Upload
ngokhanh
View
218
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Model of Lecturers' Power Motivation,Empowerment, Perceived Inequality, Internal Service
Quality and Burnout to Students Satisfaction
Abdul Raheem Mohamad Yusof
Nek Kamal Bin Yeop Yunus
Arsalan Mujahid Ghouri
KOD: FRGS/KPT 06-50-06-092012
Univer
A Model of Lecturers' Power Motivation,Empowerment, Perceived Inequality, Internal Service
Quality and Burnout to Students Satisfaction
Abstract
Education is most fundamental need for nations now, today's developed and dominatingnations in trade and commerce etc. were emphasize on education in past and now they are
enjoying the ultimate result. Providing best education opportunities are investment bygovernment which will produce the finest, skillful and knowledgeable human resource
for their nation! economy. If individuals see the good education opportunities and
chances then they are ready to invest their time and money to secure their future.
Education bound teachers and students to balanced and enhance the social and economic
perspective, which could be happen on international stage too.This study explores the relationship of student satisfaction with power motivation,
empowerment, internal service quality, perceived inequality and burnout. This study alsofind empirically how burnout link with student satisfaction when it effect combine with
other variables e.g. power motivation, empowerment, internal service quality and
perceived inequality.In first result, it confirmed that burnout mediates the relationship between power
motivation and students' In second test it's not fulfilled the requirement for mediationtest on the medicate relationship of burnout on empowerment and students' satisfaction.
In third test ofmedication of burnout over perceived inequality and students' satisfaction,it was established that burnout mediates the relationship between perceived inequalityand students' satisfaction. In f011h test of mediation it found that requirement for
mediation test on the relationship of burnout on internal service quality and students'
satisfaction not fulfilled.First regression test shows the significance variation in burnout by power
motivation, empowerment, perceived inequality and internal service quality. Second
regression analysis illustrates the significance variation in students' satisfaction by the
impact of power motivation, empowerment, perceived inequality, internal service qualityand burnout.
Satisfied students are promoter and re-presenter of universities. So burnout is the
factor with power motivation and perceived inequality which hurts the student
satisfaction level. So when university administration allows faculty members to
implement their authority over others, they take care of burnout/ stress level of them,otherwise it returned with low students' satisfaction. Inequality feelings between facultymembers increase the stress level in faculty members, which directed the students'
satisfaction downwards. So administrators of public sector universities suppose to create
balance between the responsibilities and workload for students and colleagues/ staff,
employee treatment, colleague relationship, job timing to create win-win situation for
students, university/ university administration and faculty members.
Table of Contents
Abstract
AcknowledgementTable of Content
List of Tables
List of Figures
11
iii
v
V111
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Background of the Study1.3 Problem Statement
1.4 Objective of the Study1.5 Research Questions1.6 Hypotheses1.7 Research Model
1.8 Research Framework
01
02
06
08
08
09
11
12
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Power Motivation 13
2.2 Empowerment 16
2.3 Perceived Inequality 20
2.4 lntemal Service Quality 24
2.5 Bumout 29
2.6 Student Satisfaction 33
2.7 Operational Definitions ofVariables 38
2.7.1 Power Motivation 38
2.7.2 Empowerment 38
2.7.3 Perceived Inequality 39
2.7.4 lntemal Service Quality 39
2.7.5 Bumout 39
2.7.6 Student Satisfaction 39
111
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design 40
3.1.1 Data Collection 40
3.1.2 Instrumentation & its Operationalization 41
3.1.3 Outline of Instruments 43
3.1.4 Pilot Testing 43
3.1.5 Reliability & Validity Testing 44
3.1.6 Normal Distribution -Normality Test: 45
3.2 Data Analysis 45
3.2.1 Descriptive Analysis 45
3.2.2 Correlation Analysis 46
3.2.3 Multiple Regression Analysis 46
3.2.4 Baron and Kenny's (1986) Steps for Mediation 46
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
4.1 Descriptive Statistics
4.1.1 Teachers
4.1.2 Student
Hypotheses Testing
48
48
50
514.2
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Interpretation 61
5.2 Conclusion 64
5.3 Recommendation 65
References 67
Appendix I 90
Appendix II 120
Appendix III 131
IV
Appendix I (List of Tables)
Table 1.1: Expenditures in Education in 2009 90
Table 1.2: Enrolment in different study sectors/ sections in 2007, 90-912008 and 2009
Table 3.1: Outline ofQuestionnaire for Teachers 91
Table 3.2: Outline ofQuestionnaire for Students 92
Table 3.3: The Alpha Score of Teacher Questionnaire Items 92
Table 3.4: Reliability Statistics of Power Motivation 92
