroit, MI.
LaMastro, V. (2002). Commitment and perceived organizational support [Electronic
version]. National Forum Journals, 13, 1-8.
Mael, F. A. (2001). Organizational identification and its relevance to college alumni.
Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the
reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 13, 103-123.
Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1995). Loyal from day one: Biodata, organizational
identification, and turnover among newcomers. Personnel Psychology, 48, 309333.
Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (2001). Identification in work, war, sports, and religion:
Contrasting the benefits and risks. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31,
192-222.
113
Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological
perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337.
Marsh, H. W. (1986). Global self-esteem: Its relation to specific facets of self-concept
and their importance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 12241236.
Marsh, H. W. (1998). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept:
Theoretical and empirical justification. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82,
77-172.
Marsh, H. W., Craven, R., & Debus, R. (1997). Self-concepts of young children 5 to 8
years of age: Measurement and multidimensional structure. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 83, 377-392.
Marsh, H. W., & Young, A. (1998). Top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal models: The
direction of causality in multidimensional, hierarchical self-concept models
[Electronic version]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 509-527.
Marx, R. W., & Winne. P. H. (1980). Self-concept validation research: Some current
complexities. Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance, 13, 72-82.
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1980). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,
correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment [Electronic version].
Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.
Messer, B., & Harter, S. (1986). Manual for the adult self-perception profile. Denver,
CO: University of Denver, Department of Psychology.
114
Moore, C., Henderson, S., & Chawla, S. K. (1994, March). Stress and job commitment in
the workforce: A healthcare and law enforcement example. Paper presented at the
meeting of the Southwest Small Business Institute Association, Dallas, TX.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organizational
linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York:
Academic.
Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of
organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-227.
Murphy, J., & Schiller, J. (1992). Transforming America’s schools: An administrator’s
call for action. LaSalle, IL: Open Court.
O’Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational
culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit
[Electronic version]. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 487-516.
O’Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1996). Organizational commitment and
psychological attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and
internalization on prosocial behavior [Electronic version]. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 492-499.
Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1979). Organizational
commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 19, 603-609.
Pratt, M. (1998). To be or not to be? Central questions in organizational identification. In
D. A. Whetten & P. C. Godfrey (Eds.), Identity in organizations: Building theory
through conversations (pp. 171-207). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
115
Reger, R. K., Gustafson, L. T., DeMarie, S. S., & Mullane, J. V. (1994). Reframing the
organization: Why implementing total quality is easier said than done [Electronic
version]. Academy of Management Review, 19, 565-584.
Rose, L. C., & Gallup, A. M. (2001). The 33rd annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of the
public’s attitudes toward the public schools [Electronic version]. Phi Delta
Kappan, 83, 1-30.
Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic.
Schwartz, H. S. (1987). Antisocial actions of committed organizational participants: An
existential psychoanalytic perspective. Organization Studies, 8, 327-340.
Serksnyte, L. (1999). Identities and organizations. New York: New School for Social
Research, Department of Political and Social Science.
Shamir, B. (1991). Meaning, self, and motivation in organizations. Organization Studies,
3, 405-424.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Recent
developments in theory and method. New Directions for Testing and
Measurement, 7, 25-43.
Steele, C. M. (1998). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the
self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 21, pp.
261-302). New York: Academic.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroups behavior. In
S. Austin & W. Worchel (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed, pp.
7-24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.
116
Tayman, L. (2000, August). New Gallup poll shows public approval of public schools at
all-time high. American Association of School Administrators. Retrieved
September 17, 2001, from http://www.aasa.org/publications/ln/08_00/
08_22_00gallup.htm
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). No child left behind. Retrieved August 21, 2002,
from http://www.nochildleftbehind.gov/overview/index.html
Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S. R. (1984). Occupational communities: Culture and control
in organizations. In L. Cummings & B. Shaw (Eds.), Research in organizational
behavior (Vol. 13, pp. 191-228). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Wells, L. E., & Marwell, G. (1976). Self-esteem: Its conceptualization and measurement.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Zirkel, P. A. (1971). Self-concept and the “disadvantage” of ethnic group membership
and mixture. Review of Educational Research, 41, 211-225.
