Can an incentive scheme raise competences among teachers?

7/28/2019 Can an incentive scheme raise competences among teachers?

1/87

STUDENTNAME CATALINARODRIGUEZMERINO

STUDENTNUMBER 1133372

MAPROGRAMMENAME MAEDUCATIONMANAGEMENT

MODULENAMEEDUCATIONMANAGEMENT

DISSERTATION

MODULETUTOR CHRISTOPHERWINCH

WORDCOUNT 18,976

DEADLINEDATE NOVEMBER23TH,2012

DATESUBMITTED NOVEMBER23TH,

2012

SIGNATURE

INITIALS

Pagenumberoneachpage

Student number inheader or footer on

eachpage

Coverpage2beforeessayandafterthis

cover sheet, stating module title, essay

title,studentnumberandwordcount

Twohardcopiessubmitted

Onecopysubmittedviae-learning

Checkedworkisproperlyreferenced

Wordlengthlimitsrespected

Allsourcesarecorrectlycitedinorder


2/87

Cananincentiveschemeraisecompetenciesamongteachers? [ID:1133372]

2

Cananincentiveschemeraisecompetenciesamongteachers?

CatalinaRodrguezMerino

M.AinEducationManagementKingsCollegeLondon

November2012


3/87


3

ABSTRACT

Thesupplementaldissertationwilltrytooffercluesonteacherscompetencies,andhow

theycanberaisedthroughanincentiveprogramme.Empiricevidenceshowsthereisa

strongbondbetweenqualityofteachersandstudentsperformance.

However,sometimesteachersdonotworkontheircompetencies.Oneofthesolutions

toaddressthisissueistocreateanincentiveschememotivatingteacherstoperformin

theirbestquality.Theuseofincentivestomotivateemployeesiswidelyusedinseveral

industriestoaligntheobjectivesandresultsofthefirmswiththoseoftheemployees.

Thefirstaimofthisdissertationwastoidentifywhichcompetencieswerethebestones

forevaluatingteacherperformance.Todoso,acasestudyinaChileanprivateschoolwas

usedtoaddresswhichcompetencieswereexpectedinagoodteacher.Itwasimperative

tocreate thesetofcompetencies (indicators) tomeasure teacherperformanceonthe

schoolandlateron,determinewhichonesofthosecompetenciescouldberaisedifthe

schooldeterminetogiveincentivestotheteachingstaff.

The research question of the dissertation was: Can an incentive scheme raisecompetenciesamongteachers?Also,thedissertationplannedtogiveananswertoseven

objectives. (1) Determine what it is understood by competencies, incentives and any

relevanttopicrelatedtotheresearch.(2)Createatemplateofcompetencies.(3)Mapthe

set of competencies that are expected from the administration. (4) Map the set of

competenciestheteachingstaffoftheschoolthinktheyshouldpossessand/ordevelop.

(5)Discoverandinvestigateifobjectivethreeandobjectivefourarealigned.(6)Develop

a set of competencies using the data collected in the focus groups. (7) Answer the

researchquestion.

A purposefully methodologywas chosen to fulfill the requirements. A Chilean private

school was selectedbecause they have freedom and independence to implement any

typeofteacherevaluationandrewardsystemstheywantto.Themethodchosenwasa

qualitative research. Four focus groups were conducted to: the administration of the

school,Nursery,PrimaryandSecondaryTeachers.


4/87


4

People were asked to fill a template that divided different types of competencies in:

SystematicKnowledge,ProceduralKnowledge,LocalKnowledge,SocialCompetenceand

Self-Competence.Inthelightofthedatathatwasgatheredduringthefocusgroups,it

was possible to say administration and teachers were aligned in their thoughts. In

addition, thirty competencies were identified as the most important ones for the

participants.However,notallofthemweresuitabletorisethroughanincentivesystem.

