3 ~ 7 9

Ag/d

JOB SATISFACTION AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

AT NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES

IN CENTRAL THAILAND

DISSERTATION

Presented to the Graduate Council of

North Texas State University

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

by

Suthep Karoonlanjakorn, B.Ed., M.Ed.

Denton, Texas

May, 1986

Karoonlanjakorn, Suthep, Job Satisfaction Among Faculty

Members at Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central

Thailand. Doctor of Philosophy (Higher Education Adminis-

tration), May, 1986, 170 pp., 31 tables, bibliography, 93

titles.

The Faculty Job Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction Scale

developed by Olin R. Wood (1973) was employed in this study

to determine what significant differences and level of

faculty job satisfaction existed on each facet of job

satisfaction and in overall job satisfaction among faculty

members at non-metropolitan teachers colleges in central

Thailand. The results of this study were compared with the

findings of Vatthaisong (1982) in a similar study of faculty

members at teachers colleges in northeast Thailand. The

instrument consists of two parts: the first part includes

seven demographic items, and the second part has 68 items

and uses a six-point rating scale for ten facets of job

satisfaction, including one-single item of overall

satisfaction. A sample of 288 faculty members at non-

metropolitan teachers colleges in central Thailand was

randomly selected. A total of 253 faculty members or 87.85

percent of the sample participated in this study.

Frequencies, percentages, means, one-way ANOVA, and two-way

ANOVA were used for analyses. The level of significance was

set at .05. The Scheffe" method for post hoc comparison was

adopted following one-way ANOVA.

Results of the study revealed that sources of

satisfaction for faculty in rank order of importance were

interpersonal relations, responsibility, achievement,

recognition, the work itself, growth, working conditions,

policy and administration, salary, and supervision. No

areas of dissatisfaction were revealed. The major source of

dissatisfaction in Vatthaisong's study was salary. This

study revealed that faculty members did not differ

significantly on the ten facets of satisfaction on the basis

of academic degrees, age, and faculty affiliations.

Nevertheless, three significant differences and two

significant interactions were found. First, faculty with

level three salary classification were more satisfied with

their achievements than those who were on level four.

Second, female faculty were more satisfied with

interpersonal relations than male faculty. Third,

instructors were better satisfied with the working

conditions than administrators. Fourth and fifth, the

longer the period of time male faculty were engaged in their

profession, the more satisfied they were with their personal

growth and their work. This finding was opposite to that of

female faculty.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

Chapter

III

INTRODUCTION

Theories of Motivation and Job Satisfaction Summary Statement of the Problem Importance of the Study Rationale for Hypotheses . . . . Hypotheses Definitions of Terms Background of the Study Limitations of the Study Basic Assumptions Chapter Bibliography

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Definition of Job Satisfaction Measures of Job Satisfaction Research Related to Theories of Motivation

and Job Satisfaction Demographic Variables and Job Satisfaction Sex Variable and Job Satisfaction Other Variables Related to Job Satisfaction Summary Chapter Bibliography

METHODOLOGY

Data Collection Procedure and Sample Instrumentation Analysis and Treatment of Data . . , Chapter Bibliography

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA

Analysis of Level of Faculty Job Satisfaction . .

Testing the First Null Hypothesis . . . . . ' Testing the Second Null Hypothesis . . . . Comparing the Results of This Research With the Results Discovered by Vatthaisong,

Summary

Page

v

1 16 18 20 21 23 24 24 28 28 29

33

33 34

37 42 58 64 72 76

81

81 86 89 90

92

93 98

119

122 128

i n

Chapter Page

V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 131

Summary 131 Findings and Conclusions 135 Implications 138 Recommendations 144 Chapter Bibliography 147

APPENDIXES A. Tables XXX and XXXI 149 B. Cover Letter and Instrument 153

BIBLIOGRAPHY 161

IV

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. Name of Each College and Number of Divisions 82

II. Total Faculty Members, Sample Size, and Frequency/Percentage of Responses from Six Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central Thailand 83

III. Percentage of Demographic Classifications of Faculty Members at Six Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central Thailand . . . . 85

IV. Frequency of Response for Level of Satisfaction among Faculty Members at Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central Thailand, Defined by Ten Facets 95

V. Overall Level of Satisfaction among Faculty Members at Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central Thailand, Defined by Item 1 through Item 67 97

VI. Overall Level of Satisfaction among Faculty Members at Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central Thailand, Defined by Item 68 98

VII. Means for Ten Facets Defined by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience 100

VIII. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Achievement Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience . . . . 102

IX. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Growth Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience . . . 102

X. Comparison of Means for the Growth Facet Defined by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience 203

XI. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Interpersonal Relations Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years

Table

XII

of Teaching Experience

Page

104

Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Policy and Administration Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience 105

XIII. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Recognition Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience . . . 106

XIV. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Responsibility Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience 107

XV. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Salary Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience . . . . . . 108

XVI. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Supervision Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience . . . 108

XVII. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Work Itself Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience . . . 109

XVIII. Comparison of Means for the Work Itself Facet Defined by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience H O

XIX. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Working Conditions Facet among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience H I

XX. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Ten Facets among Faculty Members by Age H 2

XXI. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Ten Facets among Faculty Members by Degree Levels 113

XXII. Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Ten Facets among Faculty Members by Salary Levels 114

XXIII. Pairwise Comparison of Sample Means

VI

Table

XXIV.

XXV.

XXVI.

XXVII

XXVIII.

XXIX.

XXX.

XXXI.

Page

Contributed by Faculty Members at Three Different Salary Levels on the Achievement Facet of Job Satisfaction . . . . 115

Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Ten Facets among Faculty Members by Faculty Affiliations 117

Comparison of Job Satisfaction Based on the Ten Facets among Faculty Members by Work Positions 118

Means for the Overall Satisfaction (Item 68) Defined by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience 120

Comparison of Overall Satisfaction Based on a Single Item (Item 68) among Faculty Members by Sex and Years of Teaching Experience 121

Comparison of Overall Satisfaction Based on a Single Item (Item 68) among Faculty Members by All the Selected Variables 123

Comparison of Results of the Two Studies on the Level of Faculty Job Satisfaction with Each of the Ten Facets 125

Sample Characteristics at Six Non-Metropolitan Teachers Colleges in Central Thailand, Defined by Selected Demographic Classifications . . . . 150

Response Frequency for the Total Sample Based on Items

vi 1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The formal study of job satisfaction did not start

until the Hawthorne studies in the early 1930s (H y &

Miskel, 1982). Until the 1970s, job productivity and job

satisfaction provided the major focus for studies for nearly

forty years; however, the pendulum swung to job satisfaction

only- anc^ there it has rested for some ten or fifteen years.

Edwin A. Locke estimated that a minimum of 3,350 articles

were published on the subject by early 1972 (Locke, 1976).

Even a cursory review of the literature today reveals that

research on job satisfaction has continued to be a topic of

major interest.

Theories of Motivation and Job Satisfaction

Why is job satisfaction so attractive as a research

topic? Early proponents of the human relations approach

convinced both theorists and administrators alike that a

happy worker is a productive worker.

Motivation and job satisfaction are not the same thing;

however, far too often these terms are confused each other.

According to Hellriegel and Slocum (1979), satisfaction is

an end-state resulting from the attainment of some goal. It

2

is the worker's affective responses to or feelings about

aspects of the work situation. Motivation is primarily

concerned with an individual's desires and how those desires

can be fulfilled in the work situation. Suppose that, for

example, there are subgroups in a basketball game: the

players, the coach, and the owner. The coach must be able

to motivate the players to achieve the goal of the

01 ganizatiojj winning basketball "ames. The winning of

basketball games will give the players, coach, and owner

satisfaction.

Two categories have been established to describe the

theories of motivation (Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, and

Weick, 1970). The content theories describe the actual

factors motivating an individual, such as pay and

interesting work. The second category includes what is

called the process theories. These theories describe the

actual process through which an individual goes as he is

motivated to pursue a particular course of action.

Content Theories of Motivation

Three important content theories of motivation are

Maslow's need hierarchy, Herzberg's two-factor theory, and

the existence, relatedness, and growth (ERG) theory. All

three theories advance the basic argument that human needs

constitute the main ariving force behind employee behavior

in organizational settings. Content theories delineate

3

specific needs, motives, expectancies, and antecedents to

behavior. These theories have stimulated an extensive

number of research studies and numerous application

endeavors by managers.

Maslow's Need Hierarchy.--The crux of Maslow's theory

is that needs are arranged in a hierarchy (1954). The

lowest-level needs are the physiological and the highest

level are the self-actualization needs. The postulation of

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is that when the basic human

needs to sustain life itself--food, clothing, shelter--are

satisfied to the degree needed for the sufficient operation

of the body, other higher-order needs emerge. Once safety

needs are fairly well satisfied, social or affiliation needs

will emerge as dominant in the need structure. After

individuals begin to satisfy their need to belong to their

group, then they feel the need for esteem—both self-esteem

and recog-nition from others. Satisfaction of these esteem

needs produces feelings of self-confidence, prestige, power

and control. People begin to feel that they are useful and

have some effect on their environment. Once esteem needs

begin to be adequately satisfied, the self-actualization

needs, the desire to become what one is capable of becoming,

become more prepotent.

However, it is not necessary that one level of needs be

completely satisfied before the next level emerges as the

4

most important. In reality, most people in our society tend

to be partially satisfied at each level and partially

unsatisfied, with greater satisfaction tending to occur at

the physiological and safety levels than at the social,

esteem, and self-actualization levels (Hersey and Blanchard,

1977).

Herzberg s Two-Factor Theory.--A popular content theory

of motivation has been proposed by Hersberg, Mausner, and

Snyderman (1959). The theory, which is variously termed

factor, dual-factor, motivator-hygiene, or simply Herzberg1s

theory has been widely accepted by administrators. Simply

stated, Herzberg"s theory of motivation (or job

satisfaction) is a two-dimensional theory. Its basic

postulate is that one set of rewards contributes to job

dissatisfaction. One set of rewards concerns factors that

motivate. Examples falling under this label are

achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, and

advancement. These factors are at the heart of the job

itself, and they have the power to sustain high levels of

approximate employee work behavior. There are certain

hygiene factors which create dissatisfaction if taken away,

but these factors have no substantial influence upon

behavior when they are added. Examples of these are

interpersonal relations-subordinates, interpersonal

relations-superordinates, interpersonal relations-peers.

5

supervision-technical, policy and administration, working

conditions, personal life, pay and other factors peripheral

to the job.

Existence, Relatedness, and Growth (ERG) Theory.--

Another content theory of motivation is Alderfer's

existence, relatedness, and growth (ERG) theory (1972).

This theory is, in fact, simply the reformation of Maslow's

need hierarchy into three levels of needs.

Objects can satisfy needs. Food and drink can satisfy

hunger and thirst, which are existence needs. In

organizations, existence needs can be met by pay, fringe

benefits, and a pleasant environment. However, when objects

are not enough to meet everyone's needs for them, what

economists call a zero-sum game will occur. In this view

one person's gain is another's loss. Personal satisfaction

can be gauged beyond existing objects by comparison of what

one receives with what others receive in the same situation.

Relatedness needs can be met by reciprocation of

thoughts and feelings between an individual and significant

others such as family members, supervisors, co-workers,

subordinates, friends, and enemies. Alderfer states that

the exchange or expression of anger and hostility is a very

important part of meaningful interpersonal relationships,

just as is the expression of warmth and closeness (Alderfer,

1972, p. 11).

6

Growth needs can be satisfied when individuals engage

in problem solving that uses their capacities fully and

develops new capabilities. A person who possesses ful-

fillment of growth needs has a sense of greater wholeness or

fullness as a human being.

Three basic propositions describe the relationships

between desire for the target of certain need groups and

satisfaction of that desire. First, the less a need is

satisfied, the more it is desired. Second, the less that

relatedness needs are satisfied, the more the targets of

existence needs are desired. Third, the more that existence

needs are satisfied, the more the targets of relatedness

needs are desired. Hoy and Miskel (1982) explain that this

progression occurs because satisfaction of existence or

relateness desires frees the individual from the effort

required to satisfy either of them.

Process Theories of Motivation

Hellriegel and Slocum (1979) explain that the content

theories of motivation provide managers with an under-

standing of the particular work-related factors that arouse

employees. But these theories provide little insight into

why people choose a particular behavioral pattern to

accomplish work goals. This aspect of choice is the

objective of process theories. Process theories attempt to

explain and describe the process by which behavior is

7

energized, how it is directed, how it is sustained, and how

it is stopped. In this section, three process theories—

expectancy theory, equity theory, and goal theory--will be

examined.

Expectancy Theory. One of the more popular versions of

expectancy theories was developed by Vroom and modified by

others (Vroom, 1964; Galbraith & Cummings, 1967; Gran, 1969,

Porter & Lawler III, 1968). Expectancy theory rests on two

fundamental premises. First, individuals make decisions

about their own behavior in organizations using their

abilities to think, reason, and anticipate future events.

Second, forces in the individual and the environment combine

to determine behavior. Individual values and attitudes, for

instance, interact with environmental components, such as

role expectations and organizational climate, to influence

behavior. The expectancy model is a good predictor of job

satisfaction and a not so good but still statistically

significant one for performance. Overall, most research

findings have supported the theory that people work hard

when they think that working hard is likely to lead to

desirable rewards from the organization (Hoy & Miskel,

1982).

Equity Theory.—Adams (1963) explains that whenever two

individuals exchange anything, there is the possibility that

one or both of them will feel that the exchange was

8

inequitable. Such is frequently the case when a man

exchanges his services for pay. This situation occurs in

organizations when the person finds his inputs and outcomes

are not in balance in relation to those of others and

feelings of inequality result.

The existence of perceived inequality creates tension

to restore equity: the greater the inequity, the greater the

tension. Depending upon the source and intensity of the

inequity, a number of courses of action can be followed.

For example, individuals may attempt to increase or decrease

their inputs if they are low or high relative to those of

the comparison person. Or they may increase or decrease

their outcomes by increasing or decreasing their efforts.

If these courses of actions are not possible, individuals

may stay away from the work situation so that their

perceptions are not continuously reinforced. The extreme

course of action is to quit the job. Finally, the theory

raises the issue of methods for inequity resolution. The

inequitable situation can cause morale, turnover, and

absenteeism problems.

Goal Theory.--Locke and his associates (Locke, 1968;

Locke, Cartledge, & Knerr, 1970; Mento, Cartledge, & Locke,

1980) originally stated their goal theory in 1968. A goal,

according to this theory, is simply what an individual

consciously is trying to do. The basic supposition of the

9

theory is that intentions to achieve a goal constitute the

primary motivating forces behind work behavior. Two

assumptions of the theory are that specific goals are

superior to general goals and difficult goals lead to

greater effort than easy goals.

The process of goal-setting begins with the assumption

that the individual knows something about the nature and

properties of things that exist in the work environment.

From the question of which actions will enhance the

individual's well-being, the answer will be that values of

elements in the environment have to be judged first. The

individual judges which behaviors are good or bad, right or

wrong, or for or against personal interests.

Locke (1968) notes that most human action is purposive;

behavior is regulated and maintained by goals and in-

tentions. Hoy and Miskel (1982, pp. 162-163) conclude that

the most fundamental effect of goals on mental or physical

actions is to direct thoughts and overt behavior to one end

rather than another. Goals, in the process of directing

action, also regulate expenditure of both mental

concentration and physical effort. One action to a goal may

require more effort than another action to the same goal.

10

Implications for Practice: Theory X, Theory Y Contingency Theory and Criticism on"fetivation Th^rv,

Which Are Related to Job Satisfaction

Theory x and theory y are presented here because they

clearly offer fundamental alternatives for managing the

employee and work. Contingency theory provides another

practical application of motivation theory to

administration. Finally, criticism suggests some ideas

about why motivation theory does not work.

Theory X and Theory Y.—Douglas McGregor (1960), a

major theorist in the human resources school, has suggested

that managers have developed two distinct philosophies

concerning the roles they play in organizations. These two

philosophies, which he called theory x and theory y,

represent opposite points of view. One is pessimistic and

the other is optimistic. The basic characteristics of

theory x are as follows:

The average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if he can.

Because of this human characteristic of dislike of work, most people must be coerced, controlled, directed, threatened with punishment to get them to put forth adequate effort toward the achievement of organizational objectives.

The average human being prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid responsibility, has relatively little ambition, wants security above all (McGregor, 1960, pp. •3 J / •

These propositions suggest that a manager who sees his

role in terms of theory x would tend to be autocratic.

11

What McGregor proposed as an alternative was theory y, which

rests on an entirely different set of assumptions.

The expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as play or rest. . . , External control and the threat of punishment are not the only means for bringing about effort toward organizational objectives. . . . Man will exercise self-direction and self-control in the service of objectives to which he is committed. . . . Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with their achievement. . . . The average human being learns, under proper conditions, not only to accept but seek responsibility. , . . The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity, and creativity in the solution of organizational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population. * • Under the conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual potentialities of the average human^being are only partially utilized (McGregor 1963,

McGregor argues that individuals want to exercise

responsibility and that managers should allow them to do so.

In this fashion, the human resources in an organization are

optionally utilized (Gannon, 1979, p. 33).

Contingency Theory.--Morse and Lorsch (1970) have

similar viewpoints to those of Hoy and Miskel (1982). The

former say that theory x works well in some situations,

although there are also some situations where it does not

work effectively. At the same time, the approach based on

theory y, while it has produced good results in some

situations, does not always do so. Hoy and Miskel observe

that McGregor's theory oversimplifies reality in two ways.

First, employees are viewed as fitting into the pattern

12

envisioned by theory x or theory y. A more realistic

position is that employee work habits lie along a continuum

ranging from x to y. The individuals may exhibit some of

the characteristics postulated by theory x and some by

theory y. Second, theory y places a great deal of

responsibility for achievement on both workers and

administrators.

Based on the shortcomings of theory x and theory y,

Morse and Lorsch have been involved in a study to

investigate the affect of different organizations upon the

motivation of organization members. Their study provides

surprising results and suggests a new set of basic as-

sumptions which move beyond theory y into what is called

"Contingency Theory: the fit between task, organization, and

people." These theoretical assumptions emphasize that the

appropriate pattern of organization is contingent on the

nature of the work to be done and on the particular needs of

the people involved.

The contingency theory requires a new set of

assumptions.

1. Human beings bring varying patterns of needs and

motives into the work organization, but one central

need is to achieve a sense of competence.

2. The sense of competence motive, while it exists in

all human beings, may be fulfilled in different ways

13

by different people depending on how this need

interacts with the strengths of the individuals'

other needs--such as those for power, independence,

structure, achievement, and affiliation.

3. Competence motivation is most likely to be fulfilled

when there is fit between task and organization.

4. Sense of competence continues to motivate even when a

competence goal is achieved; once one goal is

reached, a new, higher one is set.

The assumptions of Morse and Lorsch's theory have

implications for managers. There are indications that

people will gradually gravitate into organizations that fit

their particular personalities. Managers can help this

process by becoming more aware of what psychological needs

seem to best fit the tasks available in the organizational

setting and by trying to shape personnel selection criteria

to take account of these needs.

Given the new needs of younger employees for more

autonomy, it may well be that the more participative

approach is the most appropriate. But there will still be

many situations in which the more controlled and formalized

organization is desirable. Such an organization need not be

coercive or punitive. If it makes sense to the individuals

involved, given their needs and their jobs, they will find

it rewarding and motivating„

14

Criticism on Motivation Theory. — A criticism on using

motivational theories in organizations is made by Levinson

11973). He does not agree that the "carrot and stick"

motivates people in work situations, The carrot-and-stick

approach, as identified by Hoy and Miskel (1982) as theory

x, is a "jackass fallacy" in Levinson's view. Uncon-

sciously, the boss is the manipulator and controller, and

the subordinate is the jackass. People inevitably respond

to the carrot-and-stick by trying to get more of the carrot

while protecting themselves against the stick. This

predictable phenomenon has led to the formation of unions,

the frequent sabotage of management's motivation efforts,

and the characteristic employee suspicion of management's

motivational techniques.

Leadership involves an understanding of motivation. If

the leaders in organizations are not responsive to what is

called a crisis in motivation," or according to Levinson,

the great jackass fallacy," the workers will feel resentful

and defeated. They are no longer motivated by competitive

spirit because the carrots and the sticks mean less. They

simply do as they are told. They usually stay until re-

tirement unless they are among the "deadwood" that is

cleaned out when a new management takes over.

Morse and Lorsch and Levinson agree on the view that

punishment is not the way for organizations to attempt to be

15

effective. According to Levinson, the result of a reward-

punishment attitude toward motivation is a continuing battle

between those who seek to wield power and those who are

subject to it. The consequences of this battle are

increased inefficiency, lowered productivity, heightened

absenteeism, theft, and sometimes outright sabotage.

Fitzgerald (1971) mentions a similar point of view that

the growing pressures for economy and productivity also give

rise to other labor problems that increase costs, ab-

senteeism and turnover, idleness and featherbedding, product

defects and errors. All this is reflected in one of the

more familiar questions one hears at management

seminars,"How can I motivate my employees?" This is not a

pleasant question to ponder, especially for those managers

confronted with mounting problems of high employee turnover,

low productivity, and poor morale. Fitzgerald suggests that

the roots of such problems go deeper than is generally

recognized, and the major tenets of motivation theory offer

solutions that are not quite relevant to what is going on in

the workplace. Instead of thinking of employees as objects,

to be manipulated by this or that theoretical approach,

management must strive to effect fundamental, value-oriented

changes in the structure of rationalized work systems.

Fitzgerald points out that what is needed is not merely

the "willingness to confront change," but a commitment to go

16

beyond changes in structure and procedures. He adds that

the mixes of "training" to improve skills and climate, of

job enlargement, and of organizational development and

participation are recommended.

Summary

This introductory section discussed the dynamics of

motivation. Although satisfaction and motivation are

different phenomena, they are closely related to each other.

Managers who know how to motivate workers can cause a higher

level of job satisfaction among those workers. The modern

approach to motivation can be divided into content and

process theories. The Herzberg, Maslow, and Alderfer models

attempt to identify specific content factors that motivate

employees. Among these models, the Herzberg model is a

useful explanation of job satisfaction.

The Vroom, Adams, and Locke models are concerned with

answering the question of how individual behavior is

energized, directed, maintained, and stopped. Expectancy

theory of motivation is concerned with how the expectations

of a person influence behavior. Inequity theory focuses on

comparisons, tension, and tension reduction. Goal theory of

motivation is concerned with intentions of individual to

achieve a goal. Such intentions constitute the primary

motivating forces behind work behavior.

17

McGregor s theory x and theory y offer fundamental

alternatives for managing employees and work. The Morse and

Lorsch model describes their contingency theory in com-

parison and contrast with McGregor's theory x and theory y.

