Zaznave učiteljskega poklica in motivacija za poučevanje med slovenskimi študenti
Povzetek
V raziskavi sva preučevali zaznave učiteljskega poklica med študenti družboslovja in jezikoslovja na dveh slovenskih filozofskih fakultetah, ki so zaključevali dodiplomski študij in se odločali za smer študija na magistrski stopnji. Skupina študentov, ki je izrazila namero po nadaljevanju študija na pedagoški smeri, je prav tako poročala o motivaciji za poučevanje oz. učiteljski poklic in svojem zadovoljstvu s karierno izbiro, skupina študentov, ki je izrazila namero po nadaljevanju študija na nepedagoški smeri, pa je odgovarjala na odprto vprašanje o tem, zakaj se niso odločili za pedagoško smer študija. Udeleženci so izpolnjevali vprašalnik FIT-Choice, ki meri dvanajst motivacijskih dimenzij in šest vidikov zaznav učiteljskega poklica. Študentje so visoko ocenili strokovno zahtevnost učiteljevega dela, nižje pa so ocenili učiteljev družbeni status in plačilo, ki ga prejema za svoje delo. V njihovih odgovorih se odraža neravnovesje med zahtevnostjo učiteljevega dela in nagradami (družbeni status, plačilo), ki jih učitelj prejema za svoje delo. Med razlogi, ki jih bodoči študentje pedagoških smeri navajajo kot najpomembnejše za izbiro učiteljskega poklica, so altruistični in intrinzični motivi. Ti študentje so tudi visoko ocenili svoje zmožnosti za opravljanje učiteljskega poklica. Zunanji dejavniki, kot so: možnost zaposlitve drugod po svetu, poučevanje kot rezervna kariera in več časa za družino, so se izkazali kot manj pomembni razlogi za odločitev za učiteljski poklic. Kvalitativna tematska analiza odgovorov študentov, ki so se odločili za nepedagoško smer študija, je pokazala, da sta nizka notranja vrednost (npr. nezanimanje za poučevanje) in nizka vrednost osebne koristi (npr. boljše karierne priložnosti drugje) najpogostejši temi, ki jih omenjajo študentje. Prav tako so bile pogosto omenjene visoke zahteve poklica zaradi zahtevnih interakcij z otroki in s starši, več študentov pa omenja tudi preobsežen program pedagoških predmetov in možnost njihovega opravljanja po končanem magistrskem študiju. V diskusiji poudarjava pomembne vidike motiviranja študentov za karierno pot učitelja.
Prenosi
Literatura
Bergmark, U., Lundström, S., Manderstedt, L., & Palo, A. (2018). Why become a teacher? Student teachers’ perceptions of the teaching profession and motives for career choice. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2018.1448784
Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Sage.
Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2019). Thematic analysis. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in health social sciences (pp. 843–860). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_103
Butler, A. S. (2021). The impact of external contextual factors on teaching candidates. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 11(3), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1072
Depolli Steiner, K. (2022). Teacher motivation and commitment to the teaching profession among Slovenian teacher education students. Psihološka obzorja, 31, 516–525. https://doi.org/10.20419/2022.31.559
Employment Service of Slovenia. (2022). Učitelji in drugi strokovni delavci osnovnih in srednjih šol. Prikaz podatkov iz raziskav Napovednik zaposlovanja, Poklicni barometer in evidenc ZRSZ [Teachers and other professional workers in primary and secondary schools. Review of data from the Employment Forecast among Employers, the Occupational Barometer and the records of the Employment Service of Slovenia]. Employment Service of Slovenia.