Table 3.5: Item Statistics of Power Motivation 93-94
Table 3.6: Reliability Statistics ofEmpowerment 95
Table 3.7: Item Statistics of Empowerment 95-96
Table 3.8: Reliability Statistics of Internal Service Quality 96
Table 3.9: Item Statistics of Internal Service Quality 97-98
. Table 3.1 0: Reliability Statistics of Perceived Inequality 98
Table 3.11: Item Statistics ofPerceived Inequality 99
Table 3.12: Reliability Statistics ofBurnout 99
Table 3.13: Item Statistics ofBurnout 99-100
Table 3.14: Reliability Statistics of Student Satisfaction 100
Table 3.15: Items Statistics of Student Satisfaction 100-101
Table 3.16: Pearson's r Indices ofCorrelation 101
Table 4.1: My designation is 101
Table 4.2: Gender 102
Table 4.3: Ethnic group 102
Table 4.4: My education level 102-103
Table 4.5: My marital status 103
Table 4.6: My age is 103
Table 4.7: Im working in 103-104
Table 4.8: How long have you been with your current university 104
Table 4.9: How long have you been working at your current 105
Position
v
Table 4.10: How long have you been working (total working 105
experience)
Table 4.11: Gender 105-106
Table 4.12: Ethnic group 106
Table 4.13: My university is 106-107
Table 4.14: My age is 107
Table 4.15: My marital status 107
Table 4.16: I'm enrolled in 107-108
Table 4.17: Model summary of regression ofpower motivation, 108
empowerment, perceived inequality, internal servicequality to burnout
Table 4.21:
ANOVA results of power motivation, empowerment, 108
perceived inequality, internal service quality, to burnout
Coefficients results of power motivation, 109
empowerment, perceived inequality, internalservice quality to burnout
Con-elation between power motivation, burnout 109and students' satisfaction
Coefficients result ofpower motivation and students' 110satisfaction
Table 4.18:
Table 4.19:
Table 4.20:
Table 4.22:
Table 4.23:
Table 4.24:
Coefficients results ofpower motivation and burnout 110
Coefficients results of burnout and students' satisfaction 110
Model summary of regression ofpower motivation, 111burnout and students' satisfaction
Table 4.25: ANOVA results of power motivation, burnout and 111students' satisfaction
Table 4.26: Coefficients result ofpower motivation, burnout and 111students' satisfaction
Table 4.27:
Table 4.28:
Result ofmediation 112
Correlation between empowerment, burnout and students' 112satisfaction
Table 4.30:
Table 4.31:
Table 4.32:
Coefficients result of empowerment and students'satisfaction
Coefficients result of empowerment and burnout
Coefficients results of burnout and students' satisfaction
Con-elation between perceived inequality, burnout
113Table 4.29:
113
113
114
vi
and students' satisfaction
Table 4.33: Coefficients result ofperceived inequality and students' 114satisfaction
Table 4.34: Coefficients results of perceived inequity and burnout 115
Table 4.35: Coefficients results of burnout and students' satisfaction 115
Table 4.36: Model summary of regression ofperceived inequality, 115burnout and students' satisfaction
Table 4.37: ANOVA results of perceived inequality, burnout and 116students' sati sfaction
Table 4.38: Coefficients result of perceived inequality, burnout 116and students' satisfaction
Table 4.39: Result ofmediation 116
Table 4.40: Correlation between internal service quality, burnout 117and students' satisfaction
Table 4.41: Coefficients result of internal service quality and 117students' satisfaction
Table 4.42: Coefficients result of internal service quality and burnout 118
Table 4.43: Coefficients results of burnout and students' satisfaction 118
Table 4.44: Model summary of regression ofpower motivation, 118
empowerment, perceived inequality, internal servicequality, burnout to students' satisfaction
Table 4.45: ANOVA results ofpower motivation, empowerment, 119
perceived inequality, internal service quality, burnoutto students' satisfaction
Table 4.46: Coefficients results ofpower motivation, 119
empowerment, perceived inequality, internalservice quality, burnout to students' satisfaction
vii
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Research Model 11
Figure 2.2 Research Framework 12
Figure 4.1: Mediating model of burnout on relationship ofpower motivation 52
and students' satisfaction
Figure 4.2: Mediating model ofburnout on relationship of empowerment 54
and students' satisfaction
Figure 4.3: Mediating model ofburnout on relationship ofperceived 56
inequality and students' satisfaction
Figure 4.4: Mediating model ofburnout on relationship of internal service 58
quality and students' satisfaction
Vlll
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction
In today's globalization era, knowledge is increasingly a commodity that moves between
countries (Arokiasamy, 2011). Education is most fundamental need for nations now,
today's developed and dominating nations in trade and commerce etc. were emphasize on
education in past and now they are enjoying the ultimate result. On the other hand, the
education remains imperative for individual success. Education would improve an
individual's physical, mental and social aspects which bring economic wealth, social
prosperity and political stability in individual and nation life.