The findingsofthe studyshowed thereare some competencies thatworkbetterwith

incentivesand some that simply donotwork.Amongthe competencies that couldbe

favoredare the ones that are easy tomeasure and quantify, suchas: proficiency ina

foreignlanguage,useoftechnology,literacyandnumeracyskills,knowledgeofinclusion,

and First Aids. On the other hand, soft skills and competencies related to Self-

Competencewerehardertoattachtoanindicatorandlesslikelytoworkinanincentive

scheme.


5/87


5

TABLEOFCONTENTS

TABLEOFCONTENTS..........................................................................................................5

CHAPTER1:INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................7 A.TheBackgroundoftheDissertation......................................................................................................................7 B.TheGoaloftheStudy................................................................ ................................................................. ................10C.ResearchQuestionandobjectives.......................................................................................................................11 D.OverviewoftheMethodology...............................................................................................................................12 E.OverviewoftheDissertationmap.......................................................................................................................13

CHAPTER2:LITERATUREREVIEW.....................................................................................14A.Mainconcepts...............................................................................................................................................................14 1.Incentivesasamechanismtoimprovetheeducationallearningprocess .......... .......... ......142.StudentPerformanceversusTeacherCompetencies .......................................................................163.Competencies:lookingforthebestsetofknowledge,skillsandattitudes ........................18

4.Personalqualities:animportantingredientofteachersperformance ...............................235.Havingmotivatedteachers ................................................................................................................................246.Finalthoughts.............................................................................................................................................................26

B.EducationalChileanbackground.........................................................................................................................27 1.Theimportanceofthestudy .............................................................................................................................272.TheChileansystemofeducation ......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ........283.TheChileansystemofincentives ...................................................................................................................28

CHAPTER3:METHODOLOGY............................................................................................31A.Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................31 B.QualitativeResearch..................................................................................................................................................31 C.FocusGroupthechosenmethod..........................................................................................................................33

D.Validityoftheresearch............................................................................................................................................33 E.Ethics................................................................................................................................................................................34 F.Creationofthetemplate...........................................................................................................................................34 G.Sample..............................................................................................................................................................................36 H.DataCollectionandManagement........................................................................................................................37

CHAPTER4:FOCUSGROUP..............................................................................................38 A.Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................38 B.AdministrationFocusGroup..................................................................................................................................39 1.Systematicknowledge: .........................................................................................................................................392.Proceduralknowledge: ........................................................................................................................................403.Localknowledge: ......................................................................................................................................................40

4.Socialcompetencies: ..............................................................................................................................................405.Self-Competence: ......................................................................................................................................................40

C.NurseryFocusGroup.................................................................................................................................................40 1.Systematicknowledge: .........................................................................................................................................402.Proceduralknowledge: ........................................................................................................................................413.Localknowledge: ......................................................................................................................................................414.Socialcompetencies: ..............................................................................................................................................415.Self-Competence: ......................................................................................................................................................41

D.PrimaryFocusGroup................................................................................................................................................41 1.Systematicknowledge: .........................................................................................................................................412.Proceduralknowledge: ........................................................................................................................................41


6/87


6

3.Localknowledge: ......................................................................................................................................................424.Socialcompetencies: ..............................................................................................................................................425.Self-Competence: ......................................................................................................................................................42

E.SecondaryFocusGroup............................................................................................................................................42 1.Systematicknowledge: .........................................................................................................................................422.Proceduralknowledge: ........................................................................................................................................423.Localknowledge: ......................................................................................................................................................434.Socialcompetencies: ..............................................................................................................................................435.Self-Competence: ......................................................................................................................................................43

CHAPTER5:DISCUSSIONANDINTERPRETATIONOFDATA...............................................44A.Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................44 B.Identifyingthesetofcompetenciesforeachgroup.....................................................................................44 C.Knowledgeofthesubject.........................................................................................................................................45 D.Inclusion.........................................................................................................................................................................46 E.Literacyandnumeracyskills.................................................................................................................................47 F.Foreignlanguage.........................................................................................................................................................48 G.Technology.............................................................. ................................................................. ......................................49H.Leadership.....................................................................................................................................................................50 I.Motivation/vocation...................................................................................................................................................51 J.Definitions,thefirststeptoestablishanincentivescheme....................................................... ................52K.Clarityoftheincentive............................................................. ................................................................. ................53L.Typeofincentive.........................................................................................................................................................55 M.Yearsofexperiencev/sperformance...............................................................................................................55