Finally, Fitzgerald argues that the major tenets of

motivation theory offer some solutions that are not quite

relevant to what is going on in the workplace. He, then,

suggests value-oriented changes in the structure of

rationalized work systems.

Job satisfaction is an end—state resulting from the

attainment of some goal. It is the worker's affective

responses to or feelings about aspects of the work

situation. Whatever theories or methods the managers in

organization use to motivate their employees do undoubtedly

affect employees' job satisfaction. Among competing

theories of motivation, Herzberg's two-factor theory is

cited by many researchers, for instance, Sergiovanni (1966),

McGreal (1968/1969), Leon (1973/1974), Wood (1976), and

Vatthaisong (1982/1983), as the most suitable theory for

studying faculty job satisfaction. The reason is that

Herzberg's theory incorporates numerous facets of job

satisfaction.

No matter what the theorists of motivation explain and

what results may yield in research done in the United

States, more studies in job satisfaction, especially in

18

higher education, need to be conducted widely. The dearth of

research in this field in Thailand when compared with the

large amount in the United States is significant. Fur-

thermore, one question is raised: Are the results of a

similar study using the same instrument with a sample from a

different region of Thailand similar to or different from

the results of Vatthaisong's study?

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study was to investigate and

analyze job satisfaction of faculty members at non-

metropolitan teachers colleges in central Thailand. The

investigation was based on ten facets of job satisfaction,

namely achievement, recognition, growth, the work itself,

responsibilities, salary, administrative policies,

supervision, interpersonal relations, and working condition.

The emphases of the study were not only to discover the

results but also to compare some of the results of this

study to Vatthaisong's (1982/1983) findings. The emphases

were as follows:

1. To determine the level of job satisfaction among

faculty members with respect to each of the ten

facets cited above;

2. To compare job satisfaction among faculty members on

each of the ten facets and determine whether any

significant differences exist on the basis of their

19

demographic classifications (sex and years of

teaching experience at the college level, salary

levels, academic degrees, age, position as an

instructor or administrator, and faculty

affiliations);

3. To compare overall job satisfaction among faculty

members according to their demographic classi-

fications ;

4• To compare the results of this research with the

findings of Vatthaisong, especially those dealing

with sex and years of teaching experience.

The specific research cjuestions were the following.

1. To what extent do the faculty members express job

satisfaction as measured by the ten facets of a

modified form of the Wood Job Satisfaction

Instrument?

2. Do significant correlations exist between faculty

members' demographic classifications and their job

satisfaction on the ten facets of a modified form of

the Wood Job Satisfaction Instrument?

3. Do significant differences exist between faculty

members' demographic classifications and their

overall job satisfaction?

4. Are central Thailand faculty members' job

satisfaction levels congruent with Vatthaisong's

findings of faculty members in northeast Thailand?

20

Importance of the Study-

Under a centralized educational system in Thailand

(Ministry of Education, 1973), Thai government officials are

governed in bureaucratic organizational structures.

According to Levinson (1973), such structures are based on a

military model that assumes complete control of the

organization by those at the top. In pure form, it is a

rAgid hierarchy, complete with detailed job descriptions and

fixed, measurable objectives. The bureaucratic structure

requires everyone at every level to be dependent on those at

higher levels. One s fate is decided by a distant "they"

who are beyond his influence and control. Even presidents

at teachers colleges in Thailand still lack autonomy in such

local issues as promotion, tenure, and the determination of

internal organizational structure (Suntrayuth, 1984/1985).

Levinson comments further that while the bureaucratic

structure, with its heavy emphasis on internal competition

for power and position, is often touted as a device for

achievement, it is actually a system which defeats

individuals. Bureaucratic structure, with its implicit

power-struggle orientation, increases infighting, empire-

building, rivalry, and a sense of futility (Levinson, 1973).

A careful comparison of variables from a sample of

faculty members in six non-metropolitan teachers colleges in

central Thailand may lead to the discovery of significant

21

differences in job satisfaction. A comparison of faculty-

members' job satisfaction might yield some clues as to the

possible factors related to job satisfaction, which might,

in turn, provoke research that would help us to devise ways

of increasing job satisfaction among faculty members at

teachers colleges in Thailand, who are under the

bureaucratic organizational structure. Finally, the

findings of this study should provide information for

teachers college administrators, which will assist them in

developing administrative policies conducive to the

£ulfillment of the needs of faculty members.

Rationale for Hypotheses

According to Vatthaisong's finding , a major source of

dissatisfaction among faculty members was salary

(1982/1983). The present research attempted to explore

further the relationship of salary to job satisfaction.

Grahn et al. (1981) have reported the results of their

research conducted among faculty at the General College of

the University of Minnesota. The study sought to determine

the degree of satisfaction of faculty who have different

salary levels, academic degree levels, length of service and

sex. Grahn et al. found that faculty with salaries of

$30,000 or over were most satisfied with advancement,

security, and compensation. Ph.D. faculty were more

satisfied with security and creativity. Faculty with

22

longest service were most satisfied with security, social

status, and working conditions. Female faculty were more

satisfied with achievement, activity, authority, and social

service, and less satisfied with advancement and security.

Male faculty were more satisfied than women with advancement

and security.

Vaughn and Dunn observed that "age seems to have a

predictable influence upon job satisfaction. Generally, the

young are more dissatisfied than the old" (Vaughn & Dunn,

1974). • They did not test this observation, but this

researcher attempted to test it.

Within the job satisfaction literature, there is almost

a universal agreement on the positive relationship between

job level and job satisfaction (Lynch & Verdin, 1983). The

present researcher also examined this relationship. This

study also included an examination of statistical dif-

ferences in job satisfaction among faculty members, those

who taught only, and those who were both administrators and

instructors.

The length of service at a particular college is

another factor in job satisfaction which was examined. As

the length of time in the profession increases, the reported

levels of satisfaction increase according to Lynch and

Verdin (p. 445). The relationship of job satisfaction and

academic degrees had been tested by Grahn et al. (1981).

This researcher made an attempt to examine it also.

23

Hypotheses

In this investigation of job satisfaction among faculty

members at non-metropolitan teachers colleges in central

Thailand, the following hypotheses were formulated.

1. No significant differences exist between or among the

following faculty groups with respect to the ten

facets of job satisfaction: (1) male and female

faculty; (2) faculty with under ten years of teaching

experience and those with over ten years of teaching

experience; (3) faculty with bachelor's degrees and

faculty with master's degrees or higher; (4) faculty

who are in different age categories; (5) faculty who

3^© instructors and administrators; (6) faculty who

belong to different categories of faculty affi-

liations; and (7) faculty who are in different

categories for their salary levels.

2. No significant difference exists in faculty members'

job satisfaction between or among the following

groups--(1) male and female faculty, (2) faculty with

under ten years of teaching experience, and those

with over ten years of teaching experience, (3)

different groups of faculty classified by work

positions, age, salary levels, academic degrees, and

faculty affiliations.

24

Definitions of Terms

The operational definitions of the following terms are

included for this study.

Faculty Members.--The term Faculty members is used to

refer to two discrete groups: first, faculty members who are

administrators and instructors at the same time and second,

faculty members who are instructors only.

Administrators.--The term administrators includes

presidents, vice-presidents, deans, and department

chairpersons.

Faculty Affiliations.--The term faculty affiliations

refers to the affiliations of faculty members to their

specific departments; namely, faculty of education, faculty

of sciences and faculty of humanities and social sciences.

Department of Teacher Education.—The department to

which all the teachers colleges have to report under the

centralized administration system.

Background of the Study

The proposed study was motivated by previous research

on job satisfaction in different kinds of organizations in

the United States and Canada. Much of the interest in job

satisfaction stems from the assumption that a high level of

satisfaction will lead to a high level of job performance.

However, some evidence suggests that a high level of job

performance in itself can lead to job satisfaction (Schwab &

Cummings, 1970).

25

Lawler (1971) has suggested that initial interest in

job satisfaction was stimulated by the classic works of

Roethlisberger and Dickson's Management and the Worker

(1939) and Hoppock s monograph "Job Satisfaction" (1935).

These works demonstrated the possibility of doing

quantitative research on job satisfaction. Young (1982)

says that the construct of satisfaction has been of interest

to researchers for at least five decades. A body of

literature containing over 3,000 studies has been created as

a result of the interest in this concept (Locke, 1969).

In an attempt to summarize the literature on job

satisfaction, Locke has categorized the studies into three

schools of thought. One school, the physical-economic

school, grew out of Frederick Winslow Taylor's thesis on

scientific management (Locke, 1976). Taylor considered the

influence of the physical arrangements of work, fatigue, and

pay on job satisfaction. Another, the human-relations

school, is a basic outgrowth of Mayo's historical work that

is more commonly known as the "Hawthorne Studies" (1970).

This school was later developed by the universities of

Michigan and Ohio State, emphasizing the relationships of

good supervision, informal work groups, and friendly

employer-employee relationships on satisfaction. The third,

the work-itself school, has its underpinnings in the works

of Maslow (1954) and Herzberg (1966). The emphasis of this

26

approach is on the actual work tasks performed by an

employee and job satisfaction is viewed as a function of the

work performed.

The overall level of job satisfaction in certain

segments of the labor force has been studied for several

decades (Young, 1982). More recently, job satisfaction has

become of interest to those examining education (Schmidt,

1976). Young said that the researchers addressing job

satisfaction in education settings have typically restricted

their subject pools to administrative and instructional

personnel (1982, p. 111).

Young also described further the two groups of subjects

as follows:

The administrative personnel for which job satisfaction studies have been conducted in higher education are presidents, assistants to presidents, deans, department chairpersons, registrars, and placement directors. Job satisfaction studies have also been conducted with various administrative personnel in K-12 public education. The specific personnel examined in the setting were superintendents, pupil personnel directors, principal, and assistant principals. Various instructional groups have also been assessed: elementary teachers, middle school teachers, community college faculty, home economics faculty, college English teachers, and college professors (Young, 1982, p. 111).

Literature about job satisfaction studies conducted in

higher education in Thailand is extremely sparse when

compared to research in the United States. A study of job

satisfaction and dissatisfaction among faculty members in

27

higher education by Vatthaisong is one of a very few

reported research efforts available at the present

(Vatthaisong, 1982/1983). He employed a questionnaire

comprising 67 items for measuring job satisfaction and one

single item dealing with overall satisfaction. His subjects

comprised the faculty members of six teacher training

institutions in northeast Thailand. His findings show that

faculty members were not satisfied with their salaries.

Faculty with over ten years teaching experience were more

satisfied with their achievements, working conditions and

had a higher overall degree of satisfaction than faculty

with under ten years experience. No difference was found in

satisfaction between the sexes.

The differences between Vatthaisong's and this present

study are the scope and nature of study. Vatthaisong's

subjects were faculty members who were identified as

instructors. They were selected from six teachers colleges

or what he called teacher training institutions in northeast

Thailand. The subjects for the present study were

characterized as faculty members who were only instructors

and those who were instructors and administrators at the

same time. They were selected from the six non-metropolitan

teachers colleges in central Thailand. Vatthaisong's

research compared the job satisfaction of faculty members on

the basis of teaching experience and sex. The present study

28

was designed to compare its findings with those in his

study. In addition, the present research included more

variables related to age, levels of education, salary

levels, work positions, and faculty affiliations.

Limitations of the Study

The study was limited to faculty members and

administrators at six non-metropolitan teachers colleges in

central Thailand, namely, Nakhon Pathom Teachers College,

Karnchana Buri Teachers College, Ayuthaya Teachers College,

Nakhon Sawan Teachers College, Chachoengsao Teachers

College, and Chantha Buri Teachers College. Therefore, the

results of the study could not be generalized to the other

teachers colleges in other regions of Thailand.

Basic Assumptions

The following basic assumptions are made for this

study.

1. It is assumed that the random sample chosen was

representative of all the faculty members in the six

teachers colleges included in the study.

2• It is assumed that the faculty members expressed

their attitudes honestly through the questionnaire

employed in this study.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, J.S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67 (5), 437-445.

Alderfer, C.P. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organizational settings. New York: Free Press.

Campbell, J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E., & Weick, K.E. (1970). Managerial Behavior, Performance, and effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fitzgerald, T.H. (1971). Why motivation theory doesn't work. Harvard Business Review, 49, 37-44.

Galbraith, J., & Cummings, L.L. (1967). An empirical investigation of the motivational determinants of task performance: Interactive effects between instrumentality-valence and motivation-ability. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2, 237-257. ~~

Gannon, M.J. (1979). Organizational behavior: A managerial and organizational perspective. Boston: Brown and Company.

Gran, G. (1969). Instrumentality theory of work motivation: Some experimental results and suggested modifications. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 53, 1-25.

Grahn, J. et al. (1981). General college job satisfaction survey, University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, General College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 208 716)

Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J.W. (1979). Organizational behavior (2nd ed.). Minnesota: West Publishing Co.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K.H. (1977). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Herzburg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World. ~~~

29

30

Herzburg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. New York: Harper.

Hoy, W.K., & Miskel, C.G. (1982). Educational administration, theory, research, and practice. New York: Random House.

Lawler, E.E. (1971). Pay and organizational effectiveness: A psychological view. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Leon, J.S. (1974). An investigation of the applicability of the two-factor theory of job satisfaction among college and university professors (Doctoral dissertation. University of Arkansas, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 5397A.

Levinson, H. (1973). Asinine attitudes toward motivation. Harvard Business Review, 51, 70-76.

Locke, E.A. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189.

Locke, E.A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 309-336.

Locke, E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

Locke, E.A., Cartledge, N., & Knerr, C.S. (1970). Studies of the relationship between satisfaction, goal-setting, and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 135-13~9~!

Lynch, B.P., & Verdin, J.A. (1983). Job satisfaction in libraries: Relationship of the work itself, age, sex, occupational group, tenure, supervisory level, career commitment, and library department. Library Quarterly .53, 434-447. i

Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.

Mayo, G.E. (1970). The first inquiry. In H.F. Merrill (Ed.), Classics in management (pp. 379-388). New York: American Management Association, Inc.

31

McGreal, T.L. (1969). An investigation of organizational variables affecting teacher satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts International 29, 2067A. — '

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Mento, A.J., Cartledge, N.D., & Locke, E.A. (1980). Maryland vs. Michigan vs. Minnesota: Another look at the relationship of expectancy and goal difficulty to task. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 419-440. — —

Ministry of Education (1973). The Department of Teacher Training: Its work and organization. Banqkok, Thailand.

Morse, J.J., & Lorsch, L.W. (1970). Beyond theory y. Harvard Business Review, 48, 61-68.

Porter, L.W., & Lawler III, E.E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press.

Roethlisberger, F.J., & Dickson, W.J. (1939). Management and the worker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Schmidt, G.L. (1976). Job satisfaction among secondary school administrators. Educational Administration Quarterly, 2, 68-86. ~

Schwab, D.P., & Cummings, L.L. (1970). Theories of performance and satisfaction: A review. Industrial Relations, 9, 408-430.

Sergiovanni, T.J. (1966). Satisfaction and dissatisfaction of teachers (Doctoral dissertation. The University of Rochester, 1966). Dissertation Abstracts International, 27, 1235X1

Suntrayuth, S. (1985). A comparison of present and preferred institutional goals among board members, administrators, and faculty of teacher colleges in Bangkok, Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, North Texas State University, 1984). Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 3291A. ~ —

Vatthaisong, A. (1983). A study of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among faculty members in teacher

32

training institutions in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 468A. "

Vaughn, W.J., & Dunn, J.D. (1974). A study of job satisfaction in six university libraries. College & Research Libraries, 35, 163-177.

Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Wood, O.R. (1976). A research project: Measuring job satisfaction of the community college staff. Community College Review, 3 (3), 57-67.

Young, I.P. (1982). A multivariable study of administrator leadership behavior and custodian satisfaction. Planning & Changing, 13, 111-123.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The review of related literature in this study is

divided into six major parts. It begins with a definition

of job satisfaction. In the second part, it is concerned

with measures of job satisfaction. In the third part, it

presents research related to theories of motivation and job

satisfaction. The fourth part consists of demographic

variables and job satisfaction. The fifth part deals with

the variable of sex and job satisfaction. The last part

deals with all other variables related to job satisfaction.

Definition of Job Satisfaction

Before further details of job satisfaction are

presented, an attempt to define job satisfaction is in

order. The classical definition was given by Robert Hoppock

(1935) . He defined job satisfaction as any combination of

psychological, physiological, and environmental cir-

cumstances that cause a person to say, "I am satisfied with

my job. Job satisfaction has been conceived as the

affective orientations of individuals toward work; it

results when on-the-job experiences relate to the

individual's values and needs (Smith, 1974).

33

34

Job satisfaction is the feeling(s) one has about his or

her job. It is possible that feelings of satisfaction or

dissatisfaction occur only when a question is asked of the

individual, or when circumstances pose potential alter-

natives (favorable or unfavorable) to him or her which

require him or her to make an evaluation. The feelings of

an individual about various aspects of his or her job are

not absolute, but relative to the alternatives or lack of

alternatives available to him or her. Feelings are also

influenced by his or her previous experiences (Dunn &

Stephens, 1972). Dawis, England, and Lofquist (1964)

conclude that job satisfaction is an internal indicator of

correspondence, i.e., it represents the individual worker's

appraisal of the extent to which the work environment

fulfills his or her requirements. Locke defines job

satisfaction as a function of the perceived relationship

between what on wants from one's job and what one perceives

it as offering (Locke, 1969).

Measures of Job Satisfaction

The typical method of measuring job satisfaction is to

employ questionnaires. According to Dunn and Stephens

(1972), six instruments for measuring job satisfaction were

developed from the early 1930s to the 1960s. The first

instrument developed to measure job satisfaction was the

Hoppock scale. This scale was used in a survey of job

35

satisfaction in New Hope, Pennsylvania, in 1933. it is

interesting to note that Hoppock's work was done near the

beginning of the human relations movement, a movement that

placed great emphasis upon morale and job satisfaction.

(Dunn & Stephens, 1972).

The Brayfield-Rothe index of job satisfaction was the

second instrument that was developed. Between the time of

Hoppock s early attempts at measuring satisfaction and 1946

very little seems to have been done in regard to the problem

of measuring job satisfaction. In 1946, Arthur H.

Brayfield reported upon the construction of an index of job

satisfaction in his Ph.D. dissertation at the University of

Minnesota library, and in 1951 Brayfield and Rothe reported

upon their construction of this instrument in the Journal of

Applied Psychology (Dunn & Stephens, 1972).

The third measure developed was the General Motors

Faces Scale. The Faces Scale may be used for obtaining a

summary rating of job satisfaction. In the Cornell studies

it was found that the faces method adequately met criteria

of convergent and discriminant validity (Dunn & Stephens,

1972). The reliability score for this instrument is not

available from General Motors, who developed the instrument,

because they no longer find it an acceptable instrument for

their use.

36

The fourth measure to be developed was the SRA Employee

Inventory. This inventory has been one of the most widely

used of the currently available instruments for measuring

job satisfaction. Science Research Associates, Inc., has

developed extensive norms for the SRA Employee Inventory.

SRA is prepared to administer, score by computer, and

interpret the results of the SRA inventory (Dunn & Stephens,

1972).

The fifth measure which was mentioned by Dunn and

Stephens (1972) was the Job Descriptive Index (JDI). This

instrument was copyrighted by Patricia Cain Smith, who in

1970 was professor of psychology at Bowling Green State

University. The copyright for the JDI is now held by

Bowling Green State University. The JDI measures

satisfaction with five areas of jobs: work itself, pay,

promotion opportunities, supervision, and people on the job.

The sixth measure developed by Weiss, Dawis, England,

and Lofquist (1967) is the Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire. Each of twenty facets in the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire is measured by five items.

Employees indicate their feelings about each item on a five-

point Lakert scale ranging from "very dissatisfied" to "very

satisfied. ' Studies that have compared responses to common

facets of the JDI and MSQ have found them to be fairly

highly related.

37

The last measure, developed by Wood (1973/1974), is the

Faculty Job Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction Scale. The

instrument is based on ten facets selected from the Herzberg

Motivation-Hygiene theory as follows: achievement, growth,

interpersonal relations, policy and administration, re-

cognition, responsibility, salary, supervision, the work

itself, and working conditions. Its face, content, and

construct validity on the basis of procedures used in the

development of the instrument, the results of factor

analysis, reliability coefficients for internal consistency

and test-retest, and recommendations from a panel of experts

led to the conclusion that the validity, reliability, and

level of refinement of the instrument were adequate for the

collection of research datct.

Research Related to Theories of Motivation and Job Satisfaction

Research concerned with the application of theories of

motivation and job satisfaction is reviewed in this section.

Bess (1981) has examined recent theories of personal work

satisfaction available to the academic person at the college

or university and compared them with those of professionals

in other occupations. The following theories of job satis-

faction were examined: job facets theory, expectancy theory,

equity theory, need and need deficiency theory, and two-

factor theory.

38

The use of facet theory in studies of college faculty

employs questionnaires with long lists of job charac-

teristics. Expectancy theory is particularly useful in

separating the contingencies that affect effort—performance

and performance reward. While equity theory can be of

considerable value in understanding some of the sources of

faculty dissatisfaction with teaching, it does not reveal,

for example, the qualitative natures of satisfactions

received at varying levels of input. Whereas expectancy

theory predicts that workers will be able cognitively to

appraise their situations and adjustments, need theory

assumes that most workers will be driven by basic human

forces that may not be fully understood through

introspective analysis. Therefore, under this perspective,

primary responsibility for the improvement of satisfaction

would lie in formal authorities external to the individual.

When the literature on need, two-factor, or need deficiency

theory in the field of higher education was examined by

Bess, surprisingly little research was found.

Herzberg's theory of motivation is attractive to some

researchers in regard to job satisfaction. Openshaw (1980)

conducted a research effort concerning job satisfaction

determinants among faculty and administrators to test

Herzsberg's motivation-hygiene theory of job satisfaction in

a higher education setting and to determine whether there

39

was a significant difference in overall job satisfaction

according to selected demographic and situational variables.

Openshaw hypothesized that (1) motivation factors are

primarily related to feelings of job satisfaction rather

than to feelings of job dissatisfaction, (2) hygiene factors

are primarily related to feelings of job satisfaction, (3)

motivation factors are significantly greater indicators of

job satisfaction than are hygiene factors, and (4) there is

a significant difference in overall job satisfaction for all

of the demographic and situational variables included in the

study.