APPENDIXES
117
Appendix A
Quantitative Instruments
(reproduced as used)
118
119
ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION SCALE
Please rate the following statements by circling the number on the
following rating scale that most closely represents your response.
1-strongly disagree 2-moderately disagree 3-slightly disagree
4-neither disagree nor agree 5-slightly agree 6-moderately agree 7-strongly agree
1.
When someone criticizes my school, it feels like a personal
insult.
1234567
2.
When I talk about my school, I usually say “we” rather than
“they”.
1234567
3.
My school’s successes are my successes.
1234567
4.
When someone praises my school, it feels like a personal
compliment.
1234567
5.
I feel a sense of ownership for my school.
1234567
6. If the values of this school were different, I would not be as
attached to my school.
1234567
7.
My attachment to this school is based primarily on the
similarity of my values and those represented by my school.
1234567
8.
Since starting this job, my personal values and those of this
school have become more similar.
1234567
9.
The reason I prefer this school to others is because of what it
stands for, that is, its values.
1234567
10. The community appreciates this school and recognizes its
importance.
1234567
11. I find this school is distinctively different over other schools.
1234567
12.
I am proud of this school’s accomplishments.
1234567
13.
Others see this school as a great organization.
1234567
14.
There are many things about this school that are enduring to
me.
1234567
15.
When someone criticizes my school, I become defensive.
1234567
16.
This school is more than a place where students are educated.
1234567
120
ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION SCALE, continued
Please rate the following statements by circling the number on the
following rating scale that most closely represents your response.
1-strongly disagree 2-moderately disagree 3-slightly disagree
4-neither disagree nor agree 5-slightly agree 6-moderately agree 7-strongly agree
17.
I am proud to tell people where I work.
1234567
18.
When compared to other schools, this school is an example of
educational excellence for which I feel a part.
1234567
19.
When my school has a problem, I feel personal responsibility.
1234567
20.
Others see this school as an example of educational
excellence.
1234567
21.
The students of this school are proud to attend here.
1234567
22.
Parents would rather have their children at this school than
any other.
1234567
ADULT SELF-PERCEPTION PROFILE
This scale contains statements which allow you to describe yourself. This is not at test.
There are no right or wrong answers. Please look at the first. It talks about two kinds of
persons, and we want to know which person is most like you.
Check only one box for each numbered sentence.
Really
true for
me
1.
Sort of
true
for me
Sort of
true
for me
Some adults are
not satisfied with
the way they do
their work
BUT
other adults are
satisfied with the
way they do their
work.
Really
true
for me
121
2.
3.
Some adults feel
BUT other adults like to
uncomfortable
meet new people.
when they have to
meet new people
BUT other adults are able
Some adults feel
that they often are
too serious about
their lives.
to find humor in
their lives.
4.
Some adults like
the way they are
leading their
lives.
BUT
other adults don’t
like the way they
are leading their
lives.
5.
Some adults feel
they are very
good at their
work
BUT
other adults worry
about whether they
can do their work.
6.
Some adults do
not enjoy
nurturing others
BUT
other adults enjoy
being nurturant.
7.
When some
adults don’t
understand
something, it
makes them feel
stupid
BUT
other adults don’t
necessarily feel
stupid.
8.
Some adults are
very happy being
the way they are
BUT
other adults would
like to be different.
9.
Some adults feel
at ease with other
people
BUT
other adults are
quite shy.
10.
Some adults
sometimes
question whether
they are a
worthwhile
person
BUT
other adults feel
that they are a
worthwhile person.
11.
Some adults are
not very
productive in
their work
BUT
other adults are
very productive in
their work.
122
12.
Some adults feel
that they are
intelligent
BUT
other adults
question whether
they are very
intelligent.
13.
Some adults are
not very sociable
BUT
other adults are
sociable.
14.
Some adults are
proud of their
work.