The two famous quotes about the education which represents the philosophy of
education are:
1) "I freed thousands of slaves. I could have Feed thousands
more if they had known they were slaves."- Harriet Tubman
(Cooper et al. 2005)
2) "The great object of Education should be commensurate
with the object of life. It should be a moral one; to teach self
trust; to inspire the youthful man with an interest in himself;
with a curiosity touching his own nature; to acquaint him with
the resources of his mind, and to teach him that there is all his
strength, and to inflame him with a piety towards the Grand
Mind in which he lives" (Emerson, 1884).
These quotes shows the significance of education on individual and nation's fate,
as these present the idea of mind opening, building confidence, decision making and
choosing the right or wrong future and understand themselves. Education is a major
aspect of development for modem society since scarcity of educated people stops or
diminishes the society progress or well being.
1.2 Background of the Study
Providing best education opportunities are investment by government which will produce
the finest, skillful and knowledgeable human resource for their nation! economy. As US
Senate, Committee on Health, (2011) illustrated the more emphasis on education because
we are seeing a growing impact of skills on the economic success of individuals and
nations and yardstick for educational success is no longer simply improvement by
national standards, but the best performing systems globally. If individuals see the good
education opportunities and chances then they are ready to invest their time and money to
secure their future. Education bound teachers and students to balanced and enhance the
social and economic perspective, which could be happen on international stage too.
Higher education in Malaysia began with the formation of University Malaya in
1959 (Arokiasamy, 2011). The presence of a large number of foreign programs in
Malaysia has brought the expected trade benefits and Malaysia is already making
progress in its quest to become a net expOlter of tertiary education by 2020 (Malaysia,
1991). Expenditure on education is one of the priorities of the Malaysian government.
The government of Malaysia comprehends the magnitude of education which remains
their integral part of their vision 2020. Malaysian Government initiatives appreciated in
2
the study of Morshidi (2006) as higher education of Malaysia took various policy
initiatives to increasing cost burden, and the global trends in restructuring higher
education. Educational development and reform in Malaysia have always been
characterized by the government's efforts to adapt education to national development
needs (Ahmad, 1998) to build K-economy. As The World Bank Group (2012a) database
ofworld development indicator & global development finance demonstrates that in 2009,
92.46% of adult 15+ age fell in literate category. Table 1 (see appendix 1) shows the
different perspectives govemment expenditures on education in 2009.
Table 1.1 (see appendix 1) illustrates the significant spending from the
Govemment of Malaysia on education sector as they spend the 4.15% and 5.79% ofGNI
and GDP respectively, and remain one of the highest investor of respective country's
GDP in the world. In public expenditure on education, they payout 18.93% of total
govemment expenditure which also remain significant in Asian territory. Higher
education in Malaysia which involves more than 900,000 students pursuing higher
education in 20 public universities, 33 private universities and university colleges, 4
foreign university branch campuses, 22 polytechnics, 37 community colleges and about
500 private colleges and govemment of Malaysia create a higher education environment
that foster the development of academic and institutional excellence to peruse the vision
of the "to make Malaysia a centre of educational excellence and to internationalise of
Malaysian education" (Ministry of Higher Education, 2012). As perspective of
intemationalise Arokiasamy (2011) quoted the President, Malaysian Association of
Private Colleges that Malaysia has become a "middle man" in the provision of higher
education.
3
According to the Ministry of Education (2001) the missions of tertiary education
ofMalaysia are:
• Community Colleges aim to provide training and retraining facilities in various
industrial skills
• Polytechnics aim to provide and upgrade further education and training facilities
at semi-professional level in technical, commerce, and service fields and provide an
alternative route for higher education for secondary schoolleavers.
• Produce sufficient quality human resources in science and technology, different
races. Emphasis will be made on science and technology, the use of lCT, and the
mastery of the Malay language and other international languages geared towards the
needs of the nation and the K-economy.