The sample included all academic administrators (n=200)

from the College of Allied Health Sciences, Arts and

Sciences, Business Administration, and Education at Georgia

State University, Atlanta, Georgia. The Job Descriptive

Index was used to measure overall job satisfaction and

satisfaction with specific aspects of the job. Results of

the study showed that respondents exhibited a high degree of

job satisfaction. Contrary to the Herzsberg's theory, both

motivation and hygiene factors were primarily related to

feelings of job satisfaction rather than to feelings of job

dissatisfaction, and hygiene factors were significantly

greater indicators of job satisfaction than were motivation

factors. Academic administrators had significantly higher

overall job satisfaction scores than did full-time teaching

40

faculty. The last finding is congruent with Benoit's

(1976/1977). It can be concluded that power is satisfying

among administrators.

On the basis of these findings, Openshaw concluded that

both motivation and hygiene factors contribute to

®&tisfaction and dissatisfaction in a higher education

setting. The duality of man's nature--i.e., the need to

avoid pain and displeasure and the need to grow psy-

chologically--must be accommodated in the work place.

Educational administrators must be cognizant of their

ability to increase performance and satisfaction on the job

by satisfying the intrinsic job needs of workers at all

levels and through restructuring the nature of work by

providing greater opportunities for self-actualization.

The next research finding that is somewhat surprising

is a similar study which was done by Ageel (1982/1983).

Even though Ageel's study was in his native country--Saudi

Arabia--and Openshaw's study was conducted in America, the

findings are quite similar.

The objective of Ageel's study was to examine the

overall job satisfaction of selected staff members at Umm

Al-Oura University in Makkah, Saudi Arabia, in order to

determine the factors which give satisfaction and dis-

satisfaction, and to examine the relationship of selected

demographic variables with job satisfaction. Questionnaires

41

were distributed among Saudi and expatriate faculty in the

College of Education and Law, as well as open ended

questions about what attracted respondents to the job in the

first place, under what conditions they would either stay or

leave, and what aspects of their employment provided

satisfaction and dissatisfaction. In contrast to the

respondents of Herzberg, it was found in Ageel's study that

content factors were related primarily to job dis-

satisfaction, while context factors were related primarily

to job satisfaction. It was suggested that the sudden

expansion of higher education in a developing country might

lead to greater attention with context factors (i.e.,

material rewards and trappings of the jobs) to the detriment

of dealing with content factors, i.e., the intrinsic rewards

associated with a job well done.

Gall and Vogel (1981) reported a different aspect of

motivation which causes job satisfaction. Their research

report shows the attitudes of faculty members of the College

of Arts and Sciences at Northeastern Illinois University.

The survey method was adopted by the researchers. The 85

respondents excluded faculty in administrative positions. A

significant difference was found in faculty plans for

retirement: 47 percent wished to live in the city; 24

percent in the suburbs, and 29 percent in the country.

Fifty-five percent of the respondents indicated that they

42

would continue working full-time in their present position

if offered the opportunity as an alternative to retiring.

With respect to this decision, personal satisfaction was

cited as being the primary motivation for delaying

retirement. For part-time faculty, 62 percent indicated

that they would elect to continue working part-time in their

present position if offered the opportunity as an

alternative to retiring. Again, personal satisfaction was a

major concern for making this decision.

Demographic Variables and Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction of faculty members which is related to

demographic and job variables such as sex, age, marital

status, academic degree, teaching experience, academic or

administrative rank will be investigated in this section.

The terms job satisfaction may deal with satisfaction in all

dimensions and/or each facet depending on the purpose of an

individual study.

Grahn et al. (1981) conducted a study of job

satisfaction in 1980. The study concerned employment

attitudes among faculty at the General College of the

University of Minnesota, an institution for nontraditional

post secondary education. The long form of the Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire was used, with a new demographic

questionnaire substituted. The survey sample consisted of

96 teaching, administrative, and student service faculty

43

members employed at least half-time. Results show three

work-related factors that strongly satisfy General College

faculty: moral values, social service, and activity. it is

suggested that these factors might be used in the future to

improve overall faculty satisfaction and in faculty

recruitment. The identified work-related areas of

dissatisfaction cluster around organization and management

functions, and include advancement, compensation, and

company organization and policies. Full professors were

relatively satisfied with advancement; men were more

satisfied than women with advancement and security; Ph.D.

faculty were more satisfied with security and creativity;

those with longest service were most satisfied with

security, social status, and working conditions; faculty

with salaries of $30,000 or over were most satisfied with

advancement, security, and compensation; and full-time

faculty, with moral values, security, and variety.

Instructors showed most satisfaction with authority, co-

workers, creativity, recognition, responsibility, social

status, supervision-human relations, and supervision-

technical relations. Female faculty were more satisfied

with achievement, activity, authority, and social service,

and less satisfied with advancement and security.

Willie an<^ Stecklein (1982) reported a similar study

comparing the results they found in 1956 to those in 1968.

44

Ths same questionnaire was used both times with similar

samples. Information about personal background; profes-

sional activities; job-related attitudes, satisfactions and

dissatisfactions; and career appraisal was gathered from a

25 percent random sample, stratified by rank, of full-time

faculty in Minnesota's accredited, nontheological colleges

and universities. The data suggest that the professoriate

has remained relatively unchanged during the two and one-

half decades covered by the three surveys. Its members are

likely to be male, married, and middle-aged. The results of

effort to increase the number of women have not substantial-

ly changed the ratio of men to women, although minor changes

have occurred. The educational level of those teaching in

Minnesota colleges had risen sharply during the years of the

study despite conditions that might have prevented such a

rise. Between 1956 and 1980, there was an 18 percentage

point increase in doctorate holders among the faculties in

the four-year institutions. Although eight out of 10

respondents in each of the surveys described themselves as

satisfied or very satisfied, larger percentages than

previously are now describing their attitude as satisfied

rather than very satisfied.

In 1980 and 1982 surveys to gauge the perceptions of

full-time, academic transfer faculty with respect to actual

and preferred program emphases, and to determine their level

45

of job satisfaction were conducted by Ramsey at Pensacola

Junior College, Florida (1982). Responses from 56 percent

of the instructors surveyed in 1980 (N=81) and 55 percent in

1982 (N=74) revealed that over 68 percent of the respondents

were male, almost all were over 30, and over 98 percent held

a master's or doctoral degree. In 1980, the greatest

differences between actual and preferred emphases were in

the areas of programs for the academically talented,

entrance requirements, and opportunities for faculty

research whereas in 1982 differences were apparent with

respect to study skills and habits and the gap between

current and preferred emphasis on faculty research had

increased. In both surveys, faculty expressed the highest

level of satisfaction with the kind of work they did, their

degree of job security, and amount of responsibility, and

the lowest degree of satisfaction with their salary,

institutional policies and practices, and opportunities for

advancement. In 1982, the strengths of PJC were seen as its

open admissions policy and program variety while ad-

ministrative communication was seen as an area needing

attention.

Job satisfaction of another full—and part—time faculty

has been investigated. Sorcinelli (1978) has examined

dental educators attitudes toward academic life through

structured, in-depth interviews with 122 full-and part-time

46

faculty at Indiana University School of Dentistry. Results

showed that the major reasons for choosing an academic

career were influence of a faculty member or dean, interest

in the subject matter, economics, and a means to keep

current in the field. The satisfactions of an academic

career included relationships with students, the act of

teaching, and interactions with colleagues. The major

dissatisfactions included effects of financial cutbacks;

lack of recognition and reward (non-salary); lack of time

for research, teaching and service responsibilities; and low

salary. Among the satisfactions with the Indiana University

School of Dentistry were academic challenge and freedom,

relationships with colleagues, the school's national

reputation, and relationships with students. Dissatis-

factions with the school involved the decline in the quality

of education offered, effects of financial cutbacks, low

salary, and administrative and departmental organizational

problems. More than three-fourths of the respondents had no

systematic method for assessing their teaching

effectiveness. Research was reported as the major criterion

for awarding tenure and promotion although two-thirds of the

respondents indicated their major interest and involvement

was in teaching activities.

A review of the literature of more than 200 studies on

tenure has been examined by Habecker (1981). After

47

addressing the tenure process, typology, history, the

involvement of the American Association of University

Professors, and current legal perspectives, various

alternatives to tenure were considered. It was concluded

that there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that

alternatives to tenure have improved faculty morale,

productivity, institutional personnel flexibility, teaching,

job security motivation or have led to decreased litigation

or overall improved institutional effectiveness, however

defined. Additional findings from the literature include

where differences between tenured and nontenured teachers

have been found, tenured teachers have usually been rated as

more effective than nontenured teachers; it appears that

tenured teachers express higher levels of overall job

satisfaction than do nontenured teachers.

Additional research concerning job satisfaction of

faculty in higher education has been conducted by Berman

(1980). Research that attempts to understand the job

satisfaction of faculty in higher education has generally

focused on full-time teaching faculty. Part-time faculty

are responsible for a substantial portion of the total

instructional production of the nation's colleges and

universities, but to date have been largely unobserved. The

job satisfaction and role conflict of full-time and part-

time male and female faculty were investigated using the

48

entire teaching faculty at the University of Maryland

(College Park Campus) as the sample group. Respondents

completed the Job-Related Tension Index and a questionnaire

containing job satisfaction and role conflict items.

Results indicated that part-time faculty expressed greater

job satisfaction and less role conflict than full-time

faculty. Female faculty experienced greater job satisfac-

tion and greater role conflict than male part-time faculty

and the least satisfied group was female full-time faculty.

Studies of job satisfaction over the years have

involved workers in a variety of occupations—from pro-

duction activities in manufacturing plants to, more re-

cently, the service professions. Such studies have direct

implications for employers or funding agencies which use the

findings in attempts to minimize those aspects of the work

environment which produce stress, reduce job satisfaction,

and, in extreme cases, lead to various forms of withdrawal

behavior.

The existence of high levels of stress and low levels

of job satisfaction among educators has received con-

siderable attention in recent years. Many individuals in

academia today find themselves in an environment

characterized by, for example, declining relative pay

levels, changing perceptions of status, and increasing

demands for creative intellectual activity brought about by

49

more stringent application of up-or-out and publish-or-

perish policies. The concerns for creative activity among

educators inspired Pearson and Seiler (1983) to conduct

their study to examine job satisfaction among university

faculty in the United States of America, identifying those

elements of academic activities with which faculty are

satisfied and those with which they are dissatisfied.

Utilizing a nationwide sample of university professors

in the United States, this study explored job satisfaction

levels of academicians and the differences between perceived

satisfaction of faculty in professional schools and that of

faculty in other disciplines. The results were based upon

responses from 336 faculty representing 24 universities

selected on a stratified basis which included large, small,

public and private universities.

The 22 elements of an academic work environment which

were used in the study were selected through the use of the

expert-judge technique. Approximately fifteen experienced

faculty were involved in the identification of these

elements. A rotated varimax factor analysis with iterations

as contained in the Statistical Package for the Social

Sciences (Nie, Bent, and Hull, 1975) was performed on the 22

elements, using the 336 responses, and the results support

the separation of work elements into six general dimensions:

(1) classroom-related; (2) research-related; (3) teaching-

50

related; (4) recognition- and reputation-related; (5)

support-related; and (6) compensation-related.

Teaching dimensions and research requirements were the

most satisfying elements of the academic work environment;

support and compensation aspects were the most dissatis-

fying. Faculty from professional schools reported high

levels of satisfaction for almost all of the 22 separate

environmental dimensions, and these faculty also reported

higher salaries and less stringent requirements for tenure

and promotion.

The demographic variables which explained the greatest

amount of variance in work satisfaction scores were tenure,

teaching load, sex, institution (public-private), and age.

Salary and academic rank, which a priori are considered to

be significant in an academician's satisfaction with work,

appeared to have a lesser impact.

Mellinger (1982/1983) attempted to investigate and

compare the differences and similarities of job satisfaction

of faculty and administrators at a struggling liberal arts

college. Enrollments in the institution declined from 680

m 1968 to 230 in 1981. The Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey

developed by Clark and Koester was used to collect data.

Additional questions were incorporated to determine

administrative job satisfaction/dissatisfaction. To

determine the correlation at the .05 level of significance,

51

a chi square and corrected chi square were employed. The

mean, standard deviation, and a t-score were calculated for

the satisfaction and dissatisfaction scales.

Mellinger's findings indicated that despite declining

enrollments, neither faculty nor administrators were highly

dissatisfied. However, the longer a person worked at the

college the more dissatisfaction was reported. Faculty

reported enjoying their teaching; however, administrators

reported dissatisfaction with their tasks and relationships.

Administrators reported a higher frequency of symptoms of

job stress than faculty. The results implied that improved

information flow, improvement in relationships and

reconstructing the rewards system would improve job

satisfaction. Both groups felt more recognition also would

improve job satisfaction.

^ study of job satisfaction among administrators

in higher education has been done by Sullivan (1983/1984).

Her study was conducted in the fall of 1982 to identify

selected demographic characteristics of associate and

assistant law school deans; to identify factors of work and

the work environment which affect job satisfaction of law

school associate and assistant deans; and to identify the

relationships between certain demographic and employment

characteristics of law school associate and assistant deans

and job satisfaction.

52

A questionnaire, including the short form of the

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ), was mailed to

the subjects comprising 396 associate and assistant deans in

the 172 United States law schools accredited by the American

Bar Association. The response totaled 277, or 70 percent.

Frequency distributions were tabulated and one-way analysis

of variance was computed.

The findings of the study show that the majority of

associate and assistant deans were white males, although the

number of women had increased in recent years. Associate

deans were slightly older than assistant deans. Associate

deans held significantly more tenure-track appointments and

reported substantially higher salaries than assistant deans.

Career focus was another difference; assistant deans

reported primary career focuses as administrators. Res-

pondents with a career focus as administrator expressed

higher job satisfaction than those without such a focus.

The number of associate and assistant deans who held law

degrees has declined in recent years. Respondents were very

satisfied with most aspects of their jobs, particularly with

the autonomy of their positions and competence of the law

school dean. The least satisfaction was reported for

opportunity for advancement. Respondents reported high

degrees of satisfaction with their overall life situation.

53

Sullivan concluded that there are substantial

differences between associate and assistant deans.

Assistant deans' primary career focus is as administrator

while associate deans' is as professor. Job satisfaction is

greater for persons with a career focus as an administrator.

A shift in hiring practices has occurred; and increasing

number of assistant law school deans do not have law

degrees. Associate and assistant law school deans are

satisfied with their jobs except for the lack of opportunity

for advancement. They are also highly satisfied with their

overall life situation.

Winkler (1982) is another person whose study utilized a

nationwide sample of university faculty members. The

purpose of his study was to measure the perceptions of job

satisfaction among faculty. Differences in faculty job

satisfaction relative to rank, age, tenure, department

affiliation, academic discipline (using the Biglan Model),

and sex were measured. Items contributing the most and

least to faculty job satisfaction were identified.

A random sample of 600 faculty from twenty-two

universities was surveyed by Winkler using the Job

Descriptive Index (JDI) and the Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire Short Form (MSQ) to measure job satisfaction.

Three hundred thirty-six usable questionnaires were analyzed

to test eleven null hypotheses related to rank, age,

54

department affiliation, sex, tenure status, and Biglan Model

academic task areas. Statistics employed included t-test,

oneway and threeway, fixed factor analysis of variance.

Separate analyses were used for data measured by the JDI and

MSQ.

Three of the eleven null hypotheses were rejected at

the .05 level. Statistically significant differences in job

satisfaction were found between faculty in the following

areas: in the departments of Agriculture and Mechanical

Engineering using MSQ data; by sex using MSQ data; and

hard/soft interaction with nonfile/life Biglan Model

academic areas using either JDI or MSQ data. Faculty

identified twenty-two items as contributing the most to

their job satisfaction. The most frequently mentioned items

included autonomy, academic freedom, independence, and

teaching and/or advising excellent students. Faculty

identified fifty-five items as contributing the most to

their job dissatisfaction. The most frequent items in this

category were pay, poor administration and leadership, lack

of support (equipment, budget, secretarial, public),

university structure and reward system, and narrow,

dogmatic, pompus colleagues.

Winkler concluded that differences in faculty job

satisfaction did exist with pay identified as a primary

dissatisfaction. No statistical significance was found

55

comparing rank, age, tenure, academic discipline areas

except for hard/soft by nonlife/life interaction. Females

expressed less job satisfaction than males. Professors in

agriculture expressed the highest mean job satisfaction of

all respondents.

Another piece of research in this area that is worth

noting is a study done by Vatthaisong (1982/1983). The

researcher investigated and analyzed job satisfaction among

faculty members of Thai teacher training institutions. His

study employed the Faculty Job Satisfaction/ Dissatisfaction

Scale consisting of a two-part questionnaire: (a) two items

of demographic classifications, and (b) 67 items divided

into ten factors for measuring job satisfaction and one

single item dealing with overall satisfaction. The

instrument gathered responses on a six-point scale. His

findings include the following. (1) Sources of satisfaction

for faculty in rank order of importance were interpersonal

relations, the work itself, achievement, recognition,

responsibility, growth, working conditions, supervision, and

administrative policies. The source of dissatisfaction was

salary. (2) Faculty with over ten years teaching experience

were more satisfied with their achievement and working

conditions than faculty with under ten years experience.

(3) Faculty with over ten years teaching experience revealed

more overall satisfaction than faculty with under ten years

56

experience. (4) No difference existed in satisfaction

between males and females.

A piece of research conducted at an institution of

higher learning in Bangkok, Thailand, should also be

mentioned here. Jariyavidyanont (1978/1979) investigated

and analyzed job satisfaction of faculty members in the

National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA)

located in Bangkok.

The subjects involved were 120 full-time faculty

members who had been working at NIDA at least six months

before November 1, 1977. The subjects included not only the

faculty members who were in residence at the time of the

study but also those who were studying or training abroad at

the time. The instrument elicited respondents' attitudes

toward overall job satisfaction as well as specific aspects

of job satisfaction. The Likert scale system consisting of

a five category continuum of agreement-disagreement was

used. A response of 86.7 percent was obtained.

A one-way analysis of variance was employed to test for

significance of any differences among faculty members* job

satisfaction scores and their sex, age, marital status,

educational backgrounds, position, years of working at NIDA,

and distance traveled to work.

The major findings and conclusions were as follows.

Faculty members who were employed by NIDA were moderately

57

satisfied with their jobs and most of them perceived their

job as meaningful and interesting. When considering each

specific aspect of job satisfaction, the faculty members

were most satisfied with the status of their professions.

They were least satisfied with salary and welfare aspects as

related to job satisfaction. The only demographic variable

which produced a significant difference was the degree held

by faculty members. Thus, it was concluded that there was

an effect on job satisfaction scores that could be attri-

buted to the level of education of the faculty members.

Another study has been done by Saidian (1980/1981).

Saidian employed the MSQ (short form) to measure job

satisfaction among teachers in vocational schools in

Esfahan, Iran. The 20 item Minnesota Satisfaction

Questionnaire (MSQ) was translated and distributed to a

random sample of 200 of the 8,807 vocational teachers who

were either two-year degree or four-year degree teachers. A

total of 158 respondents or 79 percent of the sample

participated in Saidian's study.

The chi-square test was used to analyze the data of

this study. It was found that teachers derived the greatest

amount of satisfaction from their job when they had a

feeling of accomplishment. This observation verified the

fact that teachers select teaching and realize a great deal

of satisfaction from their job.

58

However, the result of this study supported the fact

that teachers were most dissatisfied with their supervisors

and their competence as administrative decision-makers. The

fact that administrators give very little positive feedback

to teachers for doing good work was cited by these teachers

as a major criticism. With respect to their supervisors,

teachers expressed a great deal of dissatisfaction about the

manner in which administrators handled their administrative

roles.

Sex Variable and Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction of male and female faculty has been

studied by many researchers to determine whether there are

differences in job satisfaction between sexes. Hill (1983)

studied the job satisfaction of 752 male and 195 female

faculty in 16 Pennsylvania colleges and universities. Job

satisfaction was measured by a 45-item inventory, and factor

analysis of the inventory revealed the following components

of job satisfaction: (1) teaching, (2) recognition and

support, (3) convenience, (4) economic, (5) administrative,

and (6) associational. Further analysis indicated that the

first three facets represented an intrinsic dimension and

the last three represented an extrinsic dimension. A step-

wise regression analysis was run for each sex on the two

dimensions of job satisfaction to assess the predictive

strength of various background items and to determine

59

whether the two sexes differ with respect to the kinds of

influences that affect their job satisfaction. Although

there were indications that differences in sex may affect

the kinds of expectations that a person has about work in

academia, little difference in job satisfaction was found

between the sexes. Dissatisfaction with work was greater

among younger faculty, those in the lower academic ranks,

and those who teach in the humanities and social and

behavioral sciences.

Hill (1982) conducted an even earlier study on the

subject. His topic was concerned with the connection

between faculty sex composition and job satisfaction among

women academics in selected institutions of higher education

in Pennsylvania. Responses to a mailed questionnaire were

received from 1,089 respondents, including 214 women.

Biographical data and demographic information were

collected, and job satisfaction was measured by a 45-item,

Likert-type inventory that reflected dimensions of the work

environment of higher education (economic, teaching,

administrative, associational, recognition-support, and

convenience facets). Women who taught in institutions with

relatively high proportions of women on the faculty tended

to be significantly more satisfied than those who taught in

highly male-dominated institution on some, but not all

dimensions of job satisfaction. Of the six dimensions of

60

job satisfaction, those reflecting the economic,

administrative, and convenience dimensions were most

affected by sex composition. The positive effects of

increased proportions of women faculty are likely to be more

pronounced among humanities, social and behavioral science,

social service, and mathematics and physical science

faculty; and among these groups the economic dimension is

often the most significantly affected dimension of job

satisfaction.

A piece of research that should be mentioned here is

the research done by Benoit (1976/1977). Her study and

Hill s (1982 & 1983) were alike, because the studies dealt

with only faculty women in higher education. The

instrumentation was different, however. Benoit used the

long-form Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ).

Analysis of variance and mean were used to analyze the data.

The major purpose of Benoit's study was to analyze and

to quantify environmental work elements which affect job

satisfaction of faculty women in state universities of

Louisiana. Additional purposes were to determine degree of

job satisfaction among faculty women in higher education, to

learn whether job satisfaction of these women was affected

by independent variables, to profile respondents and to

investigate their career patterns.

61

The mean of the respondents' scores on the general

satisfaction portion of the MSQ was examined to determine

degree of satisfaction of faculty women in the state

universities of Louisiana. The mean score for these women

was 73.14, indicating to some degree dissatisfaction.

Compared with the mean score of general satisfaction for

five other groups—teachers, principals, distributive

education coordinators, secretaries and nurses—who have

responded to the same questionnaire, faculty women were less

satisfied than any other group.

Several conclusions were derived from the data of this

study: (1) Women are becoming increasingly involved in

society, and this involvement may account for their dis-

satisfaction; and (2) Administrators were more satisfied

than non-administrators. Perhaps the administrator feels

that she is more the "mistress of her own fate," and finds

that "power" is satisfying.