BUT
other adults are not
very proud of what
they do.
15.
Some adults are
disappointed with
themselves
BUT
other adults are
quite pleased with
themselves.
16.
Some adults do
not feel that they
are very
intellectually
capable
BUT
other adults feel
that they are
intellectually
capable.
17.
Some adults can
really laugh at
themselves
BUT
other adults have a
hard time laughing
at themselves.
18.
Some adults see
caring or
nurturing others
as a contribution
to the future
BUT
other adults do not
gain a sense of
contribution
through nurturing
others.
19.
Some adults are
dissatisfied with
themselves
BUT
other adults are
satisfied with
themselves.
20.
Some adults feel
they are just as
smart as other
adults
BUT
other adults wonder
if they are as smart.
21.
Some adults do
not enjoy
fostering the
growth of others
BUT
other adults enjoy
fostering the
growth of others.
22.
BUT
Some adults like
the kind of person
they are
other adults would
like to be someone
else.
123
23.
BUT
Some adults feel
they are enjoyable
to be with
other adults often
question whether
they are enjoyable
to be with.
24.
Some adults feel
they have a good
sense of humor
BUT
other adults wish
their sense of
humor was better.
25.
Some adults feel
they are good at
nurturing others.
BUT
other adults are not
very nurturant.
124
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT QUESTIONNAIRE
Listed below are a series of statements that represent possible feelings individuals
might have about the school or organization for which they work. With respect to your
own feelings about the school for which you are now working, please indicate the
degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement by circling one of the
seven alternatives.
1-strongly disagree 2-moderately disagree 3-slightly disagree
4-neither disagree nor agree 5-slightly agree 6-moderately agree 7-strongly agree
1.
I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that
normally expected in order to help this school be successful.
1234567
2.
I talk up this organization to my friends as a great school to
work for.
1234567
3.
I feel very little loyalty to this school.
1234567
4.
I would accept almost any type of job assignment in order to
keep working for this school.
1234567
5.
I find that my values and the school’s values are very similar.
1234567
6.
I am proud to tell others that I am part of this school.
1234567
7.
I could just as well be working for a different school as long
as the type of work was similar.
1234567
8.
This school really inspires the very best in me in the way of
job performance.
1234567
9.
It would take very little change in my present circumstances
to cause me to leave this school.
1234567
10.
I am extremely glad that I chose this school to work for over
others I was considering at the time I joined.
1234567
11.
There’s not too much to be gained by sticking with this school
indefinitely.
1234567
12.
Often I find it difficult to agree with this school’s policies on
important matters relating to its employees
1234567
125
ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT QUESTIONNAIRE, continued
1-strongly disagree 2-moderately disagree 3-slightly disagree
4-neither disagree nor agree 5-slightly agree 6-moderatly agree 7-strongly agree
13.
I really care about the fate of this school.
1234567
14.
For me, this is the best of all possible schools for which to
work.
1234567
15.
Deciding to work for this school was a definite mistake on my
part.
1234567
16.
I feel that it is part of a teacher’s responsibility to work
beyond the regular work day for the benefit of the school.
1234567
17.
I feel that teachers should commit to the schools by
sponsoring clubs and activities.
1234567
18.
My desire is to teach my classes and be left out of all of the
other activities.
1234567
19.
When my school is honored, I know that I am partially
responsible for its success.
1234567
20.
I prefer working at this school over any other.
1234567
21.
I have a strong commitment to this school.
1234567
22.
The people in this school are like a family to me.
1234567
23.
The administration appreciates what I do for this school.
1234567
24.
Other teachers appreciate what I do for this school.
1234567
25.
Students appreciate what I do for this school.
1234567
How many years have you taught? _________________
How many years have you taught at this school? ________________
How many hours per week do you spend working after regular hours?