CHAPTER6:CONCLUSION................................................................................................57 A.Expectedsetofcompetencies.......................................................... ................................................................ ......57B.Raisingcompetenciesthroughincentives....................................................... .................................................60

CHAPTER7:APPENDICES.................................................................................................63 A.TemplatesinSpanish................................................................................................................................................63 1.NurserysheetfilledbyAdministration ......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ......... .....632.NurserysheetfilledbyNurseryTeachers .................................................................................................653.PrimarysheetfilledbyAdministration .....................................................................................................664.PrimarysheetfilledbyPrimaryTeachers ...............................................................................................675.SecondarysheetfilledbyAdministration ................................................................................................696.SecondarysheetfilledbySecondaryTeachers ..................................................................................... 70

B.TemplatesinEnglish.................................................................................................................................................72 7.NurserysheetfilledbyAdministration .....................................................................................................728.NurserysheetfilledbyNurseryTeachers ................................................................................................ 73

9.PrimarysheetfilledbyAdministration.....................................................................................................74

10.PrimarysheetfilledbyPrimaryTeachers ............................................................................................7511.SecondarysheetfilledbyAdministration .............................................................................................7612.SecondarysheetfilledbySecondaryTeachers .................................................................................. 77

C.Questionsmadeduringthefocusgroups.........................................................................................................78

REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................79


7/87


7

CHAPTER1:INTRODUCTION

A.TheBackgroundoftheDissertation

AsMizalaandRomaguera(2002)affirmthereisarecentinterestofquantifying

everysingleresultoftheeducationprocess.Theeducationsystemhasmanyparticipants

involved: parents, headmaster, classmates, nursery teachers, primary teachers,

secondary teachersandeverysinglehumanbeingwhoworksinaschool and interacts

with the student at some point. However, there is one actor who takes the biggest

responsibility in this endeavour: the teacher. Schools, governments and parents are

looking for good teachers. Teacherswith the enough quality to impact in the student

learningprocess.AsWaterreussuggests,teacherqualitycouldbedefinedasteachers

abilitytocontributetopupilachievement(2003,p.29).

Researchshowsthatteacherqualityaffectsstudentsachievementmoregreatly

than any other school-based variable (Goldrick, 2002, p.2). This affirmationmade by

Goldrick ten years ago was supported by several studies (Darling-Hammond and

Loewenberg, 1998, Fergusonand Ladd, 1996, Sanders etal., 1997). Knowing that this

variablewassoimportantforthelearningprocesshelpedtheGovernmentoftheUnited

States toannounce theAct NoChildLeftBehind(USDE,2007)wherea highly skilled

teacherineveryclassroomwasanationalaimandstillis.AsCarnoy etal.stressakey

elementinbetterschoolingisbetterteaching(2007,p.190).

The main problem and concern is teaching quality is not directly observable.

Becauseofthisgapbetweenwhatitisobservableandwhatitisnot,theschoolhasto

create a set of indicators that will help the administration with the accountability

process (Mizala and Romaguera, 2004). With those indicators, schools generate

information that will help in the decision-making and will make possible to evaluate

teachersandtheirquality.

Thisproblemispresentatschoolswheredifferentactorssuchastheheadmaster

andtheparentswanttohavethebestteachersfortheirchildren,understandingthata


8/87


8

betterteacherwillproduceabetteroutcomeamongstudents.However, itispractically

impossible to place every parent and the administration of the school inside the

classroomcheckingthattheteacherisdoingher1bestefforttoteachthestudents.That

was one of the concerns examined by Eberts et al.: Education involves multiple

stakeholders, disparate and conflicting goals, complex and multitask jobs, team

production,uncertain inputs,andidiosyncraticelementscontingenton theattributesof

individual students, the efforts and attitudes of fellow teachers, and the classroom

environments(2002,p.914).Thatiswayitissodifficulttofindanindicatorcapableof

measuring students performance. The complexity of variables and people involved

sometimesblursthefinaltarget,whichistohelpinthelearningprocess.