Fray, L. & Gore, J. (2018). Why people choose teaching: A scoping review of empirical studies, 2007–2016. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 75(1), 153–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.06.009
Giersch, J. (2016). A test of personal and social utility values and the appeal of a career in teaching. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 15(3), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-016-9194-7
Giersch, J. (2021). Motivations to enter teaching: an investigation with non-education university students. Journal of Education for Teaching, 47(3), 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2021.1880870
Heinz, M. (2015). Why choose teaching? An international review of empirical studies exploring student teachers’ career motivations and levels of commitment to teaching. Educational Research and Evaluation, 21(3), 258–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2015.1018278
Jugović, I., Marušić, I., Ivanec, T. P., & Vidović, V. V. (2012). Motivation and personality of preservice teachers in Croatia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2012.700044
Kim, H., & Cho, Y. (2014). Preservice teachers’ motivation, sense of teaching efficacy, and expectation of reality shock. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2013.855999
Krečič, M. J., & Grmek, M. I. (2005). The reasons students choose teaching professions. Educational Studies, 31(3), 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690500236449
Kyriacou, C., & Kobori, M. (1998). Motivation to learn and teach English in Slovenia. Educational Studies, 24(3), 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305569980240307
Malmberg, L.-E. (2006). Goal-orientation and teacher motivation among teacher applicants and student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.07.005
Nesje, K., Brandmo, C., & Berger, J. L. (2018). Motivation to become a teacher: A Norwegian validation of the Factors Influencing Teaching Choice Scale. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(6), 813–831. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2017.1306804
OECD. (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners. TALIS, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en
OECD. (2022). Education at a glance 2022: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en
OECD. (2023). Teachers by age (indicator). OECD iLibrary. https://doi.org/10.1787/93af1f9d-en
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2006). Who chooses teaching and why? Profiling characteristics and motivations across three Australian universities. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660500480290
Shang, W., Yu, T., Wang, J., Sun, D., & Su, J. (2022). Why choose to become a teacher in China? A large-sample study using the Factors Influencing Teaching Choice Scale. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 50(4), 406–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2022.2066504
Simić, N., Marušić Jablanović, M., & Grbić, S. (2022). Why teaching? A validation of the fit-choice scale in the Serbian context. Journal of Education for Teaching, 48(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2021.1958655
Sinclair, C. (2008). Initial and changing student teacher motivation and commitment to teaching. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660801971658
Struyven, K., Jacobs, K. & Dochy, F. (2013). Why do they want to teach? The multiple reasons of different groups of students for undertaking teacher education. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 1007–1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0151-4
Tang, S., Y. F., Wong, A., K. Y, & Cheng, M. M. H. (2015). The preparation of highly motivated and professionally competent teachers in initial teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 41(2), 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2015.1010875
Tašner, V., Žveglič, M., & Mencin Čeplak. M. (2017). Gender in the teaching profession: university students’ views of teaching as a career. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(2), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.169
Taštanoska, T., Kuščer, K, & Ambrožič Deleja, S. (2022). The education system in the Republic of Slovenia 2021/2022. Ministry of Education, Science and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia. https://www.eurydice.si/publikacije/The-Education-System-in-the-Republic-of-Slovenia-2021-22.pdf
Tiplic, D., Brandmo, C., & Elstad, E. (2015). Antecedents of Norwegian beginning teachers’ turnover intentions. Cambridge Journal of Education, 45(4), 451–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2014.987642
Torres-Cladera, G., Simó-Gil, N., Domingo-Peñafiel, L. (2021). Building professional identity during preservice teacher education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 11(3), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1070
Valenčič Zuljan, M., Cotič, M., Fošnarič, S., Peklaj, C., & Vogrinc, J. (2011). Teacher education in Slovenia. In M. Valenčič Zuljan & J. Vogrinc (Eds.), European dimensions of teacher education – similarities and differences (pp. 295–322). Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana and The National School of Leadership in Education. https://solazaravnatelje.si/ISBN/978-961-253-058-7.pdf
Younger, M., Brindley, S., Pedder, D., & Hagger, H. (2004). Starting points: Student teachers’ reasons for becoming teachers and their preconceptions of what this will mean. European Journal of Teacher Education, 27(3), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/0261976042000290787
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2007). Motivational factors influencing teaching as a career choice: Development and validation of the FIT-Choice Scale. Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3), 167–202. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.75.3.167-202
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2012). An introduction to teaching motivations in different countries: Comparisons using the FIT-Choice Scale. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2012.700049
Watt, H. M. G., Richardson, P. W., Klusmann, U., Kunter, M., Beyer, B., Trautwein, U., & Baumert, J. (2012). Motivations for choosing teaching as a career: An international comparison using the FITChoice scale. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(6), 791–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.03.003
Watt, H. M., Richardson, P. W., & Devos, C. (2013). How does gender matter in the choice of a STEM teaching career and later teaching behaviours? International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 5(3), 187–206.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12(3), 265–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-P
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