• Aims to improve post-graduate programmes, produce students of excellence and
quality, further develop students character, encourage research and development (R&D)
of international standards, inculcate a culture of quality in higher education, and promote
lifelong learning.
• Aim to provide more opportunities for tertiary education, reduce the number of
students studying abroad, help promote Malaysia as a center of academic excellence,
reduce government's funding costs for tertiary education, and encourage private higher
education institutions to undertake R&D activities.
Teaching is commonly viewed as a noble profession with special privileges and
responsibilities (Goodlad, 1990). Teacher role in education is centre pillar in education,
as teacher work as knowledge provider and guide under the periphery of proposed and set
standardize curriculum for particular level. Teaching can be carried out informally or
4
now extend beyond formal teaching as teacher can be part of public or private or
institutional functions, educational and enjoyment trips or supervise in extra curricular
activities, but in this study the formal teaching or education system are in discussion. The
best education systems draw their teachers from the most academically able, and select
them carefully to ensure that they are taking only those people who combine the right
personal and intellectual qualities (Auguste, et aI., 2010) which contribute to the society
and ultimately economy of particular country. Study by Winters (2011) suggested that, in
United States quality of teachers remain the single most imperative factor which
influence and effect on student performance, author further added that countries which
score highly on intemational tests have multiple policies in place to ensure that the
teachers they employ are as effective as possible. The results of best teachers employed
can improve communication and collaboration between the school and the home and
community in order to promote trust and understanding and build partnerships with all
segments of the school community (N0l1h Carolina Professional Teaching Standards,
n.a).
Lecturing is one of the professions that require high commitment; the workload is
heavy, the role is broad and the lecturers are directly responsible in educating and
shaping the students (Awang, et al., 2010). Research has also proved that lecturers or
academicians are one of the factors that influence the moral standard and ethical
behaviour of students (Saat, et al., 2004). University Lecturers not only have to give
lectures, they are also expected to provide professional consultations, to conduct
academic researches and to publish their findings so that the community would benefit
(Awang, et al., 2010). Lecturers produce the nation's future leaders; it shoulders the
5
responsibility to ensure quality and high ethical standards of graduates (Saat, et aI.,
2004).
Students in any nation treated as future servant and products of particular
university/ college/ school. They are those individuals on which the fate lies of any
nation. Chock (2010) cited the famous quote of 'Vince Lombardi', that leaders aren't
bom; they are made. And they are made just like anything else, through hard work. And
that's the price which a11 of us must pay to achieve any goal that is worthwhile. So
teachers' efforts and support/ facilities from school play important role which initiate
student to show interest to attainment the goal of education. As Ajzen (2001) posited that
student attitudes and beliefs exert very strong influences on attainment of their goals.
Table 1.2 (see appendix 1) indicating the enrolment figures in study sectors in
2007,2008 and 2009, which are in increasing trend and govemment must care about the
students' satisfaction and education.
1.3 Problem Statement
Power motivation, empowerment and intemal service quality are predictor of healthy and
competitive work environment. Many studies found these variables fruitful to make
individual more competitive and productive. As motivation and empowerment urge
individual or group to serve the organization on their own and intemal service quality
gives the view to individual or group attachment to the organization. This study will find
the level of impact of these variables and gauge their impact on the performance of
6
teachers of public sector universities, which is considerable important to build the solid
foundation of any country.
Many studies found perceived inequality and burnout as the negative motivational
aspects in work place which always affect the individual and organization performance,
Sometimes burnout took individual to stage where he/ she unable to work or sometimes it
affect their physical/mental condition. Teacher mental and physical conditions are vital
for universities to perform well, produce greater products in aspects of research and
students and remain competitive. Public sector universities' emphasis on research work
of faculty members and students, local and international conferences, internal programs
to reach or maintain particular level need more hard work from teachers and likeness
factor in promotions/ transfers and workload comparison kind of matters cause burnout
and inequality. This study will explore the level of the perceived inequality and burnout,
and address which aspects are need to address to minimize their impact in public sector
universities and their relationship with students' satisfaction.
Students consider the main stakeholder for universities and their satisfaction with
institute quite considerably into the hands of teachers. Students' satisfaction always
remains the question mark for universities or even for governments. This aspect need to
address so well to compete at international level for Malaysia. This study will uncover
relationship of proposed variable(s) and combination of variables with students
satisfaction.