Concerns regarding tenure-line, nontenured faculty were

studied by Fuchs and Lovana-Kerr (1981) in 1979 at Indiana

University. Study objectives were to identify obstacles to

tenure level performance, conditions that might influence

faculty to seek, positions elsewhere, demographic data,

appointment data, and information about the following:

degrees of satisfaction with work, perceived attitudes of

colleagues toward work, amount and type of feedback and

62

evaluation received, factors deemed important in acquiring

tenure, attitudes toward the department, and factors judged

important to one's quality of life. Responses revealed that

significantly more women were hired as lecturers than men,

while significantly more men were initially hired as

assistant professors. However in 1979, many women who had

been hired as lecturers had been promoted to the rank of

assistant professor and there was no significant difference

in the current rank of men and women. The major differences

between male and female nontenured faculty occurred in their

perceptions of their professional lives: women were

significantly less satisfied with their quantity of work

than were men, but significantly more satisfied with their

service and other professional activities. Men were

significantly more confident than women of receiving tenure.

Both women and men felt that members of the same or opposite

sex viewed them primarily as co-workers or friends. Social

life and cultural environment were not as important to

either men or women as the professional aspects of their

lives.

In 1982, Lovana-Kerr and Fuchs conducted a follow-up

study to check the results they found in 1979. The follow-

up study included faculty hired since 1975 who were

previously studied in 1979, along with faculty hired since

1979. In March, 1981, questionnaires were mailed to 116

63

women and 189 male faculty, and the response rate was 59

percent for women and 55 percent for men. Of this group, 13

male faculty and 14 female faculty had been tenured since

the 1979 study. The major differences between male and

female nontenured faculty members in both studies pertaining

to their perceptions of their professional lives were their

research; feedback received on their work; their degree of

confidence in acquiring tenure; and their relationships

within their departments. Men were more satisfied than

women with the quantity of their research and received their

colleagues' evaluations on the quantity and quality of their

research and publications as excellent or good. Women

appeared to be more satisfied than men with their teaching

performance, service, and professional activities. More

women than men also perceived colleague evaluations to be

good or excellent on their teaching.

Balazadeh (1981/1982) investigated motivation to work

and job satisfaction between male and female faculty members

at a university. The sample for this study was selected

from faculty members from different colleges at a Midwestern

Regional University in Kansas. The Educational Work

Component Study (EWCS) questionnaire and the job Descriptive

Index (JDI) questionnaire were employed to investigate the

motivation to work and the degree of job satisfaction among

male and female faculty members respectively. The

64

statistics used in this study were the T-test, the Kendall

Tau b nonparametric measurement, and the Multiple Regression

Analysis.

The findings of this study showed that the longer the

faculty members were in their positions, the lower were

their job satisfaction and motivation. Still, the research

contributed some other findings. The female faculty members

showed a greater degree of job satisfaction than male

faculty members. Being in a prestigious position made the

faculty members satisfied and more highly motivated. Sex

made no significant contribution to faculty members'

satisfaction and motivation when the other variables of

demographic information were held constant.

Other Variables Related to Job Satisfaction

Independent variables other than those of sex and

general demographic variables can be matched with job

satisfaction. Job satisfaction, then, is a dependent

variable that can be affected by any number of specific

independent variables. Independent variables may, for

example, include the following: faculty in unionized and

nonunionized institutions, management by objectives (MBO),

student evaluation, decision-making participation, and so

forth. Whether faculty members will be or will not be

satisfied with their job depends on those variables as the

following research has demonstrated.

65

A study was conducted by Evans, Johnson, and Ramsey

(1983) to determine if job satisfaction of athletic coaches

is influenced by the fact that their sports were revenue or

nonrevenue producing. A revenue sport was identified as one

being able to sustain itself financially within the

university (baseball, football, basketball). Nonrevenue

sports were identified as tennis, swimming, golf, and field

and track. Head coaches from 95 colleges responded to a

personal data sheet and a 50-item job satisfaction

questionnaire. Findings revealed the following: (1)

Coaches of nonrevenue sports had higher work demand

satisfaction; (2) Coaches of revenue sports achieved higher

mean scores on job satisfaction; (3) Coaches of revenue

sports were more satisfied with the administration/organi-

zational phase of their jobs; (4) Most of the coaches were

dissatisfied with their salaries; (5) Both groups were

fairly satisfied with the racial balance in their working

environments and organizational aspects of their jobs; and

(6) The coaches overall were satisfied with their jobs.

Research pertinent to collective bargaining in higher

education has investigated many of the implications and

consequences of unionization for college faculty, but it has

rarely examined the connection between collective bargaining

and job satisfaction. Hill (1982), then, has done research

that explores the extent to which collective bargaining

66

influences job satisfaction among college faculty by

comparing levels of facet-specific job satisfaction of

faculty in traditional and unionized institutions. In order

to examine his hypotheses empirically, questionnaires were

sent to 2,400 faculty members at twenty institutions of

higher education in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. For

purposes of his study, the various institutions were divided

into two groups: unionized and nonunionized systems. Usable

returns were received from 1,089 respondents (a response

rate of 45.5 %).

Hill measured job satisfaction by a 45-item, Likert

type inventory that reflected various dimensions of the work

environment of academia. The dimensions included the

economic, teaching, administrative, associational,

recognition-support, and convenience facets of job

satisfaction. Results of t-tests of means of job

satisfaction for the two faculty groups indicate that

unionized faculty are significantly more satisfied on four

of the six facet-specific dimensions than are nonunionized

faculty. These dimensions are economic, administrative,

associational, and convenience facets of job satisfaction.

The findings also indicate that differences in job

satisfaction between union and nonunion faculty are greatest

for most groups in the economic and administrative spheres.

The implication of this is that collective bargaining

67

enhances job satisfaction for most academics in a number of

facet-specific dimensions of the work situation.

To analyze relationships that may exist between

community college administrators' perceptions of collective

bargaining and both their management style and job

satisfaction, Griffin (1982/1983), conducted a study of a

total of 83 Deans, Associate Deans, Director IVs, Provosts

and Assistant Provosts and found that administrators who

indicated high job satisfaction have both positive and

negative attitudes about collective bargaining depending on

the issue but their attitudes are more often positive than

negative.

Terpstra, Olson, and Lockeman (1982) investigated the

impact of an MBO application in a university setting. It

was hypothesized that faculty performance levels would be

positively affected while satisfaction levels would not be

influenced. A total of 23 faculty from the College of

Business and Economics at the University of Idaho completed

a questionnaire regarding their perceptions of performance

and satisfaction both prior to and after the MBO

application. Additionally, data were gathered through

archival, nonobtrusive methods (performance records) and

interviews with department heads. The results suggest that

performance increased as a result of the MBO application

while satisfaction generally declined. The findings from

68

this study diverge from earlier studies conducted within

business and industry in which the implementation of MBO had

little or no effect on satisfaction (French, Kay, and Meyer,

1966; Ivancevich, 1974; Steers, 1975; Raia, 1966).

In speculating as to why an MBO approach might be

expected to have different results in an educational

setting, it may be, as Umstot, Bell, and Mitchell (1976)

suggested, that individuals who have worked for some time

without specific goals may feel constrained by the addition

of goals. Scholars and academicians have traditionally

placed much value on individual autonomy, behavioral

flexibility, and academic freedom. MBO may have been seen

as threatening these afore-mentioned job dimensions and

values. Thus, the introduction of MBO in higher education

may present some rather unique problems.

In conclusion, results of the study would seem to have

important implications for similar institutions of higher

education considering the application of MBO. If MBO leads

to long-term dissatisfaction among faculty, administrators

must weigh carefully the trade-offs associated with dissa-

tisfaction on the one hand and increases in performance on

the other. The cost of recruiting and faculty replacement

efforts may not be worth the benefits of increased research

and service activities. If, however, the observed decline

in satisfaction is only a temporary phenomenon, the initial

costs may be well worth the effort.

69

Turnover rate in relation to less job satisfaction

among faculty in higher education is an important issue to

be examined. It has been apparent to many administrators

who are responsible for administering, supervising, and

funding post-secondary vocational-technical education that

excessive turnover of faculty tends to retard the quali-

tative development of programs. Turnover of faculty also

places additional demands on the administrator's time and

the institution's resources. Hansen and Kramer (1978)

focussed their study on post-secondary vocational-technical

teachers that had high turnover rates among them. The

purpose of their study was to identify the reasons for the

apparently high turnover rate among teachers in Iowa's 15

post-secondary area schools. Two techniques were used in an

attempt to identify the reasons for the turnover rate. One

technique consisted of comparing background information via

Iowa Professional School Employees Data Sheets for all

former and current teachers for the period 1971 through

1975. The second technique consisted of asking former

instructors, by use of a mailed questionnaire, to relate

their reasons for leaving the vocational-technical teaching

program.

The analysis of the data sheets failed to provide any

conclusive insight into the reason for the turnover rate.

Although the profile was of limited value, some tendencies

70

were observed. Analysis of the data from the survey of

current and former teachers revealed that (a) former

teachers showed greater dissatisfaction with preservice

workshops than did current teachers; (b) former teachers

tended to be less satisfied with external working conditions

than did current teachers; (c) both current and former

teachers found relationships with students to be the most

rewarding aspects of their teaching experience; (d) both

current and former teachers found interaction with

administrators and supervisors to be the least rewarding

aspect of their teaching experience. Finally, former

teachers reported they left the program primarily because of

problems they experienced with administrators and/or

supervisors, and school policies. Current teachers were

more likely to cite contract and salary problems as possible

reasons for leaving the program. This study also concluded

that one-fourth of the turnover rate can be attributed to

nonvoluntary reasons (illness, retirement), one-third to

personnel problems between teachers and superiors and/or

school policies, and one-fourth to problems with teachers'

contracts, salaries, and/or fringe benefits.

Over the past decade there has been a dramatic upsurge

in the collection and use of student evaluation of in-

struction in higher education. One of the principal ways

this- information is being used is in connection with

71

personnel decisions about faculty members. Along with its

increased use has been an increasing number of research

articles and commentary on all aspects of evaluation of

instruction by students. Ryan, Anderson, and Birchler

(1980) surveyed faculty members concerning their

observations and opinions about the effects of student

evaluation of instruction in a university where this

practice had been a mandatory requirement for personnel

evaluation purposes for several years. The study was

carried out at the authors' institution—University of

Wisconsin-La Crosse, which is part of the university system.

The questionnaire items were designed to elicit faculty

judgments about the effects that the gathering and use of

SEI (student evaluation of instruction) information had had

on their own and their colleagues' morale and job attitudes

and on changes in their instructional practices. Other

items focused on beliefs about the purposes for which SEI

information should be used and some of the procedures or

conditions under which it had been and should be gathered.

The questionnaire was distributed to all 300 academic

department faculty members. Returns sufficiently complete

for inclusion in the analysis were obtained from 193, or 63

percent, of the recipients. The respondents reported a

definite reduction in morale and job satisfaction, change in

various institutional practices--mainly with judgments about

the validity of the ratings students provide.

72

Finally, upon examining whether some demographic

characteristics affect the level of participation in the

decision-making process and the degrees of job satisfaction

of faculty, Klapachan (1983) found that participation in the

decision-making process was not a sole factor in influencing

the satisfaction of faculty members. Therefore, it was

recommended that university administrators should be more

aware of this fact and search for other means to provide job

satisfaction for faculty.

Summary

Job satisfaction among faculty members in higher

education is attractive to many researchers in business and

educational settings. The research that has been done in

this area was categorized by this writer into six topics:

(1) Definition of Job Satisfaction; (2) Measures of Job

Satisfaction; (3) Research Related to Theories of Motivation

and Job Satisfaction; (4) General Demographic Variables and

Job Satisfaction (5) Sex and Job Satisfaction; (6) Others

Variables Related to Job Satisfaction.

In the part of literature on faculty's job satisfaction

related to general demographic variables, many pieces of

research show significant findings. Ramsey's finding (1982)

shows that faculty expressed the highest level of satis-

faction with the kind of work they did, their degree of job

security and amount of responsibility, and the lowest degree

73

of satisfaction with their salaries, institutional policies

and practices, and opportunities for advancement.

Habecker s finding (1981) shows that tenured teachers

expressed higher levels of job satisfaction than did

nontenured teachers. Berman (1980) found that part-time

faculty expressed greater job satisfaction and less role

conflict than full-time faculty. According to Pearson and

Seiler (1983), faculty from professional schools reported

higher levels of satisfaction than the levels reported by

faculty in other disciplines. Saidian's (1980/1981) finding

shows that teachers were most dissatisfied with their

supervisors for the reason that their supervisors gave very

little positive feed back to them. However, most research

shows that faculty are most dissatisfied with salary

(Ramsey, 1982; Sorcinelli, 1978; Pearson and Seiler, 1983;

Vatthaisong, 1982/1983; Jariyavidyanont, 1978/1979; Winkler,

1982) .

Hill (1983) found that little difference existed in job

satisfaction in the scores of men and women; dissatisfaction

was greatest among younger faculty and those in the lower

academic ranks. Hill (1982), also, found that women who

taught in institutions with relatively high proportions of

women on the faculty tended to be significantly more

satisfied than male faculty with their teaching performance,

service, and professional activities while men were more

74

satisfied than women with the quantity of their research.

Balazadeh's study shows that the female faculty showed a

greater degree of job satisfaction than male faculty.

Benoit (1976/1977) found that faculty women are becoming

increasingly involved in society, and this involvement may

account for their job dissatisfaction.

Evans et al. (1983) found that coaches of revenue

sports were more satisfied than coaches of nonrevenue sports

with the recognition they received. Hill (1982) found that

collective bargaining enhances job satisfaction for most

academics in a number of facet-specific dimensions of the

work situation. Griffin (1982/1983), also, found that

administrators who indicated high job satisfaction have both

positive and negative attitudes about collective bargaining

depending on the issue, but their attitudes are more often

positive than negative. The finding discovered by Terpstra

et al. from the College of Business and Economics at the

University of Idaho shows that the faculty performance level

increased as the result of the MBO application, while

satisfaction generally declined. According to turnover rate

in relation to less job satisfaction, Hansen and Kramer

(1978) found that former teachers left the program because

of problems they experienced with administrators and/or

supervisors, and school policies. Current teachers were

likely to cite contract and salary problems as possible

75

reasons for leaving the program. Ryan et al. (1980) found

in a study of student evaluation of instruction a definite

reduction in morale and job satisfaction, change in various

institutional practices--mainly reduced course work demands

on students.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ageel, H.A. (1983). Job satisfaction of staff members of Umm Al-Qura University in Makkah (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 2836A.

Balazadeh, G. (1982). A comparative study of motivation to work and job satisfaction between male and female faculty members at midwestern regional university (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 4313A.

Benoit, S.S. (1977). Job satisfaction among faculty women m higher education in the state universities of Louisiana (Doctoral dissertation, The Louisiana State University and Agriculture and Mechanical College, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International. 37, 6969A. ~

Berman, M.R. (1980). Variables associated with role conflict between career and family. Atlanta, GA: American Personnel and Guidance Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 192 188)

Bess, J.L. (1981). Intrinsic satisfactions from academic versus other professional work: A comparative analysis. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher ^ c a t i o n . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED

Dawis, R.V., England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1964). A theory of work adjustment. Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, XV\ ~

Dunn, J.D., & Stephens, E.C. (1972). Management of personnel: Manpower management and organizational behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. ~~

Evans, V., Johnson, D., & Ramsey, J.p. (1983). Differences — — j o b satisfaction of athletic coaches in revenue and non-revenue sports.Minneapolis, MN: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 357)

French, J.R.P., Kay, E., & Meyer, H.H. (1966). Participation and the appraisal system. Human Relations, 19, 3-19.

76

77

Fuchs, R.G., & Lovano-Kerr, J. (1981). Professional development and quality of life: A comparative study of male/female non-tenured faculty"! Los Angeles, C A : — American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 202 416)

Gall/ L.A., & Voge, F.X. (1981). Attitudes of university faculty toward aging and retirement. Chicago, Illinois. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 208 780)

Grahn, J. et al. (1981). General college job satisfaction survey, University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, General College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 208 716)

Griffin, M.E. (1983). Relationships between perceptions of collective bargaining, management style, and job satisfaction of mid-level administrators in Minnesota's community colleges (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1982). Dissertation Abstract International, 43, 3470a! ~~

Habecker, E.B. (1981). A systematic approach to the study of benefits and detriments of tenure in American higher education: An analysis of the evidence. Huntington, IN: Huntington College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 212 208)

Hansen, G.L., & Kramer, R.E. (1978). Iowa postsecondary vocational-technical teacher retention study. Community Junior College Research Quarterly, 2, 2 5 5 "~*258 •

Hill, M.D. (1982). Faculty sex composition and job satisfaction among academic women. New York, NY: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 215 632)

Hill, M.D. (1982). Variations in job satisfaction among higher education faculty in unionized and nonunionized institutions in Pennsylvania. Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public SectorTll, 165-180.

Hill, M.D. (1983). Some factors affecting the job satisfaction of academic women. Montreal, Canada: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 231 297)

Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. New York: Harper.

78

Ivancevich, J.M. (1974). Changes in performance in a management by objectives program. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 563-574.

Jariyavidyanont, S. (1979). Job satisfaction of Nida faculty members (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 5353A. "

Klapachan, P. (1983). A study of the relationships between participation in the decision making process and job satisfaction among the faculty of a midwestern regional state university (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts Internaf-.innal 44, 1000A. ~ '

Locke, E.A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4 309-336. — — '

Lovano-Kerr, J., & Fuchs, R.G. (1982). Retention revisited: follow-up study of female/male non-tenured faculty

perceptions on retention, professional development and quality—of life* New York, NY: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 217 824)

Mellinger, G.P. (1983). An investigation of academic job satisfaction/dissatisfaction in a small struggling liberal arts college (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1982) Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 94IaT ~

Nie, N.^Bent, D.H., &Hull, C.H. (1975). Statistical package for the social sciences (2nd ed.). New York* McGraw-Hill.

Openshaw, H. (1980). Job satisfaction determinants among faculty and administrators: An application of Herzberg's motivation hygiene model in higher education ( octoral dissertation, Georgia State University, I 9 8 0)- Dissertation Abstracts International. 41,' 247 OA• ~

Pearson, D.A., & Seiler, R.E. (1983). Environmental satisfiers in academe. Higher Education, 12, 35-47.

Raia, A.P. (1966). A second look at management goals and controls. California Management Review, 8 (4), 49-58.

79

Ramsey, J.K. (1982). Faculty perceptions of institutional quality and vitality. Jacksonville, FL: Florida Association of Community Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 084)

Ryan, J.J., Anderson, J.A., & Birchler, A.B. (1980). Student evaluation: The faculty responds. Research in Higher Education, 12, 317-333.

Saidian, M. (1981). A study of job satisfaction as measured by the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire as applied to selected male and female vocational and technical teachers of Esfahan, Iran (Doctoral dissertation. University of Kansas, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 4378A.

Smith, P.C. (1974). The development of a method of measuring satisfaction: The Cornell studies. In E.A. Fleishman, & A.R. Bass (Eds.), Studies in Personnel and Industrial Psychology (pp. 272-289T Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press.

Sorcinelli, M.D. (1978). Faculty attitudes at Tntfiana University School of Dentistry. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University School of Dentistry. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 187 282)

Steers, R.M. (1975). Task goal attributes, achievement, and supervisory performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 392-403.

Sullivan, S.M. (1984). Job satisfaction of associate and assistant deans in accredited United States law schools (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-

1983). Dissertation Abstracts International, 4 4 r 2* 9 9 5A *

Terpstra, D.E., Olson, P.D., & Lockeman, B. (1982). The effects of MBO on levels of performance and satisfaction among university faculty. Group and Organization Studies. 7. 353-366.

Umstot, D.D., Bell, C.H., & Mitchell, T.R. (1976). Effects of job enrichment and productivity: Implications for 379-39419n J o u r n a l o f Applied Psychology, 61 (4),

Vatthaisong, A. (1983). A study of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among faculty members in teacher training institutions in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers of

80

Vanderbilt University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 468A.

W e i S S ; n ^ ; ' D ^ W i S ' 1

R ; V " En(31^nd' G - W " & Lofquist, L.H. \1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, XXII. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.

Willie, R., & Stecklein, J.E. (1982). A three decade comparison of college faculty characteristics, satisfactions, activities, and attitudes. Research in Higher Education, 16 (1), 81-83.

Winkler, L.D. (1982). Job satisfaction of university faculty in the United States (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 696A.

Wood, O.R. (1974). An analysis of faculty motivation to work an the North Carolina community college system (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University at Ralexgh, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 90IA! —

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents research procedures employed in

this study. It contains data collection procedures and

sample, instrumentation, and analysis and treatment of data

respectively.

Data Collection Procedure and Sample

Faculty members at the following six colleges in non-

metropolitan areas of central Thailand were included in this

study: Nakhon Pathom Teachers College, Kanchana Buri

Teachers College, Nakhon Sawan Teachers College, Ayuthaya

Teachers College, Chachoengsao Teachers College, and Chantha

Buri Teachers College.

Each of the six teachers colleges has departments or

divisions affiliated with one of three faculties: the

faculty of education, the faculty of science, and the

faculty of humanities and social sciences (Planning

Division, Ministry of Education, 1984). The Division of

Planning in the Department of Education was asked to provide

the most recent roster for each of the teachers colleges

included in the study. In addition to faculty members'

names, the information furnished by the Division of Planning

included administrative and/or academic rank, faculty

affiliation, and degree held for each person.

81

82

Fox each of the six colleges included in the study,

forty-eight faculty members were chosen for a total sample

size of 288. Twenty—four faculty members who were both

administrators and instructors at the same time were

selected from among divisional chairpersons; deans of the

faculties of education, sciences, and humanities and social

sciences; and vice-presidents. This number reflects a

decision to include as many teachers/administrators as the

average number of divisions for the six colleges. (See

Table I). The remaining twenty-four were selected as

follows from among those whose only duty was instructional:

eight faculty members were chosen from each of the faculty

TABLE I

NAME OF EACH COLLEGE AND NUMBER OF DIVISIONS

Teachers Colleges Number of Divisions

Nakhon Pathom 26

Karnchana Buri 26

Chachoengsao 26

Chantha Buri 25

Nakhon Sawan 28

Ayuthaya 27

Total 158 Mean 26.3

83

affiliations; of these eight, four were randomly selected

from faculty holding bachelor's degrees and four were

randomly selected from faculty holding master's degrees.

Table II displays the total number of faculty members in the

six colleges, the size of sample selected, and the number

and percentage of responses which were returned.