So,thefirstaimofthisdissertationistoidentifythoseindicators,whichindicators

arethebestonesforevaluatingteacherperformance.Todoso,acasestudyinaChilean

private school will be used to address which competencies are expected in a good

teacher.Oneoftheobjectivesoftheresearchistocreateasetofcompetenciesthatwill

beusedintheschoolasindicatorstoevaluateteacherperformance.

The first goal is clear, to identify qualified teachers. The second goal of the

researchis toanalyze ifit ispossible toraisethosecompetenciesand having the bestteachersinsidetheclassroom.AsSantibaezpointsouttoensurequalifiedteachersget

to the classroom (and remain there), salariesmust be set accordingly (2010, p.481).

SomethingthatitiswellknownintheUnitedStates,whereseveralstudies(Brewer,1996,

GritzandTheobald,1996,Kirbyetal.,1999,Podgurskyetal.,2004,StockardandLehman,

2004)implyapositivelinkbetweengoodsalariesandlowerattritionofgoodteachers.

InLatinAmerica,Gonzalez(2001)analyzedhowsalariesofprimaryandsecondary

teachersraisedinChilebetween1990and2003andfoundapositiveeffectonstudents

testscores.SameconclusionwasobtainedbytheOECD(2004)initsreportaboutChilean

reality. However, it was impossible to determine which teacher in particular was

responsible of that score. One of the concerns is how to identify the individualistic

teacherperformanceoneachstudent:MizalaandRomaguera(2002)finditdifficultto

addressacorrelationbetweenstudentstestscoresandgoodteacher:howmuchofthe

1Forthepurposeofthisdissertationandtosimplifythenarration,theteacherwillbeafemalecharacter.


9/87


9

testscore isattributable to certain teacher, to studentgenetics, toparentseducation,

etc.

What itis clear isthatempiricevidenceshowsthereis astrong bondbetween

qualityofteachersandstudentsperformance(Rivkinetal.,1998).But,ontheotherhand,

the relationbetweenqualityofteachers and salariesis not asconclusiveas the above

connection(BallouandPodgursky,1997,Figlio,1997,Hanusheketal.,1999).Oneofthe

solutions toaddressthis issue isto create an incentive schememotivating teachersto

perform in their best quality (Gonzlez, 1998). With an incentive scheme the gap is

solved, something Santibaez agree with: this situation in a way that improves

educationaloutcomes, incentiveprogramsineducationare being increasingly favored

(2010,p.481).

Theuseofincentivestomotivateemployeesiswidelyusedinseveralindustriesat

alllevelstoaligntheobjectivesandresultsofthefirmswiththoseoftheemployees.This

solutionwasdevisedtosolvewhatisknownineconomicsastheprincipal-agentproblem

whenobjectivesofdifferentpartiesarenotinsyncorevendivergegreatly(Eisenhardt,

1989).

Business and economic literature explore these issues in depth, where theincentives most commonly found are financial, such as stock options, variable pay,

bonusesandnon-financialincentivesthatcanrangefromadditionaldaysofvacationto

patontheback.Inmostcasesfoundinthebusinessworld,benefitsareassociatedtothe

accomplishmentofspecificgoals.Particularlytrueforthecaseof thesaleforces,where

salariesaretiedtosalelevels(Ross,1973).

Fortheeducationprofessionals,setting,measuringandevaluatinggoalsisaless

straightforward endeavor since the appraisal of the effort, competencies and

performanceofteachersismoresubjectiveandspecific,needingacarefulreviewvis--vis

(Asch,2005).Itismoredifficultbutitwillbringpositiveoutcomestothegovernmentsto

useincentivesasacarrottoattractuniversitystudentstotheteachingpath.Cornettand

Gaines explain incentives are helping states recruit new teachers into theworkforce,

attract persons from outside education, retain teachers in the classroom and support

accountability programs that focus on school-by-school efforts to boost student


10/87


10

achievement(2002,p.4).