The combination of power motivation, empowerment, internal service quality,
perceived inequality and burnout not apply combine on students' satisfaction. This study
will contribute in existing literature of burnout and students satisfaction, with the
7
relationship of power motivation, empowerment, internal service quality and perceived
inequality.
1.4 Objective of the Study
This study will explore the relationship of student satisfaction with power motivation,
empowerment, internal service quality, perceived inequality and burnout. This study will
find empirically how burnout link with student satisfaction when it effect combine with
other variables e.g. power motivation, empowerment, internal service quality and
perceived inequality. This study also describe the effect of power motivation,
empowerment, internal service quality and perceived inequality on burnout and effect of
power motivation, empowerment, internal service quality, perceived inequality and
burnout on students satisfaction.
This study will show what aspects of suggested variables effecting on burnout and
students satisfaction which will give clear picture to higher education of Malaysia about
teachers and students perception, expectations and what they actually receiving.
1.5 Research Questions
• Do power motivation, empowerment, perceived inequality and internal service
quality predict the variance over burnout?
• Do burnout mediates the association between power motivation and student
satisfaction?
• Do burnout mediates the association between empowerment and student
satisfaction?
8
• Do burnout mediates the association between perceived inequality and student
satisfaction?
• Do burnout mediates the association between internal service quality and student
satisfaction?
• Do power motivation, empowerment, perceived inequality, internal service
quality and burnout predict the variance students' satisfaction?
1.6 Hypotheses
HI: Power motivation, empowerment, perceived inequality and intemal service quality
are significant predictor of burnout.
H2: Burnout mediates the relationship between power motivation and student
satisfaction.
H2a: Power motivation is statistically significant predictor of students'
satisfaction.
H2b: Power motivation is statistically significant predictor ofbumout.
H2c: Burnout is statistically significant predictor of students' satisfaction.
H2d: When burnout controlled, the relationship between power motivation and
students' satisfaction become statistically insignificant.
H3: Burnout mediates the relationship between empowerment and student satisfaction.
H3a: Empowerment is statistically significant predictor of students' satisfaction.
H3b: Empowerment is negatively associated to burnout.
H3c: Burnout is statistically significant predictor of students' satisfaction.
9
H3d: When burnout controlled, the relationship between empowerment and
students' satisfaction become statistically insignificant.
H4: Burnout mediates the relationship between perceived inequality and student
satisfaction.
H4a: Perceived inequality is statistically significant predictor students'
satisfaction.
H4b: Perceived inequality is statistically significant predictor burnout.
H4c: Bumout is statistically significant predictor of student satisfaction.
H4d: When bumout controlled, the relationship between perceived inequality and
students' satisfaction become statistically insignificant.
H5: Bumout mediates the relationship between internal service quality and student
satisfaction.
H5a: Internal service quality IS statistically significant predictor of students'
satisfaction.
H5b: Intemal service quality is statistically significant predictor ofburnout.
H5c: Burnout is statistically significant predictor of students' satisfaction.
H5d: When bumout controlled, the relationship between intemal service quality
and students' satisfaction become statistically insignificant.
H6: Power motivation, empowerment, perceived inequality, intemal service quality and
burnout are significant predictor of students' satisfaction.
10
1.7 Research Model
Figure 2.1: Research Model
11
1.8 Research Framework
HI
,,,,,, : I
....'T I
....
Figure 2.2: Research Framework
12
Chapter 2 Literature Review
2.1 Power Motivation
Motivation is considered as one of the most influential factor of doing work. According
to (McClelland et al., 1989; Weinberger & McClelland, 1990), the power motivation is
based on a natural incentive whose attainment elicits pleasurable affect, thereby
reinforcing behavior that was instrumental in obtaining it. In the context of education
where teachers are the role models, inspirational motivation occurs. It is when leaders
motivate and inspire followers by providing power over particular aspects of works or
decision making. Davis & Wilson (2000) revealed that motivation and job satisfaction
were most optimal when teachers worked in a positive school climate. It can be argued
that whose TSEBs (Taught Student Education Board) are high are more capable of using
instructional strategies effectively, more capable of ensuring student participation and
more successful in classroom management skills (Caprara, et al., 2006). Teacher power
motivation, therefore, is anything done to make teachers happy, satisfied, dedicated and
committed in such a way that they use power in their places ofwork so that both students
and university. Educational leaders may increase the motivational level among teachers
by giving inspirational talks, communicating vision and acting in ways that encourage
enthusiasm (Awamleh & Gardiner, 1999).