(Include coaching, clubs, lesson planning, staff development, etc.) _________________
Appendix B
Qualitative Interview Protocol
(reproduced as used)
126
127
QUALITATIVE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Researcher Greeting
Thank you for agreeing to this interview for my research. You may discontinue at any
time but be assured that this is an anonymous interview. Your name and school will
not be part of this study and will not be used in my analysis nor in the dissertation. I
am very interested in how teachers perceive their schools and themselves and how
those perceptions relate to a teacher’s strong identification with his or her school. I
thank you, again, for your participation.
_______________________________________________________________________
Interview question 1. If commitment is a strong belief in the goals of this school
and a willingness to expend effort, on a scale from 1-to-10, one being the lowest or least,
how committed are you to your school?
Probe. On a scale of 1-to-10, rate your commitment level to your present school.
Interview question 2. What do you personally consider to be special about this
school that makes you want to work here?
Probe. Why do you think your school is special? Do you appreciate the school’s
population, administration, teamwork, or what makes this school a good place to work?
Interview question 3. Educators receive a lot of criticism and praise from the
public, media, and government. How do you feel about yourself with regard to your
profession as a teacher?
Probe. Are you ever sorry that you decided to become a teacher? Do you feel the
teaching profession is scrutinized more than other professions?
128
Interview question 4. On a scale of 1-to-10, one being the lowest or least, how
committed are you to the profession of education?
Probe. On a scale of 1-to-10, rate your commitment level for being a teacher.
Interview question 5. How many extra hours do you put into your job and does the
effort benefit you?
Probe. How often do you work beyond the regular school day? In what ways does
it help you to work extra hours?
Interview question 6. Name the things that you personally consider to be the most
distinctive and enduring about teaching.
Probe. What is important to you about a school: the type of students, the
administration, friends as fellow teachers, sports, pride and so forth?
Interview question 7. What needs to happen for teachers to become more
committed?
Probe. What things are important to teachers? What do teachers want and need to
improve their dedication to the job?
Interview question 8. How many years have you taught?
Probe. How many years of experience do you have as a teacher?
Appendix C
Flowchart of Statistical Analysis
129
Distribute Survey
No Return
Returned
yes
Follow-up
Survey
Yes
Preliminary
Review
and
Correction
Errors
No
Reject
Correctable
No errors
Chronbach
Alpha
(reliability)
Yes
No
No
Yes
Reject
Cross
comparison of
data SPSS 11
No or poor results
Yes
Multiple
Regression
Each section
Yes
Yes
t-test
Reject
No
Accept
Hypothesis
(reject null)
Write
conclusion
Null hypothesis
is good
Decide next
step
in analysis
Appendix D
Permission to Conduct the Study
131
132
133
134
Appendix E
Informed Consent Form and Introductory Letter
135
136
137
Appendix F
Compilation of Interview Results
138
Table F1
Compilation of Interview Results
Interviewee
A
B
C
D
1
9
Family-type support,
caring peers.
10
10
2
10
8
20
3
10
Atmosphere, other
teachers. Kids are
different; all are
helpful and friendly.
The principal; friends
I teach with; well-run
school; it’s home.
8
8
4
6
10
5
We try to do the right
things for kids.
E
True care for students;
satisfaction from my
commitment when their
lives are changed
Satisfaction; watching kids
learn.
My colleagues; the kids you
help; the ones who say
thank you, making a
difference.
Students I made a difference
with. Camaraderie among
teachers. Community
connection other professions
do not have.
F
G
More accountability, financial
rewards, and recognition
5
Salary; get back to being able to
teach what you want; too much
state control; decrease paperwork;
smaller class size.
Depends on individual, maybe
money. Not me, I want praise and
encouragement.
32
Besides money, they have to feel
and be told that they are valuable.
They don’t feel warmth and
support of the community. I touch
the future; I teach. Most teachers
have to say that to themselves to
keep going everyday. You don’t
do it for the principal or parents.
It’s the kid on the second row. I
was happy to say my mother was a
teacher; I don’t think my kids are.
30
29
(table continues)
Interviewee
A
B
C
D
E
5
8
Caring for individual
students.
10
4
Students having an impact
on their lives.
6
10
I graduated from this
school, so it is special
to me.
10
17
7
5
The staff and teachers
are supportive.