As Lavy (2007) describes, incentives can be deliver in different ways: to the

individualortoagroup(teachers,department,schools);theycanbeseenasarewardor

asasystemofrewardandsanction;theycanbeaonceinalifetimeeventorhavea

regular periodicity. Finally, they can come in termsofmoney or offer non-monetary

compensation (trips, days off, diplomas, etc.) like Vegas and Umansky (2005) add.

Becausethescopeofthedissertationisnottoidentifywhichtypeofincentiveisthebest

one, but to analyze if an incentive (any) can raise competencies among teachers, no

distinctionwillbemadewhentalkingaboutincentivesingeneral.

Thedistinctionandthediscussionwillbemadeinthesenseofwhattorewardif

the students performance or the teachers competencies. Vegas and Umansky have

investigatedthatmostrecentincentiveprogramsaremeritpaystyleprogramsfocusing

on student test scores as the main measure of teacher performance (2005, p.481),

leading tothewell knownconcept teaching to the test (Glewweetal., 2003,Koretz,

2002).FiglioandWinicki(2005)evenaffirmtheareresultswhereteachersrisethecaloric

consumption of students the day of the test to increase the obtained results. Not

everything are bad news, Lazear believes there are teachers that actually improvestudentsscoresinagoodsense,butthemaindifficultywithoutput-basedpayisthat

evenifteacherscanaffecttheirstudentsearnings,theevidencedoesnotshowupuntil

manyyearsafterthestudentleavestheteachersclass(2003,p.179).Thistime-space

gapdifficulttheusingofthisindicatorasatooltorewardteachers.

B.TheGoaloftheStudy

The main issue is sometimes schools implement incentives scheme without

knowingorhaving clarityofthe purposeand expectedoutcomes. It isa try and error

system. As Figlio and Kenny note, teachers and schools engage in this process with

virtuallynoevidenceon[their]potentialeffectiveness(2007,p.902).Becauseofthat,

the aim of this research is to have evidence before implementing a new system of

incentives in the Chilean school used in the research. At the end, as Carnoy et al.


11/87


11

emphasizewell-designedteacherincentiveschemescanhavepositiveeffectsonstudent

performance(2007,p.192).AndthatiswhytheChileanprivateschooldecidedtoengage

in the research and see if an incentive program could raise competencies among

teachers, becauseasseenaboveandaswillbe seen indepth intheLiteratureReview

Chapter,qualifiedteachersaffectpositivelyinstudentperformance.

Theschoolselectedhasnotimplementedanincentiveschemefortheirteaching

staff. The only thing they have done so far, in the past few years, has been to give

monetary bonuses to those teachers who prepared students for the National

StandardizedTests(SIMCEandPSU)andgotexcellentresults.But,itisnotanincentive

schemeitisjustsomethingextrainthesalaryforasmallanddelimitedgroupofteachers.

Theaimofthe school isto create awiderstructurewhereeverysingle teacherofthe

schoolcouldparticipate,notonlytheonesinvolvedwiththementionedtests.Todoso,it

is imperative to create the set of competencies (indicators) to measure teacher

performanceontheschoolandlateron,determinewhichonesofthosecompetencies

couldberaisediftheschooldeterminetogiveincentivestotheteachingstaff.Thatisthe

goal of the study, to determine if it is possible to raise competencies, because as

Arumugasamy(2012)indicated,teachersarethemostimportantfactortodevelopandimproveaneducationofquality,becausetheyarethecentreoftheprocess,theyarethe

onesteaching.

