Reward Structures in the Public High School

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between eight categories of rewards available to teachers in high schools and teacher behaviors of absenteeism, recruitment and retention. Findings emphasize the importance of intrinsic motivators in professional organizations and suggest basic differences in motivational patterns between professional and production oriented organizations. Dennis W. Spuck is an Assistant Professor of Educational Administration at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Educational institutions, like all organizations, must provide incentives which induce cooperative behaviors from organizational members. The greatest portion of the fiscal expenditures of school districts are directed toward providing rewards which will attract and hold teachers within the system and which will motivate them to be productive members of their profession. This research compares empirically-based reward structures to theoretical reward models and explores the relationship of derived structures to selected organizational behaviors of public secondary school teachers. Reward StructuresThe formal organization may be defined as a system of consciously coordinated activities or forces of two or more persons directed toward the accomplishment of common objectives. This cooperation is not given freely by those participating in the organization, but is exchanged for desired rewards made available through participation in the organization. Teachers, as members of a formal organization, exchange their cooperative behaviors for desired rewards offered by and within the school.Early motivational theories conceived of man, the employee, as being totallyrational and motivated solely by monetary incentives.

How are employees of the nonprofit sector motivated? A research need

“…Older studies (Garbarino, 1975;McLaughlin and Marsh, 1978;Spuck, 1974) have indicated that although financial incentives can promote specific behaviors (such as accepting difficult teaching assignments) and direct teachers' efforts toward measurable goals (such as achieving higher test scores among their pupils), they are less promising as tools to improve general teaching performance (Moore, 1986). There seems to be extensive evidence that teachers regard professional efficacy, not money, as the primary motivator in their work (Scott, Cox, and Dinham, 1999;Dierynck and others, 1998;Garbarino, 1975;McLaughlin and Marsh, 1978;Spuck, 1974).…”

“…There seems to be extensive evidence that teachers regard professional efficacy, not money, as the primary motivator in their work (Scott, Cox, and Dinham, 1999;Dierynck and others, 1998;Garbarino, 1975;McLaughlin and Marsh, 1978;Spuck, 1974). There is even some evidence that the prospect of extrinsic rewards may diminish the potential of intrinsic rewards (Moore, 1986).…”

Work satisfaction and the ESL profession

“…Johnson (1986) notes that both extrinsic rewards, such as pay and promotion, as well as intrinsic rewards, such as pride in work, can supply motivation for teachers. Following the lead of Spuck (1974), she contends that better pay and higher status might draw those with an interest in teaching to the profession, but probably are not sufficient to retain or sustain outstanding staff members, as the best teachers stay in teaching because of intrinsic rewards. According to Goodlad (1984):…”

La réaction des enseignants aux attributs de leur tâche : une approche à leur motivation

“…Ainsi, par exemple, Sergiovanni (1967) a établi que les facteurs intrinsèques au travail étaient une source de satisfaction des ensei gnants. Spuck (1974), pour sa part, a trouvé que les récompenses intrinsèques étaient reliées au rendement au travail des enseignants, à une réduction de leur absentéisme et à l'efficacité de leur comportement en classe. Enfin, Toupin, Les sard, Cormier et Valois (1982) ont montré que les enseignants du Québec, d'une façon générale, sont «plutôt» ou «assez» satisfaits à l'égard de certaines dimen sions intrinsèques de leur travail.…”