8
15
You can see that it makes a
difference when the light
comes on. A mom
complimented me this year,
it felt so good.
I enjoy working with the
children.
8
7
Kids come first;
personal concern for
kids.
9
10
9
9
The kids.
10
20
10
10
The leadership
support; the kids need
me.
10
25
One of the only professions
where you have a real
impact on a child’s life. In
high school, it affects the
rest of their lives.
Influence we have on the
students.
When you work hard to do a
lesson and the students that
get turned around because
of my intervention
F
G
More appreciation; money would
help, but it’s not the key.
Recognize how hard we work and
what we tolerate. Administration
has forgotten what it is like in the
classroom.
I feel insecure because I’m new to
teaching. A lot more praise and
pats on the back.
36
The need to feel support of
administration and public. Good
teachers are quitting early because
they are not given enough support.
Need more input into how school
is run. We need more team work.
More support to people new in the
profession.
4
More recognition for professional
growth.
Teachers must be willing to work
longer hours than expected; to give
freely of personal time.
2
24
24
6
(table continues)
Interviewee
A
B
C
D
Students are put first
and their needs.
10
10
9
Being friends with
other teachers; school
climate is strong;
positive principal.
The students.
10
Administration
supports me. I like
the school
philosophy.
The students; being a
part of their lives.
10
Teachers are very
welcoming.
10
11
12
10
13
10
14
9
15
10
16
6
10
10
E
F
G
Students themselves when
Forget money and public opinion.
they accomplish skills and
Do it for self-pride. Committed
you can see they’re learning. teachers know that they do make a
difference.
5 Kids remember you when
Appreciation for what they do!
they are older. They come
back and tell you what they
learned. Impact.
20 Ability to observe the
More respect in the form of salary,
growth of kids and be a part praise. Legislators need to leave
of this process.
education alone. Stop the
pendulum swing.
5 Contact with students. They Accountability; someone who
better themselves and
knows what I am doing to check
accomplish goals.
on me; praise and encouragement.
25
The students, our
relationship. I still
communicate with
graduated students.
4 Touching the lives of my
students.
Teachers need to realize what
really matters. Plan everyday; keep
it fresh. They need to enjoy what
they’re doing.
The nation’s perspective needs to
change about the importance of
education. The reason kids are in
school needs to be supported from
home.
9
30
9
11
20
10
(table continues)
Interviewee
A
B
C
D
E
17
10
10
25
It gives me a chance to be
creative and innovative. I
can reach students through
theses methods.
18
9
The makeup of
administration and
teachers; they work
together for the
mission of the school
I have a lot invested
at this school and
what it stands for.
5
10
The children.
19
8
Mrs. Player, the
principal.
7
8
Moments with the kids that
keep you going.
20
6
They are very nice
people.
8
5
21
8
The diverse
population
9
22
Kids give hugs and
appreciate you. When you
explain and a light comes
on, and you know you made
a difference.
When kids understand
things, their eyes light up.
You can tell they appreciate
it.
F
G
More accountability; teachers
having to get rid of old lesson
plans and the way they have
always done things and change
with the flow of education.
We need to be recognized as
professionals. Parents and politics
shouldn’t delegate how we teach.
There are too many restrictions on
teachers.
Our society needs to support
education and what we are
teaching. Give teachers more
control in the classroom. I am a
professional; trust my judgment.
Appreciate what I do.
They are already extremely
committed with what they do with
so little.
16
More support from parents and
administrators in discipline
matters. If I could get the
administrators in the classroom for
1 week, it would really make a
difference.
36
30
26
.5
(table continues)
Interviewee
A
B
C
D
22
7
8
8
I’m the last line for a
student. When my students
reach a goal, it is a change
for a lifetime.
23
8
Special areas are a
vital part of the
school, music, P. E.,
exceptional student
education , and so
forth.
The commitment of
the staff to the whole
process.
7
4
Opportunity to really
influence someone’s life.
Intervention and redirecting
of families and children to
be educated.