TABLE II

TOTAL FACULTY MEMBERS, SAMPLE SIZE, AND FREQUENCY/PERCENTAGE OF RESPONSES

FROM SIX NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES IN CENTRAL THAILAND

Name of Each Teachers College

Total Faculty % Sample

Respon-dents

% of returns

Nakhon Pathom 199 22 .46 48 42 87.50

Karnchana Buri 94 10 .61 48 48 100.00

Chachoengs ao 139 15 .69 48 40 83.33

Chantha Buri 107 12 .08 48 43 89.58

Nakhon Sawan 155 17 .49 48 43 89.58

Ayuthaya 192 21 .67 48 37 77.08

Total 886 100, .00 288 253 87.85

The sample of 288 faculty members was randomly selected

from a total 886 faculty members at six non-metropolitan

teachers colleges. The sample selected is equivalent to

32.5 percent of the total faculty. A research assistant.

84

Smarn Loyfa*, mailed a total of two hundred and eighty-eight

questionnaires along with a letter composed by the

researcher, followed-up, and collected the returned

questionnaires from the middle of March to the middle of

May, 1985. When the collection of the questionnaires was

completed, the research assistant mailed them to the

researcher at NTSU (North Texas State University). In

total, 253 questionnaires were returned; thus 87.85 percent

of the sample participated in this study.

The faculty members were classified by sex, age, degree

levels, years of teaching experience, faculty affiliations,

and work positions as shown in Table III. (See Table III).

Table III also shows frequencies and percentages of faculty

members for each subgroup on the basis of seven demographic

variables. Analysis of the data reveals the following

characteristics of the respondents. (1) The number of male

faculty members (57.7%) was larger than that of morale

faculty members (42.3%). Most faculty members (57.3%) were

between 36 to 45 years of age. Only 2 percent or 5

respondents were 25 years of age or younger. A fraction

over fifty-eight percent of the respondents held a master's

degree or higher while 41.9 percent held a bachelor's

* A researcher's former colleague at Sakon Nakhon Teachers Tha^?9eii ^ h o. t a ufht at Khon Kaen University in northeast Thailand during the period when the study was beina conducted. y

85

TABLE III

PERCENTAGE OF DEMOGRAPHIC CLASSIFICATIONS OF FACULTY MEMBERS AT SIX NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES

IN CENTRAL THAILAND

Classification Numbsr

Sex:

Age:

Male 1 4 6 5 7 - 7

Female 107 42.3

Up to 25 5 2.0 26 to 35 79 4 3 6 t o 45 I45 5 7; 3

46 or more 31 12.3

Degree Levels: Bachelor 1 06 41,9 Master or higher 147 58.1

Years of teaching experience: 10 or less 70 27.7 More than 10 183 12.Z

Salary levels:

n3A 16 6.3 Cf 43 17.0 0 5 194 76.7

Faculty affiliations: Education 75 29 6 Humanities

and Social Sciences 95 37.9 Sciences 8 2 32.4

Work positions: Instructor 102 40 3 Administrator 151 59'7

86

degree. The number of faculty members with more than ten

years of teaching experience was larger (72.3%) than those

of ten years or less (27.7%). According to salary levels

classified by ranks, 76.7 percent of the respondents were at

classification 5 while 17 percent and 6.3 percent of them

were at classification 4 amd classification 3 respectively.

Among the respondents, 37.9 percent were from the faculty of

humanities and social sciences, 32.4 percent from the

faculty of sciences and 29.6 percent from the faculty of

education. Just a fraction more than forty percent of the

respondents had major responsibilities in teaching while

59.7 percent of them were responsible for both teaching and

administration.

Instrumentation

Herzberg's two-factor theory has served as the basis

for studies of job satisfaction by Sergiovanni (1966),

McGreal (1968/1969), Wickstrom (1971), Wood (1976),

Seegmiller (1977), and Vatthaisong (1982/1983). Wood

(1973/1974) developed the Faculty Job Satisfaction/ Dis-

satisfaction Scale based on Herzberg*s two-factor theory.

This instrument, which was used in the present study, has

been used by Wood (1973/1974) and Vatthaisong (1982/1983).

Wood s instrument is composed of 67 items representing the

motivation-hygiene dimensions (achievement, growth,

interpersonal relations, policy and administration,

87

recognition, responsibility, salary, supervision, the work

itself, and working conditions). There is also a single

item which is designed to provide an overall job

satisfaction. Response choices for the Wood's scale are

given a weight according to the following manner: 1-very

dissatisfied; 2-moderately dissatisfied; 3-slightly

dissatisfied; 4-slightly satisfied; 5-moderately satisfied;

6-very satisfied. A typical item appears as illustrated in

the following example:

The method used to determine your salary:

1 2 3 4 5 6

In addition to the job satisfaction questions, seven

items for demographic information were included at the

beginning of the questionnaire. They include items on sex,

age, degree levels, salary .levels, years of teaching

experience at college level, faculty affiliations, and work

positions.

The instrument was pretested by 52 full-time

instructors at a North Carolina technical institute (Wood,

1973). Following the pretest, the 10 Motivation-Hygiene

subscales based on Herzberg's theory were factor analyzed.

All items relating to job satisfaction were given an overall

factor analysis. A rotated factor matrix loading of 0.5 was

used as a guide to eliminates some items and move others to a

Motivation-Hygiene dimension which produced a higher factor

88

loading. The pretest reliability coefficients for internal

consistency were calculated from the factor analyses by the

formula developed by Charles H. Proctor (Wood, 1973). The

reliability coefficients for internal consistency on the

pretest were as follows: achievement, 0.81; growth, 0.86;

interpersonal relations, 0.93; policy and administration,

0.95; recognition, 0.85; responsibility, 0.88; salary, 0.92;

supervision, 0.96; the work its«lf, 0.86; working

conditions, 0.87; and all subscales together, 0.98.

Later, a test-retest was conducted with the same 52

instructors. Using the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, the

test-retest reliability coefficients were computed. The

results were: achievement, 0.91; growth, 0.85; interpersonal

relations, 0.92; policy and administration, 0.95;

recognition, 0.94; responsibility, 0.90; salary, 0.93;

supervision, 0.95; the work itself, 0.90; working

conditions, 0.95; and all subscales together, 0.99.

The Thai version of the questionnaire was translated by

Arkom Vatthaisong and verified by Tanomwong Sukchotrat--an

instructor at the Faculty of Liberal Arts and a researcher

at the Institute of Thai Studies, Thamnmasat University,

Bangkok, Thailand. The content of the questionnaire was

reviewed by In Sikun, who was president at Nakhon Rajsima

Teachers College, Thailand.

89

Vatthaisong conducted a pilot study with 20 faculty

members at Loei Teachers College, Thailand. The split-half

reliability test was used to determine reliability. Results

of analysis showed a high reliability coefficient for the

instrument. These results revealed a reliability coef-

ficient of 0.97, with significance at the 0.01 level (df=19)

and r 2. 0.549.

Analysis and Treatment of Data

Upon the return of the questionnaires, the researcher

assigned a code to each item of data collected and entered

coded data into an IBM computer terminal at the NTSU Data

Processing Laboratory. Statistics used in the study include

frequency, mean, percentage, standard deviation, one-way

ANOVA and two-way ANOVA (SPSS Inc., 1983). The level of

significance was set at .05 in order to be able to compare

the results of this study with the results of Vatthaisong's

study. If any significant differences were found while

testing the hypotheses using one-way ANOVA, the Scheffe'

method was employed to find the significant pairs. The

level of significance for post hoc comparison was set at

.10. The Scheffe* method, according to Ferguson (1981), is

more rigorous than the other three tests, namely Tukey,

Newman-Keuls, or Duncan. The Scheffe' method is appropriate

for this study because it permits the comparison between

groups of unequal numbers while the other methods require

equal numbers.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

Division of Planning, Department of Teacher Education, Ministry of Education (1984). The education statistics 1983. Bangkok: Ministry of Education. ~

Ferguson, G.A. (1981). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Hinkle, D.E. (1979). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

Huck, S.W. (1974). Reading statistics and research. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers. ~~

Kerlinger, F.N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. ~

McGreal, T.L. (1969). An investigation of organizational variables affecting teacher satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts International. 29 , 2067A.

Seegmiller, J.F. (1977). Job satisfaction of faculty arid —at the college of eastern Utah. Provo, Utah:

Office of Institutional Research College of Eastern 489^* Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 139

Sergiovanni, T.J. (1966). Satisfaction and dissatisfaction of teachers (Doctoral dissertation. The University of Rochester, 1966). Dissertation Abstracts International, 27, 1235A.

SPSS Inc. (1983). SPSS-X: User's guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Vatthaisong, A. (1983). A study of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among faculty members in teacher training institutions in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 4 6 8A. —

Wickstrom, R.A. (1971). An investigation into job satisfaction among teachers (Doctoral dissertation,

90

91

University of Oregon, 1971) International, 32, 1249A.

Dissertation Abstracts

Wood, O.R. (1974). An analysis of faculty motivation to work dn the North Carolina community college system (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 90Ia^ ~ ~ —

Wood, O.R. (1976). A research project: Measuring job satisfaction of the community college staff. Community College Review, 3 (3), 57-67.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

This chapter presents the findings and provides

discussion and interpretation of data analyses. An attempt

was made to answer all the questions raised in Chapter I.

The four questions are concerned with, first, level of job

satisfaction among faculty members at six non-metropolitan

teachers colleges in central Thailand as measured by ten

facets of job satisfaction; second, comparison of job

satisfaction among faculty on each of the ten facets and the

determination of whether any significant differences exist

on the basis of their demographic classifications (sex and

years of teaching experience at the college level, salary

levels, academic degrees, age, position as an instructor or

administrator, and faculty affiliations); third, comparison

of overall job satisfaction among faculty according to their

demographic classifications; and, fourth, comparison of the

results of this research with the findings of Vatthaisong

(1982/1983) dealing with sex and years of teaching

experience among faculty members at the college level.

The chapter consists of four sections. The first

section presents and interprets the results by frequencies

and percentages for ten facets of job satisfaction for the

92

93

respondents. The second section presents the data which

were derived from testing the hypothesis that no significant

differences exist among members of subgroups on seven

demographic variables for each of the ten facets of job

satisfaction. The third section presents a comparison of

responses of faculty members regarding overall job

satisfaction, based on data derived from testing the

hypothesis that no significant differences exist among

members of subgroups on seven demographic variables. The

fourth section presents a comparison of the results of this

research, conducted in central Thailand, with the results of

Vatthaisong s research, conducted among faculty members at

teachers colleges in northeast Thailand.

Analysis of Level of Faculty Job Satisfaction

The purpose of this section is to present the level of

faculty job satisfaction on each of the ten facets of the

job satisfaction instrument. The first research question is

restated below.

To what extent do the faculty members express job

satisfaction as measured by the ten facets of a

modified form of the Wood Job Satisfaction Instrument?

Frequency and percentage were used to determine the

level of faculty job satisfaction on each facet of job

satisfaction and in overall job satisfaction. The level of

faculty job satisfaction on each of the ten facets is shown

94

in Table IV. Table XV also shows the frequencies and

percentages of the responses for the level of job

satisfaction among the respondents on each of the ten

facets.

Responses to the achievement factors indicate that 78.6

percent of the responses tend toward satisfaction while 22.3

percent tend toward dissatisfaction. In relation to the

growth factor, 73 percent of the responses indicate

satisfaction while 27 percent indicate dissatisfaction.

Relating to interpersonal relations, 84.8 percent of the

responses tend toward satisfaction while 15.3 percent

indicate dissatisfaction. Concerning the policy and

administration facet, 62.6 percent of the responses tend

toward satisfaction while 37.4 percent tend toward

dissatisfaction. On the recognition facet, 76.2 percent of

the responses lean toward satisfaction while 23.8 percent

lean toward dissatisfaction. Concerning the responsibility

facet, the table shows that 80.7 percent of the responses

lean toward satisfaction while 19.3 percent lean toward

dissatisfaction. On the salary facet, 62.3 percent of the

responses tend toward satisfaction while 37.7 percent tend

toward dissatisfaction. For the last three facets in

supervision, the work itself, and working conditions, 57.6

percent, 74.4 percent and 71.3 percent of the responses tend

toward satisfaction while 42.4 percent, 25.7 percent and

95

TABLE IV

FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE FOR LEVEL OF SATISFACTION AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS AT NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES

IN CENTRAL THAILAND, DEFINED BY TEN FACETS

Dissatisfied VD MD SD SS

Satisfied MS VS

Achievement Percentage Average

Growth Percentage Average

Interpersonal Relations Percentage Average

Policy and Administratio Percentage Average

Recognition Percentage Average

Responsibility Percentage Average

Salary Percentage Average

Supervision Percentage Average

The Work Itself Percentage Average

Working Conditions Percentage Average

36 74 286 737 591 47 2 . 0 4 . 2 1 6 . 1 4 1 . 6 3 4 . 4 2 . 7

40 2 2 . 3 7 8 . 6

40 95 275 608 450 50 2 . 6 6 . 3 1 8 . 1 4 0 . 1 2 9 . 6 3 . 3

2 7 . 0 7 3 . 0

10 59 162 606 602 79 0 . 7 3 . 9 1 0 . 7 3 9 . 9 3 9 . 7 5 . 2

1 5 . 3 8 4 . 8

n 84 213 554 930 457 39 3 . 7 9 . 4 2 4 . 3 4 0 . 8 2 0 . 1 1 . 7

36 3 7 . 4 6 2 . 6

36 58 207 557 365 42 2 . 8 4 . 6 1 6 . 4 4 4 . 0 2 8 . 9 3 . 3

17 2 3 . 8 7 6 . 2

17 44 184 550 422 48 1 . 3 3 . 5 1 4 . 5 4 3 . 5 3 3 . 4 3 . 8

82 1 9 . 3 8 0 . 7

3 . 8

82 159 331 596 322 28 5 . 4 1 0 . 5 2 1 . 8 3 9 . 3 2 1 . 2 1 . 8

228 3 7 . 7 6 2 . 3

1 . 8

228 320 740 1090 579 79 7 . 5 1 0 . 5 2 4 . 4 3 5 . 9 1 9 . 1 2 . 6

11 4 2 . 4 5 7 . 6

11 47 202 425 287 40 1 . 1 4 . 6 2 0 . 0 4 2 . 0 2 8 . 4 4 . 0

2 5 . 7 7 4 . 4 4 . 0

49 122 336 780 439 45 2 . 8 6 . 9 1 9 . 0 4 4 . 0 2 4 . 8 2 . 5 2 8 . 7 7 1 . 3

96

28.7 percent tend toward dissatisfaction respectively. The

percentages of very dissatisfaction (VD) and very

satisfaction (VS) are slightly different for most facets,

but the total percentages of satisfaction are definitely

greater than dissatisfaction. The responses shown in Table

IV, then, indicate that the respondents were slightly to

moderately satisfied with respect to the ten facets of job

satisfaction.

Table V presents the overall level of satisfaction

among faculty members as determined by their response from

items 1 through 67 of a modified form of the Wood Job

Satisfaction Instrument. Results in Table V show that 70.1

percent of the responses tend toward satisfaction and 29.8

percent tend toward dissatisfaction. This result shows that

faculty members had more job satisfaction than

dissatisfaction. Of the faculty members, 40.6 percent

indicate slight satisfaction and 26.6 percent indicate

moderate satisfaction while only 2.9 percent indicate that

they were very satisfied. These responses indicate that

faculty members were more slightly and moderately satisfied

with their jobs than very satisfied.

Results in Table VI show that 77.9 percent of the

responses tend toward satisfaction while only 22.2 percent

tend toward dissatisfaction. This finding indicates that

more faculty members were satisfied with their job than were

97

TABLE V

OVERALL LEVEL OF SATISFACTION AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS AT NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES IN CENTRAL THAILAND,

DEFINED BY ITEM 1 THROUGH ITEM 67

Level of Satisfaction

Frequency of Responses

Total of Percentage

Very Dissatisfied 593 3. .5

Moderately Dissatisfied 1, 191 7. .0 29 .8

Slightly Dissatisfied 3. 277 19. 3

Slightly Satisfied 6, 879 40. 6

Moderately Satisfied 4, 514 26. 6 70 .1

Very Satisfied 497 2. 9

Total 16, 951 100. 0 100, .0*

Note: n = 253.

* Adjusted for .1 percent discrepancy due to roundinq of computations.

dissatisfied. Table VI also shows that 49.0 percent of the

responses reveal slight satisfaction, 24.9 percent moderate

satisfaction, and 4.0 percent very satisfied. This finding

indicates that faculty members were more slightly and

moderately satisfied with their overall satisfaction than

very satisfied.

98

TABLE VI

OVERALL LEVEL OF SATISFACTION AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS AT NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES IN CENTRAL THAILAND,

DEFINED BY ITEM 68

Level of Satisfaction

Frequency Responses

of %

Total of Percentage

Very Dissatisfied 3 1.2

Moderately Dissatisfied 7 2.8 22.2

Slightly Dissatisfied 46 18.2

Slightly Satisfied 124 49.0

Moderately Satisfied 63 24.9 77.9

Very Satisfied 10 4.0

Total 253 100.0 100.0*

Note: n = 253.

* Adjusted for .1 percent discrepancy due to roundinq of computations.

Testing the First Null Hypothesis

The purpose of this section is to present the data

which were derived from testing hypothesis one. The

research question is restated below.

Do significant correlations exist between faculty

members' demographic classifications and their job

satisfaction on the ten facets of a modified form of

the Wood Job Satisfaction Instrument?

99

This research question is translated into a hypothesis as

follows.

No significant difference exists in the response to

satisfaction on each of the ten facets between or among

the groups—male and female faculty, faculty with under

ten years of teaching experience and faculty with over

ten years of teaching experience, faculty with a

bachelor's degree and faculty with a master's degree or

higher, faculty who have a different category in their

age, faculty who are instructors and administrators,

faculty who have a different category in their faculty

affiliations and faculty who have a different category

in their salary levels,

A one-way ANOVA and a two-way ANOVA were used to test

the data for the null hypothesis. A two-way ANOVA was used

to test the hypothesis on sex and years of teaching

experience for each of the ten facets of job satisfaction.

A one-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis on age,

degree levels, salary levels, faculty affiliations, and work

positions for each of the ten facets of job satisfaction.

The level of significance was set at .05. The Scheffe'

method with the level of significance at .10 was employed to

find the significant pairs after using a one-way ANOVA.

Table VII presents the mean scores on each of the ten

facets on the basis of sex and years of teaching experience.

100

TABLE VII

MEANS FOR TEN FACETS DEFINED BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Means

Fa- Entire cet Popu-No.* lation M

M M F F With With With With

Under Over Under Over Under Over 10 10 10 10 10 10 Yrs. Yrs. Yrs. Yrs. Yrs. Yrs. Exp. Exp. Exp. Exp. Exp. Exp.

1 28 .56 28 .26 28 . 98 28 .28 28 .67 27 .65 28 .47 29 . 00 28 .97

2 23 . 86 23 .76 23 .99 23 .94 23 . 83 22 .84 24 .08 25 h-»

00

23 . 46

3 25 .78 25 .20 26 .57 25 .44 25 . 9 1 24 .67 25 . 38 26 .30 26 .69

4 33 .24 33 .36 33 .08 32 . 3 1 33 .60 31 .89 33 .86 32 .79 33 .22

5 20. .07 19 .95 20, .23 19 .37 20. .34 18 . 8 1 20 .34 20, .00 20. .34

6 20 . 77 20 .46 21. ,19 20, .43 20. .90 19, .54 20. .78 21. ,42 21. .08

7 2 1 . 96 22, .03 21 . 86 21. 44 22 . 15 20 . ,78 22 . 45 22 . 18 21 . 72

8 42 . 75 42. 98 42 . 45 41 . 20 43 . 35 39 . 43 44 . 18 43 . 18 42 . 12

9 1 6 . 15 16 . 11 1 6 . 20 1 6 . 26 1 6 . 11 1 5 . 59 1 6 . 28 1 7 . 00 1 5 . 85

10 2 7 .

* Tf

22 27 .

l "f~ - v

31 27 . 08 2 6 . 26 2 7 . 58 2 5 . 94 27 . 78 2 6 . 61 2 7 . 30

1. = Achievement 2. = Growth 3. = Interpersonal Relations 4. = Policy and Administration 5. = Recognition

6. = Responsibility 7. = Salary 8. = Supervision 9. = The Work Itself

10. = Working Conditions

101

Testing the First Null Hypothesis Using a Two-Way ANOVA

Results of a two-way analysis of variance for sex and

years of teaching experience a^e presented in eleven tables

ranging from Table VIXX to Ta^>le XIX. The results which

were based on the achievement|facet are presented in Table

VIII. Results show that mean scores of achievement between

male and female faculty membeajrs or between those who had ten

years of teaching experience cjr less and those who had over

ten years of teaching experience are not significantly

different. Moreover, no significant difference exists in

the interaction between sex arid years of teaching experience

regarding achievement. The findings indicate that the

variables of sex and years of teaching experience and the

interaction between the variables of sex and years of

teaching experience made no statistical differences on

faculty members satisfaction according to achievement on

their jobs.

Table IX presents a two-wp.y analysis of variance

concerning the growth facet. No significant differences

emerged between the mean scorejs of male and female faculty

members and those who had different levels of years in

teaching experience. Yet, a significant difference in mean

scores was found in the interaction between sex and years of

teaching experience regarding the growth facet. This

finding indicates that sex/yeaojs of teaching experience had

102

TABLE VIII

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE ACHIEVEMENT FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 34.15 1 34.15 1 .59 .21

Years of Teaching Experience 9.61 1 9.61 0 .45 .50

Sex by Years of Experience 8.95 1 8.95 0 .42 .52

Within Cells 5333.52 249 21.42

Total 5384.17 252 21.37

TABLE IX

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE GROWTH FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

S e x 2.93

Years of Teaching Experience 0.48

Sex by Years of Experience 110.02

Within Cells 5266.57

Total 5380.16

1

1

1

249

252

2.93

0.48

110.02

21.15

21.35

0.14

0.02

5.20

.71

.88

.02*

Significance at .05 level.

103

an effect on faculty members' satisfaction according to the

growth facet.