Studies in other settings commonly argued that employees have both intrinsic and
extrinsic needs, so do the teachers. Hence a teacher who is intrinsically motivated may be
observed to undertake a task for its own sake as like power motivation, for the
13
satisfaction it provides or for the feeling of accomplishment and self-actualization. It was
presented in the study by Tschannen-Moran & Hoy (2007) that the satisfaction derived
from classroom performance is positively correlated with teaching intrinsic aspect.
Klassen et al., (2009) also found a high correlation, in the study they carried out in five
different countries, between teachers' job satisfaction levels and teaching intrinsic
reward. Ololube (2004, 2005) illustrated that teachers are expected to render a very high
job performance, the government adopted different roles and contexts of educations'
motivational methods and tools because high motivation enhances productivity which is
naturally in the interest of all educational systems. According to Dornyei (2001), intrinsic
rewards are the most prominent and satisfying aspects of teaching. Therefore, we may
conclude that motivated teachers are mostly intrinsically motivated. The absence of this
power motivation can lead to burnout as Sinclair, et al. (2006) suggested.
Educators are aware that reformers of education may establish new schools, effect
changes in structure and curriculum, recommend and prescribe teaching methods and
aids, in the end, the teacher will be solely responsible for applying them. Unfortunately,
despite the obvious leading role teachers' play in school towards attaining educational
objectives several authors as Ala-Adeyemi and Afolabi (1990). It has been revealed that
there exist differences between teachers with high and low self-efficacy beliefs in issues
such as using new techniques and giving feedback to students with learning disabilities
(Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2001; Ross, 1998).
Ducharne & Martin (2000) agreed and stated "workgroup interactions, especially
social support received from co-workers, may significantly contribute to motivation
among teachers". They further added that co-worker support and positive relationships at
14
an educational institution seem to have an immense effect on teacher motivation. It is
implied that promoting positive communicative ties among teachers may ultimately
improve job performance as well as enhance job satisfaction. In order for personal goals
to be meaningful and intrinsically motivating, if possible, the teacher rather than the
institution should set for them (Praver & Oga-Baldwin, 2008).
Schools can be thriving with adult relationships that are interactive and positive.
These relationships can be highly motivating and create a wonderful sense of job
satisfaction. Brunetti et al. (2005) found that according to be subjects in his study,
"positive relationships with colleagues were very important concerning job satisfaction
and helped them provide and receive both personal and professional support from their
peers, including goal setting, sharing of materials, and designing curriculum". The
teachers also reported that they shared a common concem for the well-being of the
students and school. Such traits as passion, interest, inspiration, drive, and dedication are
arguably necessary traits in most motivated people, however one must realize that "only
arousing interest is not enough to be motivated" (Wi lIiam & Burden, 1997). Teachers that
are motivated will work harder, put more effort in to trying new techniques and activities,
and in general do more for the sake of the students, all of which contribute to smoother
classes and more efficient leaming. Coutts (1997) explored school climate and teacher
motivation. His finding concluded teacher effectiveness is most closely related to the
climate of the school, and that leaders are relied on less for motivation and more to be
adequate managers. Teachers with high teacher self-efficacy make more efforts to
overcome the problems they face, and they can maintain these efforts longer (Bandura,
1977; 1986). The teacher's ostensible intrinsic motivation can also have a significant
15
effect on student perception and desire to learn. One study of student assessments of
teachers conducted by Wild et al. (1992) found that teachers who were perceived to be
more intrinsically motivated were more willing to experiment and explore their fields of
study which ultimately resulted in students' satisfaction.
Power motivation is one of the most important for many educators (Hall &
Bazerman, 1997). Being able to plan their own lessons, create their own syllabi, and pick
their own texts is all part of why many people choose to be teachers. In other words,
having academic freedom and the power to choose is deeply connected to many people's
decisions to become teachers.
Ushioda (2003) also suggested that motivation often comes down to a matter of
choices. The more choice and freedom a person is given, the more willing and ready he
or she will be to work. An individual who is able to decide what and how he or she wants
to study is more able to set his or her own goals, work cooperatively, and show more
internal motivation and self-actualization. An increased freedom to create goals will give
teachers greater motivation to do what they want and achieve these goals in the
classroom. So deficiency of power motivation may leads teachers to dissatisfaction which
can escort them to burnout and on other hand, with high power motivation students' feel
highly satisfied.
2.2 Empowerment
According to Rappaport (1984) empowerment is a construct that links individual
strengths and competencies, natural helping systems, and proactive behaviors to social
policy and social change. Research on teacher empowerment began to appear in the
16