24
9
10
14
I enjoy the fact that I can
make a difference in a
child’s life. Sometimes
parents don’t have time and
I can meet a child’s need.
Detail to individual
kids.
E
F
G
Public needs to value us. First,
value education by raising our
salaries. Then they will not just
say we teach because we can’t do
anything else. To be respected as a
professional is very important.
People must understand where
education is today. The world has
changed. Their past perception of
being in school does not let them
know it. People don’t understand
how to compare schools and what
we handle. The public must
understand more. For example, the
book, $100,000 Teacher. They do
need to insist on qualified people
for teachers. We want to be more
supported and appreciated.
We don’t feel we are taken
seriously and help with high
esteem in the community. The
salary doesn’t reflect a
professional image. When you
give your all and all you get is
criticism – I don’t see how many
teachers keep going.
25
13
3
(table continues)
Interviewee
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
25
10
We have aboveaverage students from
military families that
have expectations and
good behavior.
10
5
Having students that I have
taught come back and tell
me how they appreciate it.
18
26
9
The principal is very
committed and set a
high standard.
10
30
One can see a personal
impact. It is not a concept;
it’s real and you can see it.
You see the light come on
and you don’t have to wait
to see the results like other
professions.
27
8
My autonomy in
using instructional
strategies.
10
25
The bonds one makes with
students; the light bulb
comes on.
Parents need to get more involved.
I perceive that teachers are not
held in as high esteem as when I
was going to school. Class size?
Who cares? As long as you have
well-disciplined kids, you can
teach many more at one time.
Our society as a whole does not
elevate the teaching profession.
Then that affects parents and
students. Teaching is an honorable
and good profession. Also, get rid
of the couple of “rotten apple”
teachers that affect us all. There
was a time when teachers were
honored.
It comes down to money. Pay
more and better people will
interview. Also, no tenure. Yearly
contracts for teachers. There is not
enough accountability. Teachers
should be observed anytime and
held to task like any other
profession.
1
4
(table continues)
Interviewee
A
28
9
B
I feel we put the
children first.
C
D
E
10
10
The ability to touch the
future and change
tomorrow.
29
8
The sense of
community and my
kids attending the
same school.
9
11
The rewards of watching
children learn something.
It’s a calling to teach.
30
10
A most wonderful
faculty.
10
7
I enjoy working with other
teachers. I make an impact
on students.
F
G
I don’t know. It’s not anything we
can teach teachers but must come
from within. More accolades for
some teachers. I hear so many that
say they need more recognition.
Public appreciation.
The article in the paper today was
discouraging. Teachers have to
feel they are an important part.
Leadership needs to make teachers
feel respected and appreciated. I
once got a thank-you note from
my principal for working extra
hours at a fair. It was nice.
If you did a poll at my school, then
Los Angeles, then Miami, they
would say the greatest thing we
face is a kid’s home life. If we
could improve students’ home life,
it would make a difference. More
money, recognition, would help,
and more hours in the day. We
need our time frame adjusted to
get it all in.
11
20
39
(table continues)
Interviewee
31
32
A
10
B
Other teachers.
8 My school’s
reputation.
C
D
E
F
10
20
Some kids that comes back
and say that I made a
difference.
The first thing in my mind is
money. But, most of us are so
committed now, we couldn’t be
more committed.
9
12
It puts me in a situation
where I’m available to kids.
I have them a small time to
make a difference. I want to
be effective as a teacher.
I already work with lots of
13
committed teachers. We already
put in lots of time. I resent being
called “staff.” I am faculty; don’t
pull out the professionalism. I
know that we all work for the good
of the students, but teachers are
faculty and should maintain that
elevated standing for respect.
Note: A = Self-reported commitment level, 1-10.
B = What do you personally consider to be special about this school that makes you want to work here?
C = Self-reported professional self-concept, 1-10.
D = Extra hours worked per week.
E = Name the things that you personally consider to be the most distinctive and enduring about teaching (professional
identity).
F = What needs to happen for teachers to become more committed?
G = Number of years in teaching.
G
29