Table X explains Table IX about the significant

interaction between sex and years of teaching experience

regarding the growth facet. Male faculty members with over

ten years of teaching experience were more satisfied

(mean=24.08) with their growth than male faculty members

with under ten years of teaching experience (mean=22.84)

whereas female faculty members with under ten years of

teaching experience were more satisfied (mean=25.18) with

their growth than females with over ten years of teaching

experience (mean=23.46). In other words, the longer the

period of time male faculty were engaged in their

profession, the more satisfied they were with their

TABLE X

COMPARISON OF MEANS FOR THE GROWTH FACET DEFINED BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Means

Facet Males With Males With Females With Females With Under 10 Over 10 Under 10 Over 10 Years of Years of Years of Years of Experience Experience Experience Experience

Growth 22.84 24.08 25.18 23.46

104

TABLE XI

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS FACET

AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 120.95 1 120.95 6. 77 .01

Years of Teaching Experience 15.72 1 15.72 0 . 88 .35

Sex by Years of Experience 1.24 1 1.24 0 . 07 .79

Within Cells 4450.51 249 17.87

Total

* „ 4_

4583.60 252 18.19

personal growth. This finding was opposite to that for

female faculty.

Table XI shows a two-way analysis of variance on the

interpersonal relations facet for sex and years of teaching

experience. A significant difference occurred between the

mean scores of male and female faculty members on the

interpersonal relations facet. There was no significant

difference found in mean scores for those who had different

levels of years in teaching experience. No significant

interaction was found between sex and years of teaching

experience upon the interpersonal relations facet.

105

TABLE XII

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION FACET

AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 2.68 1 2.68 0. 05 .83

Years of Teaching Experience 81.72 1 81.72 1. 45 .23

Sex by Years of Experience 29.72 1 29.72 0. 52 .47

Within Cells 14070.56 249 56.51

Total 14186.81 252 56.30

Table XII presents a two—way analysis of variance for

the two demographic classifications based on the policy and

administration facet. No significant difference appeared

between the mean scores of male and female faculty members.

Faculty with ten years of experience and those with less

than ten years did not differ significantly on this

dimension. No significant interaction between the two

variables was found.

Table XIII displays the results of a two-way analysis

of variance for the two demographic classifications

regarding the recognition facet. The analysis revealed no

significant difference in scores between male and female

106

TABLE XIII

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE RECOGNITION FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 6.95 1 6.95 0 .39 .53

Years of Teaching Experience 49.43 1 49.43 2 .78 .10

Sex by Years of Experience 17.72 1 17.72 1 .00 .32

Within Cells 4430.67 249 17.79

Total 4502.72 252 17.87

faculty members. The mean scores between faculty members

who worked over ten years and those who worked ten years or

less showed no significant difference. No significant

interaction between sex and years of teaching experience was

found.

Table XIV shows the results of a two-way analysis of

variance for the two demographic classifications regarding

the responsibility facet. No significant difference was

found in mean scores either between male and female faculty

members or between those two groups who had different levels

of years of teaching experience. The statistical analysis

also revealed no significant interaction based on sex and

years of teaching experience.

107

TABLE XIV

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE RESPONSIBILITY FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 34.60 1 34.60 2. 48 .12

Years of Teaching Experience 13.82 1 13.82 0. 99 .32

Sex by Years of Experience 31.29 1 31.29 2. 25 .13

Within Cells 3469.48 249 13.93

Total 3546.70 252 14.07

Table XV presents results of a two-way analysis of

variance for sex and years of teaching experience concerning

the salary facet. No significant difference was found in

mean scores between male and female faculty members. Nor

was any difference found among those who had different

levels of years of teaching experience. Sex by years of

teaching experience revealed no significant interaction.

Table XVI shows results of a two-way analysis of

variance for the two demographic classifications according

to the supervision facet. The comparison of mean scores

from sources of variation--sex, years of teaching experience

and sex by years of experience—shows no significant

differences.

TABLE XV

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE SALARY FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

108

Sources of Variation

Sum of df Variance F p Squares Estimate

Sex 1.02 1 1.02 0.03 .85

Years of Teaching Experience 24.82 1 24.82 0.82 .36

Sex by Years of Experience 56.77 1 56.77 1.88 .17

Within Cells 7517.19 249 30.19

Total 7600.52 252 30.16

TABLE XVI

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE SUPERVISION FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of df Squares

Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 10.55 1 10.55 0.07 .79

Years of Teaching Experience 227.14 1 227.14 1.54 .21

Sex by Years of Experience 422.04 1 422.04 2.87 .09

Within Cells 36604.23 249 147.00

Total 37270.81 252 147.90

109

Table XVII shows results of a two-way analysis of

variance based on the work itself facet. Sex or years of

teaching experience revealed no significant differences in

mean scores. However, the interaction between sex and years

of teaching experience did make a statistical significance.

TABLE XVII

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE WORK ITSELF FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 0.48 1 0.48 0 .05 .83

Years of Teaching Experience 1.02 1 1.02 0 .10 .75

Sex by Years of Experience 42.24 1 42.24 4 .09 .04

Within Cells 2572.47 249 10.33

Total 2616.29 252 10.38

Significance at .05 level.

Table XVIII focuses on the mean scores that make a

significant interaction between sex and years of teaching

experience as shown in Table XVII. The mean scores in Table

XVIII show that male faculty members with over ten years of

teaching experience were more satisfied (mean=16.28) with

their work than male faculty members with under ten years of

teaching experience (mean=15.59) whereas female faculty

110

members with under ten years of teaching experience were

more satisfied (mean^l?.00) in their work than female

faculty members with over ten years of teaching experience

(mean=15.85).

Table XVIII

COMPARISON OF MEANS FOR THE WORK ITSELF FACET DEFINED BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Means

F a C S t SndJr ?n t K " a l e s » i t h With Females With Under 10 Over 10 Under 10 Over 10 Years of Years of Years of Years of Experience Experience Experience Experience

The Work

Itself 15.59 16.28 17.00 15.85

Table XIX shows results of a two-way analysis of

variance for the two demographic classifications based on

the working conditions facet. It shows that no matter what

sources of variation—sex, years of teaching experience, and

sex by years of experiences—were sought to compare the mean

scores on each variable, the results of a two-way analysis

of variance showed no significant differences.

Testing the First Hypothesis Using One-Wav ANOVA

Results of a one-way analysis of variance for age,

degree levels, salary levels, faculty affiliations, and work

Ill

TABLE XIX

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE WORKING CONDITIONS FACET AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of Variation

Sum of Squares

df Variance Estimate

F P

Sex 1.55 1 1.55 0 .05

Years of Teaching Experience 87.49 1 87.49 3 .09 .08

Sex by Years of Experience 16.32 1 16.32 0 .57 .45

Within Cells 7059.95 249 28.35

Total 7167.04 252 28.44

positions are presented in six tables ranging from Table XX

to Table XXV. The results of one-way analysis of variance

based on mean scores of the ten facets defined by age as

shown in Table XX indicate no significant difference on each

of the ten facets of job satisfaction among faculty members

who had different levels of age at the .05 level of

significance. Table XXI also shows no significant

difference at the same .05 level of significance on each of

all facets defined by degree levels. This means that all

faculty members who attained different degree levels showed

no significant difference in job satisfaction on the ten

facets.

112

TABLE XX

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE TEN FACETS AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS BY AGE

Facets Age Means S.D. N df

Achievement

Growth

Interpersonal Rel

Recognition

Responsibility

Salary

Supervision

The Work Itself

Working Conditions

Policy and Admin.

Up to 25 25 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More

. Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46/More

29.60 29.07 28.39 28.03 27.60 24.05 23.66 23.74 27.40 25.90 25.67 25.71 21.20 19.83 20.23 19.68 2 2 . 0 0 20.90 20.54 21.32 2 6 . 6 0 21.83 21.65 22.93 48.60 42.15 42.85 42.77 18.60 16.26 15.86 16.84 29.00 27.04 26. 83 29.16 38.20 32.82 33.32 33.10

1.52 5 4.91 72 4.65 145 4.10 31 4.16 5 4.08 72 4.81 145 4.87 31 2.30 5 4.37 72 4.26 145 4.38 31 4.09 5 4.08 72 4.27 145 4.53 31 2.74 5 3.34 72 3.93 145 3.95 31 3.58 5 5.10 72 5.69 145 5.42 31 9.79 5

12.08 72 12.53 145 11.13 31 3.21 5 3.27 72 3.28 145 2.62 31 4.90 5 5.08 72 5.48 145 5.04 31 6.06 5 7.71 72 7.59 145 6.82 31

3/249 .57 .63

3/249 1.23 .30

3/249 .29 .83

3/249 .35 .79

3/249 .60 .61

3/249 1.70 .17

3/249 .44 .72

3/249 1.87 .13

3/249 1.86 .14

3/249 .81 .49

TABLE XXI

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE TEN FACETS

AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS BY DEGREE LEVELS

113

Facets Degrees Means S.D. N df F P

Achievement Bachelor's 28.34 4.82 106 1/251 .43 .51 Master's or

1/251 .43 .51

Growth Higher 28.73 4.49 147

Growth Bachelor's 23.85 4.56 106 1/251 .00 .97 Master's or

1/251 .00 .97

Higher 23.87 4.68 147 Interpersonal

4.68 147

Relations Bachelor's 25.57 4.63 106 1/251 .41 .52 Master's or

1/251 .41 .52

Higher 25.92 3.99 147 Policy and

3.99 147

Adminis-tration Bachelor's 33.13 7.80 106 1/251 .04 .84

Master's or 1/251 .04 .84

Higher 33.33 7.31 147 Recognition Bachelor's 19.61 4.41 106 1/251 2.15 .14

Master's or 1/251 2.15 .14

Higher 20.40 4.07 147 Responsi-

147

bility Bachelor's 20.36 4.10 106 1/251 2.21 .14 Master's or

1/251 2.21 .14

Salary Higher 21.07 3.46 147

Salary Bachelor's 21.90 5.97 106 1/251 .01 .90 Master's or

1/251 .01 .90

Supervision Higher 21.99 5.14 147

Supervision Bachelor's 42.40 12.69 106 1/251 .16 . 69 Master's or

1/251 .16

The Work Higher 43.01 11.80 147

The Work 11.80 147

Itself Bachelor's 16.17 3.23 106 1/251 .01 . 93 Master's or

1/251 .01

Working Higher 16.14 3.23 147

Working 3.23 147

Conditions Bachelor's 2<fCll 5.66 106 1/251 .07 .79 Master's or

1/251 .07 .79

Higher 27.29 5.10 147

114

TABLE XXII

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE TEN FACETS

AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS BY SALARY LEVELS

Facets Levels

Salary Means S.D. N df

Achievement

Growth

Interpersonal Relations

Policy and Admin.

Recognition

Responsi-bility

Salary

Supervision

The Work Itself

Working Conditions

C3 30 .91 4 .51 16 C4 27 .56 4 .33 43 C5/Higher 28 .59 4 .64 194 C3 24 .94 4 .96 16 C4 23 .93 4 .43 43 C5/Higher 23 .76 4 .65 194

C3 26 .75 4 .01 16 C4 25 .19 5 .16 43 C5/Higher 25 .83 4 .07 194

C3 34 .44 6 .26 16 C4 33 .25 8 .07 43 C5/Higher 33 .14 7 .49 194 C3 20 .12 4 .42 16 C4 20 .19 3 .79 43 C5/Higher 20 .04 4 .32 194

C3 21. .06 3, .55 16 C4 20. 53 3. ,74 43 C5/Higher 20. 80 3. 79 194 C3 21. 62 5. 54 16 C4 21. 70 5. 21 43 C5/Higher 22. 04 5. 57 194 C3 46. 50 11. 87 16 C4 42. 00 12. 54 43 C5/Higher 42. 61 12. 11 194

C3 17. 44 2. 80 16 C4 16. 19 3. 11 43 C5/Higher 16. 04 3. 27 194

C3 26. 75 5. 49 16 C4 26. 91 5. 74 43 C5/Higher 27. 32 5. 25 194

2/250 3.18 .04*

2/250 .48 .62

2/250 .84 .43

2/250 .22 .80

2/250 .02 .98

2/250

2/250

2/250

•14 .87

.10 .90

.85 .43

2/250 1.40 .25

2/250 .17 .84

Significance at .05 level.

115

However, the results of one-way ANOVA based on mean

scores of the ten facets by salary levels as shown in Table

XXII indicate no significant difference on each of the ten

facets of job satisfaction among faculty members except for

the achievement facet (F=3.18, df=2/250, p<.04). At this

point, it was not known which pairs of the sample means were

statistically significant. The Scheffe• method was used as

a post hoc hypothesis testing procedure to seek an answer.

Table XXIII shows the results of the Scheffe' post hoc

comparison. The results indicate that a pair of

TABLE XXIII

PAIRWISE COMPARISON OF SAMPLE MEANS CONTRIBUTED BY FACULTY MEMBERS

AT THREE DIFFERENT SALARY LEVELS ON THE ACHIEVEMENT FACET OF JOB SATISFACTION

G G G R R R

Means Groups P 2

P 3

P 1

27.5581 GRP 2 28.5928 GRP 3 30.9375 GRP 1 *

* Significant at .10 level.

Note: Group 1 = C3 Group 2 = C4 Group 3 = C5

116

groups namely, those who had salary classification 3 and

those who had salary classification 4 showed a significant

difference on their job satisfaction on the achievement

facet. Those who were at C3 salary level possessed more

satisfaction on the achievement facet than did those who

were at C4. There were no significant differences between

the other pairs of groups.

Table XXIV shows no significant differences among mean

scores on the ten facets by faculty members of all three

faculties—education, humanities and sciences. This means

that the factor of faculty affiliations did not make any

significant difference in faculty members' job satisfaction.

Does the fact that faculty members only teach or both

teach and administer make any statistical differences in a

comparison of their mean scores on their job satisfaction?

This should be considered a controversial issue. Table XXV

reveals that each paired group of instructors only and

administrators who performed teaching showed no significant

differences on mean scores of the facets of job satisfaction

except the working conditions facet (F=4.84, df=1/251,

p<.03). The difference between the mean scores is 1.50 and

the instructors showed more satisfaction with working

conditions than did the administrators who taught.

117

TABLE XXIV

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE TEN FACETS AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY FACULTY AFFILIATIONS

Facets Faculties Means S.D. N df F P

Achieve-ment Education 29.01 4.55 75 2/250 .97 .38 Humanities 28.69 4.31 96

2/250 .97 .38

Growth Sciences 28.01 5.02 82

Growth Education 24.52 4.40 75 2/250 1.08 .34 Humanities 23.57 4.64 96 2/250 1.08 .34

Sciences 23.60 4.78 82 Inter-

4.78 82

personal Relations Education 25.77 3.86 75 2/250 .00 1.00 Humanities i 25.79 4.35 96

2/250 .00 1.00

Policy and Sciences 25.77 4.56 82

Policy and 4.56 82

Admin. Education 34.23 7.47 75 2/250 1.16 .32 Humanities 32.47 7.74 96 2/250 .32

Sciences 33.26 7.23 82 Recog-

7.23 82

nition Education 20.52 4.07 75 2/250 . 63 .53 Humanities 19.96 4.40 96 2/250 .53

Sciences 19.79 4.17 82 Responsi-

4.17 82

bility Education 20.89 3.75 75 2/250 . 06 .94 Humanities 20.75 3.71 96 2/250 .94

Salary Sciences 20.68 3.83 82

Salary Education 22.23 5.17 75 2/250 .13 .87 Humanities 21.88 5.62 96 2/250 .87

Sciences 21.79 5.68 82 Super-

5.68 82

vision Education Humanities

43.27 42.46

2.36 2.50

75 96

2/250 .10 .91

The Work Sciences 42.63 1.70 82

The Work 1.70 82

Itself Education 16.27 3.35 75 2/250 .10 .90 Humanities 16.16 2.91 96 2/250 .10 .90

Working Sciences 16.04 3.47 82

Working 3.47 82

Conditions Education 27.40 5.83 75 2/250 .62 .54 Humanities 27.53 4.49 96 2/250 .62 .54

Sciences 26.68 5.77 82

118

TABLE XXV

COMPARISON OF JOB SATISFACTION BASED ON THE TEN FACETS AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS BY WORK POSITIONS

Facets Positions Means S.D. N df

Achievement

Growth

Inter-personal Relations

Policy and Adminis-tration

Recog-nition

Instructor 28.86 4.78 102 Administrator 28.36 4.52 151

Instructor 24.10 4.67 102 Administrator 23.70 4.59 151

Responsi-bility

Salary

Super-vision

The Work Itself

Working Condi-tions

Instructor 26.27 4.15 102 Administrator 25.44 4.32 151

Instructor 33.18 7.33 102 Administrator 33.29 7.64 151

Instructor 20.09 4.38 102 Administrator 20.06 4.14 151

Instructor 20.59 3.79 102 Administrator 20.89 3.73 151

Instructor 22.01 5.86 102 Administrator 21.92 5.25 151

Instructor Administrator

42.09 12.39 102 43.20 12.02 151

Instructor 16.29 3.23 102 Administrator 16.05 3.22 151

Instructor 28.11 5.20 102 Administrator 26.61 5.36 151

1/251 .71 .40

1/251 .45 .50

1/251 2.32 .13

1/251 .01 .90

1/251 .00 .96

1/251 .40 .52

1/251 .02 .90

1/251 .51 .47

1/251 .34 .56

1/251 4.84 .03*

Significance at .05 level

119

Testing the Second Null Hypothesis

The purpose of this section is to present the data

derived from testing the second null hypothesis which

compares the overall job satisfaction of faculty members on

the basis of demographic classifications. The research

question is restated below.

significant differences exist between faculty

members' demographic classifications and their overall

job satisfaction?

The research question can be translated into the following

null hypothesis:

No significant difference exists in faculty members'

job satisfaction between or among the following

groups (1) male and female faculty, (2) faculty with

under ten years of teaching experience and those with

over ten years of teaching experience, (3) different

groups of faculty classified by work positions, age,

salary levels, academic degrees, and faculty

affiliations.

A one-way ANOVA and a two-way ANOVA were used to test

the data for the second null hypothesis. A two-way ANOVA

was used to test this hypothesis on sex and years of

teaching experience for each of the ten facets of job

satisfaction. A one-way ANOVA was used to test the second

120

hypothesis on age, degree levels, salary levels, faculty

affiliations, and work positions for each of the ten facets

of job satisfaction. The level of significance was set at

.05. The mean scores for overall job satisfaction among

faculty members as defined by sex and years of teaching

experience are shown in Table XXVI.

TABLE XXVI

MEANS FOR THE OVERALL SATISFACTION (ITEM 68) DEFINED BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Classification Number of Instructors Means

Males 146 3.97

Females 107 4.17

Instructors with Under 10 Years Experience 70 3.98

Instructors with Over 10 Years Experience 183 4.08

Males with Under 10 Years Experience 37 3.81

Males with Over 10 Years Experience 109 4.03

Females with Under 10 Years Experience 33

00 1—1 •sr

Females with Over 10 Years Experience

74 4.16

121

Testing the Second Hypothesis Using a Two-Way ANOVA

To find significant differences in faculty members'

overall job satisfaction according to their sex and years of

teaching experience, a two-way analysis of variance was

employed. Results of the analysis are presented in Table

XXVII.

TABLE XXVII

COMPARISON OF OVERALL SATISFACTION BASED ON A SINGLE ITEM (ITEM 68) AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY SEX AND YEARS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE

Sources of sum of df Variance F p Variation Squares Estimate

Sex 2 .50 1 2.50 3.12 .08

Years of Teaching Experience 0 .61 1 0.61 .76 .38

Sex by Years of Experience 0, .70 1 0.70 .87 .35

Within Cells Total

199. 203.

56 22

249 252

0.80 0.81

Results showed no significant difference in overall

satisfaction between male and female faculty members.

Neither did significant differences emerge between the

faculty with under ten years of teaching experience and

122

those with over ten years of teaching experience. The

interaction between sex and years of teaching experience did

not show any statistical significance.

Testing the Second Null Hypothesis Using a One-Way ANOVA

The results of testing the second null hypothesis by

using a one-way analysis of variance for age, degree levels,

salary levels, faculty affiliations, and work positions are

presented in Table XXVIII. Table XXVIII shows mean scores

and results of a one-way analysis of variance for five

demographic classifications relating to overall satisfaction

based on a single item (item 68). Like sex and years of

teaching experience as shown in Table XXVII, no significant

difference between the mean scores of any two-group com-

parison among the variables age, degree levels, salary

levels, faculty affiliations, and positions was revealed.

This finding indicates that faculty members who belong to

different categories in demographic classifications had no

significant difference in overall job satisfaction.

Comparing the Results of This Research With the Results Discovered by Vatthaisong

As mentioned before, the results discovered by

Vatthaasong among faculty members in northeast Thailand were

based on sex and years of teaching experience. A part of

the results m this study, therefore, was compared to the

results of his study on the same basis. Comparison will be

123

TABLE XXVIII

COMPARISON OF OVERALL SATISFACTION BASED ON A SINGLE ITEM (ITEM 68) AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS

BY ALL THE SELECTED VARIABLES

Variables Categories Means S.D. N df F P

Age Up to 25 26 to 35 36 to 45 46 or More

4.80 4.07 4.02 4.06

1.30 .88 .82

1.18

5 72

145 31

3/249 3.04 .08

Degree Levels Bachelor's Master's or

Higher

4.06

4.05

.95

.86

106

147

1/251 .00 .98

Salary Levels C3 C4 C5 or Higher

4.06 3.93 4.08

1.12 1.01 .85

16 43

194

2/250 .50 .60

Faculty Affiliations Education

Humanities Sciences

4.07 4.01 4.10

.93

.90

.87

75 96 82

2/250 .21 .81

Work Positions Teacher Administrator

4.11 4.02

.95

.86 102 151

1/251 .58 .44

based on three categories: first, the level of faculty

satisfaction with each of the ten facets; second, job

satisfaction on each of the ten facets; and third, overall

job satisfaction among faculty members. The research

question is restated below.

Are central Thailand faculty members' job satisfaction

levels congruent with Vatthaisong's findings of faculty

members in northeast Thailand?

124

The Level of Faculty Satisfaction

Table XXIX shows the level of faculty job satisfaction

on each of the ten facets based on the two studies. The

similar results of these two studies indicated faculty

members' satisfaction with aspects of their work such as

opportunities to grow, achieve, be responsible in their job,

be recognized by others, and enjoy teaching. These results

also indicated satisfaction with aspects of their

environment such as interaction with colleagues, the

characteristics of supervision, policy and administration,

and working conditions. Both studies showed that faculty

members' responses fell more often in the slightly and

moderately satisfied categories with their jobs than in the

very satisfied.

The different results of these two studies according to

the level of faculty job satisfaction are as follows:

1. While Vatthaisong's study showed that the faculty

members ranked salary as dissatisfactory, the present study

showed that the faculty members in the central region ranked

salary as satisfactory, one rank above supervision, the

facet which was placed at the lowest level of satisfaction.

2. While Vatthaisong"s study showed that the faculty

members' ranked policy and administration carried on in

their institutions as the lowest of the satisfactory facets,

faculty m the present study ranked policy and administra-

tion above supervision and salary.

TABLE XXIX

COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF THE TWO STUDIES ON THE LEVEL OF FACULTY JOB SATISFACTION

WITH EACH OF THE TEN FACETS

125

_ Yatthaisong's Results The Present Study's Results Facets % Ranks Facets % Ranks

Achievement 78 .43 3 Achievement 78 .60 3

Growth 71 .70 6 Growth 73 .00 6

Interpersonal Relations 80 .38 1

Interpersonal Relations 84 .80 1

Policy and Administration 58 .78 9

Policy and Administration 62 .60 8

Recognition 77. .92 4 Recognition 76, .20 4

Responsibility 77. 29 5 Responsibility 80. 70 2

Salary 41. 93 10 Salary 62. 30 9

Supervision 62. 24 8 Supervision 57. 60 10

The Work Itself 78. 92 2 The Work Itself 74. 40 5

Working Conditions 69. 27 7

Working Conditions 71. 30 7

Note: In Vatthaisong's Study, n = 192. ~ In the Present Study, n = 253.

3. While Vatthaisong's and the present study's results

showed that the faculty members were satisfied with the work

itself and responsibility, the former study indicated that

the faculty members showed a little stronger feeling toward

the work itself than toward responsibility (the work itself

= 78.92%, responsibility = 77.29%). This indicator is

126

opposite the direction of results in the present study,

(responsibility = 80.70%, the work itself = 74.40%).

Job Satisfaction on Each of the Ten Facets

The second category for the comparison of the two

studies is based on faculty members' satisfaction on the ten

facets according to sex and years of teaching experience,

and on interaction between these two variables. Vatthai-

song s study indicated that faculty members with over ten

years of teaching experience were more satisfied with

achievement and working conditions than were faculty members

with under ten years of teaching experience. No significant

difference emerged between male and female faculty members

in any facets.

The results of his study are quite different in several

respects from those found in the present study. The present

study shows that there was a significant difference between

male and female faculty members on the interpersonal

relations facet. Female faculty showed more satisfaction

(mean = 26.57) in interpersonal relations than male faculty

(mean = 25.20). There was also a significant interaction

between sex and years of teaching experience on the growth

facet; male faculty members with over ten years of teaching

experience were more satisfied (mean = 24.08) in their

growth than male faculty members with under ten years

experience (mean = 22.84) whereas female faculty members

127

with under ten years teaching experience were more satisfied

(mean = 25.18) in their growth than females with over ten

years teaching experience (mean = 23.46). Another

significant interaction between sex and years of teaching

experience showed the same directions as above for the work

itself facet (mean for males with over ten years = 16.28,

under ten years = 15.59; mean for females with under ten

years = 17.00, over ten years = 15.85).

Other differences between the results of Vatthaisong's

study and the results of the present study, concerning years

of teaching experience, are that while the faculty who

possessed more years of teaching experience in his study

were significantly more satisfied with achievement and

working conditions, this study showed no significant

differences among them on any of these facets.

Overall Job Satisfaction Among Faculty Members

Regarding overall satisfaction, Vatthaisong's findings

indicated that faculty members with over ten years of

teaching experience were more satisfied with their job than

were faculty with under ten years of teaching experience.

No significant difference emerged between male and female

faculty members for overall satisfaction. The present study

findings indicate no significant differences between sexes

or different levels of years of teaching experience or

interaction of these two variables according to overall

satisfaction.

128

Concerning the level of overall satisfaction,

Vatthaisong's finding indicated that over 77 percent (77.09)

of the responses revealed more satisfaction than

dissatisfaction. The present study also showed the same

result expressed by over 77 percent (77.90) of the

responses. The similar findings of these two studies

support the conclusion that, overall, faculty members were

satisfied with their jobs.

Summary

The findings of the present study showed that faculty

members at non-metropolitan teachers colleges in central

Thailand revealed satisfaction with each of the ten facets

of job satisfaction. However, their responses tended to

fall more frequently into the categories of slightly and

moderately satisfied than into the category of very

satisfied. They expressed slight satisfaction with the

supervision facet of job satisfaction. All the results

concerning the level of job satisfaction were quite similar

to those found by Vatthaisong except for his respondents'

attitudes toward the facet of policy and administration.

The present study did not find the same results on salary as

did Vatthaisong's. He found that faculty members' feelings

tended toward dissatisfaction concerning salary.

The findings of this study showed further that faculty

members at non-metropolitan teachers colleges in central

129

Thailand revealed no significant differences on each of the

t-en facets of job satisfaction based on academic degrees,

age, and faculty affiliations. Nevertheless, the faculty

members did reveal significant differences on some of the

ten facets. Faculty members with different salary levels

showed a significant difference concerning achievement. The

Scheffe' method showed that among three groups of those

whose salary levels were different, faculty members who had

salary classification 3 were more satisfied in achievement

than those who had salary classification 4. Concerning the

working conditions facet, instructors were more satisfied

with working conditions than were administrators.

Vatthaisong's findings revealed no significant

differences between male and female faculty members on the

ten facets of job satisfaction. On the contrary, the

present study found that there was a significant difference

between male and female faculty members on the interpersonal

relations facet. Female faculty members were more satisfied

with interpersonal relations than were male faculty members.

While Vatthaisong found that faculty members with over ten

years of teaching experience were more satisfied with

achievement and working conditions than were faculty members

with under ten years of teaching experience, the present

researcher found no significant difference on any facets of

job satisfaction between those who have different levels of

years of teaching experience.

130

The present study found significant interaction between

sex and years of teaching experience on the growth and work

itself facets. The findings are that male faculty members

with over ten years experience were more satisfied with

growth and the work itself than were male faculty members

with under ten years of teaching experience while female

faculty members with under ten years experience were more

satisfied with growth and the work itself than were female

faculty members with over ten years of teaching experience.

Vatthaisong did not find any significant interaction between

sex and years of teaching experience on any facets of job

satisfaction as did this study.

Regarding overall satisfaction, Vatthaisong found that

faculty members with over ten years of teaching experience

were more satisfied with their jobs than were faculty with

under ten years of teaching experience. Yet, he found no

significant difference between male and female faculty

members for overall job satisfaction. The present re-

searcher found no significant differences between groups

according to sex, years of teaching experience, and inter-

action between these two variables concerning overall

satisfaction. All in all, the findings of both studies

regarding the level of overall satisfaction indicated that

faculty members were satisfied with their jobs.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The purpose of this study was to investigate and

analyze job satisfaction of faculty members at non-

metropolitan teachers colleges in central Thailand. The

investigation was based on ten facets of job satisfaction,

namely achievement, recognition, growth, the work itself,

responsibilities, salary, administrative policies,

supervision, interpersonal relations, and working condition.

The emphases of the study were not only to discover the

results but also to compare some of the results of this

study to Vatthaisong's (1982/1983) findings. The emphases

were as follows:

1. To determine the level of job satisfaction among

faculty members with respect to each of the ten

facets cited above;

2. To compare job satisfaction among faculty members

on each of the ten facets and determine whether any

significant differences exist on the basis of their

demographic classifications (sex and years of

teaching experience at the college level, salary

131

132

levels, academic degrees, age, position as an

instructor or administrator, and faculty

affiliations);

3. To compare overall job satisfaction among faculty

members according to their demographic classi-

fications ;

4. To compare the results of this research with the

findings of Vatthaisong, especially those dealing

with sex and years of teaching experience.

The specific research questions were the following.

1. To what extent do the faculty members express job

satisfaction as measured by the ten facets of a

modified form of the Wood Job Satisfaction

Instrument?

2. Do significant correlations exist between faculty

members' demographic classifications and their job

satisfaction on the ten facets of a modified form

of the Wood Job Satisfaction Instrument?

3. Do significant differences exist between faculty

members' demographic classifications and their

overall job satisfaction?

4. Are central Thailand faculty members' job

satisfaction levels congruent with Vatthaisong's

findings of faculty members in northeast Thailand?

133

The following hypotheses were tested. (1) No

significant differences exist in faculty members' job

satisfaction on each of the ten facets of job satisfaction

between or among the following groups: male and female

faculty, faculty with under ten years of teaching experience

and those with over ten years of teaching experience, groups

of faculty with varying salary levels, academic degrees,

age, positions as instructors or administrators, and faculty

affiliations• (2) No significant difference exists in

faculty members job satisfaction between or among the

following groups (1) male and female faculty, (2) faculty

with under ten years of teaching experience and those with

over ten years of teaching experience, (3) different groups

faculty classified by work positions, age, salary levels,

academic degrees, and faculty affiliations.

Data were obtained through administration of the

Faculty Job Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction Scale developed by

Wood (1973/1974). The instrument in the Thai version

employed by this researcher is different in part from the

one used by Vatthaisong in the content of demographic

classifications. A two-part questionnaire comprises the

instrument used by this researcher. The first part concerns

the seven demographic classifications: sex, years of

teaching experience, salary levels, academic degrees, age,

position as an instructor or administrator, and faculty

134

affiliations. The second part includes 67 items divided

into ten facets, namely, achievement, growth, interpersonal

relations, policy and administration, recognition,

responsibility, salary, supervision, the work itself, and

working conditions, and one single item (item 68) dealing

with overall satisfaction.

Each item of the second part of a modified form of the

Wood Job Satisfaction Instrument was designed to gather

responses on a six-point scale (1-6) from lowest to highest

satisfaction. For each item, the responses of 1, 2, or 3

were interpreted as dissatisfaction whereas responses of 4,

5, or 6 were interpreted as satisfaction.

The sample was drawn from the population of six non-

metropolitan teachers colleges in central Thailand. A total

of 288 faculty members comprised the random sample. The

questionnaires were administered to the selected faculty

members of each institution from the middle of March to the

middle of May, 1985. A total of 253 faculty members or

87.85 percent of the selected sample participated in this

study.

A one-way ANOVA was employed to test a significant

difference in faculty members' job satisfaction according to

their salary levels, academic degrees, age, position as an

instructor or administrator, and faculty affiliations. A

two-way ANOVA was used to test a significant difference

135

between faculty members' job satisfaction according to their

sex and years of teaching experience. The null hypotheses

were tested at the .05 level of significance.

Findings and Conclusions

In levels of faculty job satisfaction, findings

revealed that the major sources of satisfaction for faculty

members included achievement, growth, interpersonal

relations, recognition, responsibility, the work itself,

working conditions, policy and administration, salary and

supervision. Among the major sources of satisfaction,

salary, as well as policy and administration rendered the

least satisfaction. The results of this study on the level

of satisfaction concerning salary were similar to those of a

study contributed by Jariyavidyanont (1978/1979). Moreover,

the findings for these two facets--salary, and policy and

administration--are congruent with several studies conducted

by Hansen and Kramer (1978), Ramsey (1982), and Seegmiller

(1977). It may be concluded that faculty members'

satisfaction on these two facets should be considered a

critical issue. Responses relating to supervision tended

slightly toward satisfaction. This means that faculty

members found interaction with administrators and

supervisors to be the least rewarding aspect of their

teaching experience (Hansen and Kramer, 1978; Winkler,

1982). Their slight level of satisfaction on this crucial

136

facet demands special attention. Regarding interpersonal

relations, the result is similar to that in previous studies

(Savage, 1967/1968; Wickstrom, 1971; Holdaway, 1978;

Sorcinelli, 1978, and Vatthaisong, 1982/1983).

The findings of this study and Vatthaisong's research

contributed both similar and different perspectives

concerning the level of job satisfaction. Most respondents

for both studies showed satisfaction in the work itself and

in responsibility. Results from the present study showed

more strength of satisfaction on responsibility than on the

work itself (rank 2 and 5 respectively) whereas Vat-

thaisong" s study showed exactly the opposite. All other

levels of facets of job satisfaction in both studies were

arranged in the same manner, by ranks, except for the last 3

ranks (rank 8, 9 and 10) on policy and administration,

salary, and supervision. Supervision (rank 8) in Vatthai-

song' s study was interpreted as the least satisfactory, and

he also included working conditions (rank 7) in the same

category, while the present study considered supervision as

the most critical area (rank 10). The interpretation of

this finding is that supervision provided only slight

satisfaction. Instead, Vatthaisong's study considered

policy and administration a factor that provided only slight

satisfaction (rank 9). The present study interpreted policy

and administration and salary as factors rendering least

137

satisfaction (rank 8 and 9). Vatthaisong's respondents

overtly attributed dissatisfaction to the salary factor

(rank 10).

The present study found that faculty members did not

show a significant difference on each of the ten facets of

job satisfaction based on academic degrees, age, and faculty

affiliations. In testing the hypothesis, the present study

showed five significant findings in job satisfaction between

groups on several variables. First, faculty members with

salary classification 3 (usually lower salary) were more

satisfied in achievement than were those who had salary

classification 4 (usually higher salary). Second, in-

structors were more satisfied with working conditions than

were administrators. Third, female faculty members were

more satisfied with interpersonal relations than were male

faculty members. Fourth and fifth, sex and years of

teaching experience shared significant interaction on the

growth and work itself facets. Significant interaction for

these two facets worked as a contrast. While male faculty

members with over ten years experience were more satisfied

with these two facets than were male faculty members with

under ten years of teaching experience, female faculty

members with over ten years experience were less satisfied

with these two facets than were females with ten or fewer

years of experience.

138

It can be concluded that the greater time male faculty

members were engaged in their profession, the more job

satisfaction in growth and the work itself among them would

increase. The finding was different from the finding

concerning female faculty members. The greater time female

faculty members were involved in teaching, the less job

satisfaction among them occurred in both growth and

teaching.

Vatthaisong*s findings revealed no significant

differences between male and female faculty members on the

ten facets of job satisfaction. He did find that faculty

members with over ten years of teaching experience were more

satisfied with achievement and working conditions than were

faculty members with under ten years of teaching experience.

&lso found a significant difference in overall

satisfaction among two groups of faculty who had a different

level of years of teaching experience.

All other findings in both studies which were not

mentioned above yielded no statistical significance. Both

studies had congruent confirmation that, overall, faculty

members were satisfied with their jobs.

Implications

Findings of this study have implications for governing

bodies, college administrators and faculty members, and

others who are involved in improving policy, administration

139

and supervision, and in fulfilling the needs of faculty

members at teachers colleges in Thailand.

1. The least satisfactory facet, salary, among faculty

members at teachers colleges in northeast Thailand ranked as

dissatisfactory in Vatthaisong's study. This implies that

increment of salaries among faculty members in the northeast

region should be employed; this should work well but may not

be the best strategy when being adopted in the other region,

where close attention should first be given to the area of

supervision.

2. While faculty members in Vatthaisong's study were

satisfied only slightly with policy and administration and

had a low level of satisfaction in the supervision facet,

faculty members in the present study showed slight

satisfaction with supervision and a low level of

satisfaction in the policy and administration facet. These

results imply that while faculty members in the northeast

region were hardly satisfied with administrative policies,

handed down several steps to them by the Ministry of

Education, their feelings toward their supervisors who

enforced the policies were not as critical as those of the

administrative policies per se. By determining the above

results, faculty members in the present study rendered their

level of satisfaction for each of the two facets in the

opposite order. If there were possible latent dis-

140

satisfaction inhibiting their feelings, faculty members in

Vatthaisong's study would put more blame on administrative

policies than on supervisors whereas, in this study, they

would blame their supervisors rather than blame

administrative policies.

3. While the present study shows that one of the major

sources of satisfaction for faculty members included working

conditions, Vatthaisong's study in a different region showed

that working conditions provided the least satisfaction.

This implies that teachers perceived working conditions at

teachers colleges in northeast Thailand were not as good as

those at non-metropolitan teachers colleges in central

Thailand.

4. Findings on the level of satisfaction indicate that

faculty members in Vatthaisong's study were satisfied with

and enjoyed teaching as a task designed for their

responsibility, with which they were also satisfied.

Faculty members in the present study were satisfied with

their responsibility as well but did not indicate their

preference for teaching as faculty members in Vatthaisong's

study did. Generally speaking, faculty members in

Vatthaisong's study seemed to give meanings to teaching and

responsibility in a different way from ones given by those

in the present study. The former could say that teaching

was their major responsibility. On the other hand, the

141

latter could say that they were satisfied with their

responsibility but that their major preference in their area

of responsibility was not teaching per se.

5. The finding that faculty members with salary

classification 3 were more satisfied in achievement than

those who had salary classification 4 (usually higher

salary) contributes an implication. Those faculty members

who are at salary classification 3 are those who are usually

younger, have a bachelor's degree and have recently entered

their profession at the teachers college. It is possible

that they are proud and feel it an honor to be able to teach

at the teachers college. They have struggled and have

overcome high competition to be selected as an instructor.

In general, rank classification 4 belongs to graduates with

a master's degree. The competition is not so severe for

this classification because! master's degree holders are not

so plentiful as bachelor's degree holders in Thailand. From

this speculation, it is feasible that faculty members with

salary classification 3 were more satisfied in their

achievement than those with salary classification 4. While

those with salary classification 5 (usually promoted from

level 4) seemed to be less satisfied than those in

classification 3 and more satisfied than those in

classification 4, the results did not show any statistical

significance.

142

In addition, the faculty members who had salary

classification 4 might set their personal goal attainment

higher than the other group. Their students' growth and

success might reach below their criteria. All the possi-

bilities above may attribute to less satisfaction among

faculty members with salary classification 4.

6. One of the research results in this study shows

that instructors were more satisfied with working conditions

than were administrators. This result suggests that ad-

ministrators may be overworked because they have two roles--

being an instructor and administrator simultaneously. Work

schedules, number of classes, number of hours both in office

and classes and other conditions seemed to be heavy for

them.

7. The finding which shows that female faculty members

were more satisfied with interpersonal relations than male

faculty members implies that female faculty members enjoyed

relationships with their students and colleagues, both

personal and job-related, more than did the male faculty

members.

8. Results in this study show that the longer the

period of time male faculty members were engaged in their

profession, the more job satisfaction in growth and the work

itself would increase; this was opposite to the results

contributed by female faculty members. This implies that

143

female faculty members with under ten years of teaching

experience, who were usually younger than those with over

ten years of teaching experience, tended to have opportu-

nities to participate in in-service education and to further

their own study for a higher degree. They were involved in

seminars, conferences, workshops, etc., and tended to find

teaching enjoyable. They were possibly more active,

attractive, energetic and were developing themselves to be

ideal professionals. The satisfaction may not be true for

male faculty members who had less experience, but it may be

true for those with longer experience. Male faculty members

with over ten years of teaching experience may not yet be

old and the opportunities to grow in their professions are

still wide; this should contribute to satisfaction in the

teaching profession. Male faculty members with under ten

years of teaching experience seemed to like their teaching

profession, but need to gain growth and feel more

satisfaction in their teaching.

9. The nearly identical levels of overall job

satisfaction in both studies (over 77%, but somewhat

different in decimal points) implies that overall, faculty

members in different regions were likewise satisfied with

their jobs.

10. The findings show that some of the results of the

studies in which the same instrument was used are different.

144

The implication is that different environments in different

regions result in different satisfactions among the faculty

members who reside in those regions.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are divided into two

parts. The first part presents recommendations for

administrative practices. The second part presents

recommendations for further study.

Recommendations for Administrative Practices

The findings of this study are useful for governments,

top, middle, and immediate administrators or supervisors,

faculty members and other people involved in improving

administrative policy and fulfilling the needs of faculty

members at teachers colleges in Thailand.

1. It is recommended that the crucial areas in policy

and administration, salary, and supervision in both studies

be thoroughly examined. Faculty members" salaries at

northeast teachers colleges need careful attention. Faculty

members in the central non-metropolitan region need a better

image of supervision. Administrative leadership among

administrators under Thai bureaucratic structures is

essentially needed. Programs for development of

administrative leadership and skills for administrators

among and within teachers colleges should be held regularly.

145

In addition, administrators need to be fair and honest.

Faculty members in the northeast region also need better

supervision.

The slight satisfaction and the low level of

satisfaction with the policy and administration facet among

faculty members in the northeast region and the central non-

metropolitan region ,respectively, revealed the need for

improvement in this area. Improvement efforts should focus

on the following: individual faculty members should be

involved in making decisions; faculty members should be

informed about matters affecting them; administrative

policies and procedures should be made available to faculty;

policies should meet faculty needs, and policies and

procedures should be actually followed.

2. It is recommended that opportunities for increased

responsibility and growth in education both in in-service

and formal education should be made available to faculty,

especially those in classification 4.

It is recommended that those who are both

administrator and teacher coincidentally be given fewer

class responsibilities than those who teach only. This will

result in their having more time for course preparations and

for administrative work. This is a way to increase

administrators satisfaction in working conditions.

146

4. It is recommended that male faculty members with

under ten years of teaching experience and female faculty

members with over ten years of teaching experience be given

more involvement in seminars, conferences, workshops, in-

service education, and further study to earn a higher

degree. Without those incentives, teaching alone may not be

able to increase their satisfaction to the same level

attained by those male faculty members with over ten years

of teaching experience and female faculty members with under

ten years of teaching experience.

5. Even though faculty members in both studies seemed

to be satisfied with their jobs in several facets, the

frequency of their responses tended more toward slightly and

moderately satisfied rather than very satisfied. Based on

careful evaluation of the findings in both studies,

administrators should develop means for improving faculty

members' job satisfaction to the highest level.

Recommendations for Further Study

1. A study should be conducted to compare faculty job

satisfaction between faculty members at teachers colleges in

the metropolitan area and faculty members in non-

metropolitan areas.

2. Further studies should include the following

demographic classifications: academic ranks, size of the

institution, and areas of teaching*.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hansen, G.L. & Kramer, R.E. (1978). Iowa postsecondary vocation-technical teacher retention study. Community Junior College Research Quarterly, 2, 255-258.

Holdaway, E.A. (1978). Facet and overall satisfaction of teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly. 14 (1), 30-47. ~

Jariyavidyanont, S. (1979). Job satisfaction of Nida faculty members (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 5353A. ~ ~ ~

Ramsey, J.K. (1982). Faculty perceptions of institutional quality and vitality. Jacksonville, FL: Florida Association of Community Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 084)

Savage, R.M. (1968). A study of teacher satisfaction and attitudes: Causes and effects (Doctoral dissertation Auburn University, 1967). Dissertation Abstracts International, 28, 3948A. ~~

Seegmiller, J.F. (1977). Job satisfaction of faculty and staff at the college of eastern Utah. Provo, Utah: Office of Institutional Research College of Eastern 489^' Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 139

Sorcinelli, M.D. (1978). Faculty attitudes at Indiana University School of Dentistry. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University School of Dentistry. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 187 282)

Vatthaisong, A. (1983). A study of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among faculty members in teacher training institutions in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 468A.

Wickstrom, R.A. (1971). An investigation into job satisfaction among teachers (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts International. 32 . 1249A. ~

147

148

Winkler, L.D. (1982). Job satisfaction of university faculty in the United States (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 696A.

Wood, O.R. (1974). An analysis of faculty motivation to work in the North Carolina community college system (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 9 0 I A 7 ~

APPENDIX A

TABLES XXX AND XXXI

149

150

TABLE XXX

SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS AT SIX NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES IN CENTRAL THAILAND,

DEFINED BY SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CLASSIFICATIONS

„ . U 1 Col-* Col.2 Col. 3 Col. 4 Col.5 Col. 6 Variable N % N % N % N % N % N %

Sex:

Male 25 58.1 25 59.5 29 67.4 34 70.8 19 51.4 14 35.0 Female 18 41.9 17 40.5 14 32.6 14 29.2 18 48.6 26 65.0

A y 6 *

1 2 , 3 0 0 , 0 2 4 , 7 1 2 , 1 0 1 2.5 26 to 35 10 23.3 8 19.0 6 14.0 23 47.9 13 35.1 12 30 0 36 to 45 29 67.4 26 61.9 27 62.8 23 47.9 20 54.1 20 50.0 46 or More 3 7.0 8 19.0 8 18.6 1 2.1 4 10.8 7 17 5

Degrees:

Bachelor s 13 30.2 13 31.0 19 44.2 23 47.9 16 43 2 22 55 0 Master's 0 0' v

or Higher 30 69.8 29 69.0 24 55.8 25 52.1 21 56.8 18 45.0 X 6 3X s or Teaching: 10 Years or Less 12 27.9 4 9.5 7 16.3 25 52.1 9 24.3 13 32.5

More Than

10 Yrs. 31 72.1 38 90.5 36 83.7 23 47.9 28 75.7 27 67.5 w e j l s r y

Levels: C 3 0 0.0 2 4,8 1 2.3 5 10.4 1 2.7 7 17.5 C4 10 23.3 4 9..5 5 11.6 14 29.2 5 13.5 5 12.5 C 5 3 3 76-7 36 85.7 37 86.0 29 60.4 31 83.8 28 70.0

Faculty Affilia-tions :

Education 17 39.5 13 31.0 14 32.6 13 27.1 10 27.0 8 20.0 Humanities 16 37.2 15 35.7 13 30.2 19 39.6 14 37.8 19 47 5 Sciences 10 23.3 14 33.3 16 37.2 16 33.3 13 35.1 13 32*5

Positions: [nstruct adminis-trator 28 65.1 23 54.8 29 67.4 33 68.8 17 45.9 21 52.5

Instructor 15 34.9 19 45.2 14 32.6 15 31.3 20 54.1 19 47 5 Admmis-

Note : College 1 = Chantha Buri Teachers College, College 2 = Nakhon Pathom Teachers College, College 3 = Nakhon Sawan Teachers College, College 4 = Karnchana Buri Teachers College, College 5 = Ayuthaya Teachers College, College 6 = Chachoengsao Teachers College.

151

Item No,

1. 2 . 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 2 0 . 21. 22 . 23. 24. 25. 26 . 27. 2 8 . 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38.

TABLE XXXI

RESPONSE FREQUENCY FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE BASED ON ITEMS

Dissatisfied Satisfied VD MD SD VD MS VS

2 12 34 99 98 8 16 18 53 91 70 5 11 16 56 117 51 2 3 8 37 98 99 8 1 7 35 116 82 12 3 8 43 110 84 5 0 5 28 106 107 7 3 12 41 111 78 8

17 28 47 83 70 8 1 11 48 106 77 10 3 18 54 102 70 6 5 14 48 106 73 7

11 12 37 100 82 11 2 10 21 79 118 23 2 11 26 91 98 25 2 8 33 104 98 8 1 12 37 115 80 8 0 6 25 114 102 6 3 12 20 103 106 9

10 14 59 107 60 3 14 18 63 104 49 5 6 22 67 100 53 5 9 12 46 100 75 11

10 28 57 107 46 5 8 28 56 105 52 4 6 31 71 101 41 3

10 31 60 116 34 2 11 29 75 90 47 1 6 10 32 122 73 10

13 7 43 109 72 9 4 7 32 113 88 9 8 18 42 105 70 10 5 16 58 108 62 4 8 8 50 113 70 4 5 5 35 109 88 11 1 11 35 93 97 16 1 11 31 111 89 10 2 9 33 124 78 7

152

TABLE XXXI (Continued)

Item No. Dissatisfied

39. 40. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67.

Total Percentage Total Average Percentage 68.

Percentage Average

593 3.5

1191 7.0

29.8 3 7

1.2 2.8 2 2 . 2

3277 19.3

46 18.2

VD MD SD SS MS VS

13 17 55 103 59 6 9 21 53 114 51 5

22 46 55 89 38 3 12 20 47 105 63 6 9 22 58 94 63 7 8 16 61 103 59 6

21 20 81 86 41 4 24 25 59 86 50 9 22 31 57 88 46 9 9 22 51 101 63 7

12 30 56 105 45 5 15 32 72 81 49 4 19 33 63 88 44 6 26 21 47 100 52 7 20 30 57 91 51 4 29 26 77 71 40 10 23 34 59 90 39 8 3 16 54 110 61 9 5 11 68 104 55 10 2 12 52 112 68 7 1 8 28 99 103 14 3 10 40 123 65 12 0 13 41 119 70 10 5 15 52 107 73 1

18 24 52 107 49 3 19 26 65 91 47 5 2 14 43 126 60 8 2 20 43 107 75 6

6879 4514 40.6 26.6

497 2.9

70.1 124 63 10

49.0 24.9 4.0 77.9

MD SS VS

Note: n - 253. VD = Very Dissatisfied, oderately Dissatisfied, SD = Slightly Dissatisfied,

Slightly Satisfied, MS = Moderately Satisfied Very Satisfied. *

APPENDIX B

INSTRUMENT

153

154

JOB SATISFACTION AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS AT NON-METROPOLITAN TEACHERS COLLEGES

IN CENTRAL THAILAND

Part I

Instructions

Please respond to each item by checking the appropriate alternative that best describes or applies to you.

1. Your sex:

(a) Male

(b) Female

2. Your age:

(a) 25 years or less

(b) 26-35 years

(c) 36-45 years

(d) 46 and over

3. Your highest level of education:

(a) Bachelor's degree

(b) Master's degree or higher

4. Years of your teaching experience at college level:

(a) 10 years or less

(b) More than 10 years

5. Your salary level:

(a) C3

(b) C4

(c) C5

155

6. Your faculty you belong to:

(a) Faculty of education

(b) Faculty of humanities and social sciences

(c) Faculty of sciences

7. Your work nature:

(a) Teaching only

(b) Both teaching and administering

Part II

Instructions

For each of the following items, circle the response which best represents your level of job satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Scale: 1 = Very dissatisfied

2 = Moderately dissatisfied

3 = Slightly dissatisfied

4 = Slightly satisfied

5 = Moderately satisfied

6 = Very satisfied

ACHIEVEMENT

1. The actual achievement of work-related goals. 1 2 3 4 5 6

2. The immediate results from your work. 1 2 3 4 5 6

3. The actual adoption of practices which

you recommend. 1 2 3 4 5 6

4. Personal goal attainment. 1 2 3 4 5 6

5. Students follow the practices being taught. 1 2 3 4 5 6

156

6. Observing students' growth and success over a period of time. 1 2 3 4 5 6

7. The extent to which you are able objectively to evaluate your

accomplishment. 1 2 3 4 5 6

Growth 8. Opportunities for increased

responsibility in education. 1 2 3 4 5 6

9. Opportunities provided for growth in education compared with growth in other fields. 1 2 3 4 5 6

10. Participation in in-service education. 1 2 3 4 5 6

11. Types and levels of in-service education. 1 2 3 4 5 6

12. Opportunities to grow professionally through formal education. 1 2 3 4 5 6

13. Opportunities to attend professional conferences, workshops, etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS

14. Friendliness of your co-corkers. 1 2 3 4 5 6

15. Cooperation from faculty in your department. 1 2 3 4 5 6

16. Cooperation from faculty outside your department. 1 2 3 4 5 6

17. Faculty-student relationships. 1 2 3 4 5 6

18. Professional relationships on the job. 1 2 3 4 5 6

19. Personal relationships on the job. 1 2 3 4 5 6

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

20. Overall institutional relations including faculty, students, and staff. 1 2 3 4 5 6

157

21. Your involvement in making decisions. 1 2 3 4 5 6

22. The extent to which you are informed about matters affecting you. 1 2 3 4 5 6

23. The procedures used to select faculty for promotion to positions such as department chairman. 1 2 3 4 5 6

24. The extent to which administrative policies and procedures are made available to the faculty. 1 2 3 4 5 6

25. The administrative procedures used to carry out the educational program. 1 2 3 4 5 6

26. The extent to which administrative policies and procedures are actually followed. 1 2 3 4 5 6

27. The extent to which the policies meet faculty needs. 1 2 3 4 5 6

28. The educational philosophy which prevails in your institution. 1 2 3 4 5 6

RECOGNITION

29. Recognition of your accomplishments by co-workers. 1 2 3 4 5 6

30. Recognition of your accomplishments by superiors. 1 2 3 4 5 6

31. Your recognition compared to that of your co-workers. 1 2 3 4 5 6

32. The recognition you get from the administration for your ideas. 1 2 3 4 5 6

33. Publicity given to your work and activities.

RESPONSIBILITY

34. The authority you have to get the job done.

35. The total amount of responsibility

1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

158

you have. 1 2 3 4 5 6

36. Your responsibilities compared with

those of your co-workers. 1 2 3 4 5 6

37. Committee responsibilities. 1 2 3 4 5 6

38. Responsibilities outside your major areas of interest. 1 2 3 4 5 6

SALARY

39. The method used to determine your salary. 1 2 3 4 5 6

40. The range of salaries paid to instructors in your institution. 1 2 3 4 5 6

41. The top salary available to instructors compared to similar positions in other fields. 1 2 3 4 5 6

42. Your salary compared to that of people with similar training in other professions. 1 2 3 4 5 6

43. The amount of your salary. 1 2 3 4 5 6

44. The earning potential of the faculty compared to that of the administration. 1 2 3 4 5 6

SUPERVISION

45. The level of understanding that your superiors and you have of each other. 1 2 3 4 5 6

46. On-the-job supervision given by your superior. 1 2 3 4 5 6

47. Competence of your superior to give leadership. 1 2 3 4 5 6

48. Personal encouragement given by your superior. 1 2 3 4 5 6

49. The willingness of your superior to delegate authority. 1 2 3 4 5 6

50. Authority delegated compared to duties

delegated.

159

1 2 3 4 5 6

51. Counsel and guidance given by your superiors. 1 2 3 4 5 6

52. The initiation of innovations by your

superiors. 1 2 3 4 5 6

53. The fairness of your superiors. 1 2 3 4 5 6

54. The sensitivity of your superiors

to your needs. 1 2 3 4 5 6

55. The consistency of your superiors. 1 2 3 4 5 6

56. Specific on-the-job training offered by your superior. 1 2 3 4 5 6

THE WORK ITSELF

57. Work and association with college-age students. 1 2 3 4 5 6

58. The interesting and challenging aspects of teaching. 1 2 3 4 5 6

59. The general type of work you do. 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

60. Your level of enthusiasm about teaching.

WORKING CONDITIONS

61. The number of classes or groups for which you are responsible. 1 2 3 4 5 6

62. The number of hours you work each week. 1 2 3 4 5 6

63. Your work schedule compared to that of similar positions an other fields. 1 2 3 4 5 6

64. Your office facilities. 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 6

65. The adequacy of instructional equipment.

66. The number of course preparations required. 1 2 3 4 5 6

160

67. Your work schedule compared to that of your co-workers. 1 2 3 4 5 6

68. Consider all aspects of your job as an instructor and indicate your overall level of job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. 1 2 3 4 5 6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

161

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, J.S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67 (5), 437-445.

Ageel, H.A. (1983). Job satisfaction of staff members of Umm Al-Qura University in Makkah (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 2836A.

Alderfer, C.P. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth: Human needs in organizational settings. New York: Free Press.

Balazadeh, G. (1982). A comparative study of motivation to work and job satisfaction between male and female faculty members at Midwestern Regional University (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 4313A.

Benoit, S.S. (1977). Job satisfaction among faculty women in higher education in the state universities of Louisiana (Doctoral dissertation. The Louisiana State University and Agriculture and Mechanical College, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International. 37. 6969A. —

Berman, M.R. (1980). Variables associated with role conflict between career and family. Atlanta, GA: American Personnel and Guidance Association, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 192 188)

Bess, J.L. (1981). Intrinsic satisfactions from academic versus other professional work: A comparative analysis. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 203 805)

Campbell, J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E., & Weick, K.E. (1970). Managerial behavior, performance, and effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dawis, R.V., England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1964). A theory of work adjustment. Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, XV~! ~

162

163

Division of Planning, Department of Teacher Education, Ministry of Education (1984). The education statistics 1983. Bangkok: Ministry of Education. ~ ~

Dunn, J.D., & Stephens, E.C. (1972). Management of personnel: Manpower management and organizational behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Evans, V., Johnson, D., & Ramsey, J.P. (1983). Differences in job satisfaction of athletic coaches in revenue and florc—ysvsnue sports. Minneapolis, MN: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 357)

Ferguson, G.A. (1981). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill,Inc.

Fitzgerald, T.H. (1971). Why motivation theory doesn't work. Harvard Business Review, 49, 37-44.

French, J.R.P., Kay, E., & Meyer, H.H. (1966). Participation and the appraisal system. Human Relations, 19, 3-19.

Fuchs, R. G., & Lovano-Kerr, J. (1981). Professional development and quality of life: A comparative study of male/female non-tenured faculty. Los Angeles, CA: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 202 416)

Galbraith, J., & Cummings, L.L. (1967). An empirical investigation of the motivational determinants of task performance: Interactive effects between instrumentality-valence and motivation-ability. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 2. 237-257.

Gall, L.A., & Vogel, F.X. (1981). Attitudes of university faculty toward aging and retirement. Chicago, Illinois. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No ED 208 780)

Gannon, M.J. (1979). Organizational behavior: A managerial and organizational perspective. Boston: Brown and Company.

Gran, G. (1969). Instrumentality theory of work motivation: Some experimental results and suggested modifications. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 53, 1-25.

164

Grahn, J. et al. (1981). General college job satisfaction survey, University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, General College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 208 716)

Griffin, M.E. (1983). Relationships between perceptions of collective bargaining, management style, and job satisfaction of mid-level administrators in Minnesota's community colleges (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 3470A.

Habecker, E.B. (1981). A systematic approach to the study benefits and detriments of tenure in American higher

education: An analysis of the evidence. Huntington, IN: Huntington College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 212 208)

Hansen, G.L., & Kramer, R.E. (1978). Iowa postsecondary vocation-technical teacher retention study. Community Junior College Research Quarterly, 2, 255-258.

Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J.W. (1979). Organizational behavior (2nd ed.). Minnesota: West Publishing Co.

Heneman III, H.G. (1980). Personnel/human resource management. Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, inc.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K.H. (1977). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland: World. ~~

Herzburg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

Hill, M.D. (1982). Faculty sex composition and job satisfaction among academic women. New York, NY: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 215 632)

Hill, M.D. (1982). Variations in job satisfaction among higher education faculty in unionized and nonunionized institutions in Pennsylvania. Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector, 11, 165-180.

Hill, M.D. (1983). Some factors affecting the job satisfaction of academic women. Montreal, Canada: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC* Document Reproduction Service No. ED 231 297)

165

Hinkle, D.E. (1979). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

Holdaway, E.A. (1978). Facet and overall satisfaction of teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, 14 (1), 30-47.

Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. New York: Harper.

Hoppock, R. (1975). Reminiscences and comments on job satisfaction. The Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 24, 107-108.

Hoy, W.K., & Miskel, C.G. (1982). Educational administration, theory, research, and practice. New York: Random House.

Huck, S.W. (1974). Reading statistics and research. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Hudson, L.R. (1982). The relationship between job satisfaction and selected factors of teaching workload (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, 1981). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 4737A.

Ivancevich, J.M. (1974). Changes in performance in a management by objectives program. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 563-574.

Jariyavidyanont, S. (1979). Job satisfaction of Nida faculty members (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 5353A.

Kerlinger, F.N. (1973). Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Klapachan, P. (1983). A study of the relationships between participation in the decision making process and job satisfaction among the faculty of a midwestern regional state university (Doctoral dissertation. University of Kansas, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International. 44, 1000A.

Lawler, E.E. (1971). Pay and organizational effectiveness: A psychological view. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Leon, J.S. (1974). An investigation of the applicability of the two-factor theory of job satisfaction among college and university professors (Doctoral dissertation,

166

University of Arkansas, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 5397A.

Levinson, H. (1973). Asinine attitudes toward motivation. Harvard Business Review, 51, 70-76.

Locke, E.A. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189.

Locke, E.A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 309-336. ~~~ ~ —

Locke, E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chicago: Rand Mcnally College Publishing Company.

Locke, E.A., Cartledge, N., & Knerr, C.S. (1970). Studies of the relationship between satisfaction, goal-setting, and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5, 135-139.

Lovano-Kerr, J., & Fuchs, R.G. (1982). Retention revisited: A follow-up study of female/male non-tenured faculty perceptions on retention, professional development and quality of life. New York, NY: American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 217 824)

Lynch, B.P., & Verdin, J.A. (1983). Job satisfaction in libraries: Relationship of the work itself, age, sex, occupational group, tenure, supervisory level, career commitment, and library department. Library Quarterly, 53, 434-447.

Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.

Mayo, G.E. (1970). The first inquiry. In H.F. Merrill (Ed.), Classics in Management (pp. 379-388). New York: American Management Association, Inc.

McGreal, T.L. (1969). An investigation of organizational variables affecting teacher satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts International. 29, 2067A. —

167

McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Mellinger, G.P. (1983). An investigation of academic job satisfaction/dissatisfaction in a small struggling liberal arts college (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 941A~ ~

Mento, A.J., Cartledge, N.D., & Locke, E.A. (1980). Maryland vs. Michigan vs. Minnesota: Another look at the relationship of expectancy and goal difficulty to task. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 25, 419-440.

Ministry of Education (1973). The Department of Teacher Training: Its work and organization. Bangkok, Thailand.

Morse, J.J., & Lorsch, L.W. (1970). Beyond theory y. Harvard Business Review, 48, 61-68.

Nie, N., Bent, D.H., & Hull, C.H. (1975). Statistical package for the social sciences (2nd ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill.

Openshaw, H. (1980). Job satisfaction determinants among faculty and administrators: An application of Herzberg s motivation—hygiene model in higher education (Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International. 41. 2470A. —

Pearson, D.A., & Seiler, R.E. (1983). Environmental satisfiers in academe. Higher Education, 12, 35-47.

Porter, L.W., & Lawler III, E.E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press.

Raia, A.P. (1966). A second look at management goals and controls. California Management Review, 8 (4), 49-58.

Ramsey, J.K. (1982). Faculty perceptions of institutional quality and vitality. Jacksonville, FL: Florida Association of Community Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 084)

Roethlisberger, F.J., & Dickson, W.J. (1939). Management and the worker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

168

Ryan, J.J., Anderson, J.A., & Birchler, A.B. (1980). Student evaluation: The faculty responds. Research in Higher Education, 12, 317-333.

Saidian, M. (1981). A study of job satisfaction as measured by the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire as applied to selected male and female vocational and technical teachers of Esfahan, Iran (Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 4378A. ~

Savage, R.M. (1968). A study of teacher satisfaction and attitudes: Causes and effects (Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University, 1967). Dissertation Abstracts International, 28, 3948A. ~ ~~

Schmidt, G.L. (1976). Job satisfaction among secondary school administrators, Educational Administration Quarterly, 2, 68-86. ~~

Schwab, D.P., & Cummings, L.L. (1970). Theories of performance and satisfaction: A review. Industrial Relations, 9, 408-430.

Seegmiller, J.F. (1977). Job satisfaction of faculty and staff at the college of eastern Utah. Provo, Utah: Office of Institutional Research College of Eastern Utah. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 139 489) .

Sergiovanni, T.J. (1966). Satisfaction and dissatisfaction of teachers (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Rochester, 1966). Dissertation Abstracts International, 27, 1235A.

Smith, P.C. (1974). The development of a method of measuring satisfaction: The Cornell studies. In E.A. Fleishman, & A.R. Bass (Eds.), Studies in Personnel and Industrial Psychology (pp. 272-289). Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press.

Smith, P.C., Kendall, L.M., & Hulin, C.L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company. ~

Sorcinelli, M.D. (1978). Faculty attitudes at Indiana University School of Dentistry. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University School of Dentistry. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 187 282)

169

SPSS Inc. (1983). SPSS-X; User's guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Steers, R.M. (1975). Task goal attributes, achievement, and supervisory performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 392-403.

Sullivan, S.M. (1984). Job satisfaction of associate and assistant deans in accredited United States law schools (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, 1983). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 2995A.

Suntrayuth, S. (1985). A comparison of present and preferred institutional goals among board members, administrators, and faculty of teacher colleges in Bangkok, Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, North Texas State University, 1984). Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 3291A.

Terpstra, D.E., Olson, P.D., & Lockeman, B. (1982). The effects of MBO on levels of performance and satisfaction among university faculty. Group and Organization Studies, 7, 353-366.

Umstot, D.D., Bell, C.H., & Mitchell, T.R. (1976). Effects of job enrichment and productivity: Implications for job design. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61 (4), 379-394.

Vatthaisong, A. (1983). A study of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction among faculty members in teacher training institutions in Thailand (Doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 468A.

Vaughn, W.J., & Dunn, J.D. (1974). A study of job satisfaction in six university libraries. College & Research Libraries, 35, 163-177.

Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Weiss, D.J., Dawis, R.V., England, G.W., & Lofquist, L.H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, XXII. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.

170

Wickstrom, R.A. (1971). An investigation into job satisfaction among teachers (Doctoral dissertation. University of Oregon, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts International, 32, 1249A.

Willie, R., & Stecklein, J.E. (1982). A three decade comparison of college faculty characteristics, satisfactions, activities, and attitudes. Research in Higher Education, 16 (1), 81-83.

Winkler, L.D. (1982). Job satisfaction of university faculty in the United States (Doctoral dissertation. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 1982). Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 696A.

Wood, O.R. (1974). An analysis of faculty motivation to work in the North Carolina community college system (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 901A.

Wood, O.R. (1976). A research project: Measuring job satisfaction of the community college staff. Community College Review, 3 (3), 57-67.

Young, I.P. (1982). A multivariable study of administrator leadership behavior and custodian satisfaction. Planning & Changing, 13, 111-123.