C.ResearchQuestionandobjectives

A. ResearchQuestion:Cananincentiveschemeraisecompetenciesamongteachers?

1. Objective one: Determine what is it understood by competencies,incentivesandanyrelevanttopicrelatedtotheresearch.

2. Objectivetwo:Createatemplateofcompetenciestoworkwithduringtheresearch.

3. Objectivethree:Mapthesetofcompetenciesthatareexpectedfromthecoordinatorsandtheheadmasteroftheschool.


12/87


12

4. Objective four: Map the set of competencies the teaching staff of theschoolthinktheyshouldpossessand/ordevelop.

5. Objective five: Discover and investigate if objective three and objectivefourarealigned.

6. Objectivesix:Developasetofcompetenciesforthisparticularschoolusingthedatacollectedinthefocusgroups.

7. Objectiveseven:Answertheresearchquestion,analyzingifitispossibletoapplyan incentive scheme toraisesomeof the competencies settled in

objectivesix.

D.OverviewoftheMethodology

Toaccomplishtheaimofthedissertationandanswertheresearchquestionmade

above a purposefully methodology was selected to fulfill the requirements of the

dissertation goal. First, it was selected Chile as a country of research because the

investigator isa Chilean citizen and is currently living inSantiago, the country capital.

Second, a private school was selected to develop the research because they have

freedom and independence to implement any type of teacher evaluation and reward

systems they want to. Public schools and subsidized schools were left out of the

discussionbecausetheyhavetheirownsystemofevaluationandtheydependfromthe

MinistryofEducation(ContrerasandRau,2009).

Theprivateschoolselectedwaschosenbecauseitwaskeentoinvestigatewhich

competencies were necessary to have qualified teachers and wanted to create an

incentive scheme inside the school.The investigator knew the headmaster (she isalso

one oftheowners)ofthe schoolwho saidyes tothe invitationofparticipatingin this

research. In addition, it is a small school for the Chilean standards (700 hundred

students).So, itwasnotdifficulttogainthesupportof theentire teachingstaffof the

schooltoparticipateintheinvestigation.

Qualitative investigation was chosen because it was not necessary to create

indicatorsandinformationforulteriorpurposesoutsidetheschool,noneedofhavinga

transferable study. The scope of the investigation was to find answers and solutions


13/87


13

withintheschool.Moreover,theauthorofthedissertationwantedtoknowtheopinion

oftheteachersandhoweachopiniondialoguedwiththeopinionofthecolleague.The

idea was to create a set of indicators using the inputs of everybody. That is why a

Qualitativeinvestigationwaschosen;andthemethodselectedwasfocusgroups.

The staff of the school was divided in four groups: administration, nursery

teachers, primary teachers and secondary teachers. Eight people participated in the

administration group (including the headmaster), eight nursery teachers, twenty-four

primaryteachersandnineteensecondaryteachers.Therefore,thestudyislimitedtothe

datathatwasprovidedbythepeopleinvolvedinthefocusgroups.

E.OverviewoftheDissertationmap

The dissertation will be divided in six chapters. The first chapter is the

introduction. The second chapter includes the literature review regarding to using

incentivestoraisecompetenciesamongteachers.Thissectionoffersabriefoverviewon

competencies,incentives,motivationamongotherconceptsrelatedtothesubject.Also,

providesaconcisebackgroundoftheChileanreality,sincetheresearchtookplaceina

Chileanprivateschool.

The third chapter of the dissertation describes the methodology used in the

research,abackgroundofthestudy,significanceofthestudy,limitationsanddefinitions.

Chapterfourprovidesanoverviewofthedatacollectedinthefocusgroupsandpresents

empirical results. Fifth chapter presents the findings from the focus groups and the

relationbetweenwhat the administrationof the school thinkandwhat teaching staff

believes. It also, includes discussion and interpretation of the data; and final chapter

containstheconclusionofthedissertation.

Regardingtotheresearchquestionandobjectives:objectiveonewillbeanswered

intheLiteratureReviewChapter;objectivetwointheMethodologyChapter;objectives

three and four in the Focus Group Chapter; objective five in the Discussion and

InterpretationoftheDataChapter.Objectivesixandresearchquestionwillbeanswered

intheconclusionofthedissertation.


14/87


14

CHAPTER2:LITERATUREREVIEW

In the second chapter of the dissertation a brief overview on implementing

incentivestoraisecompetenciesamongteacherswillbeaddressed.Thechapterwillbe

dividedintwosections.Thefirstonedescribesandanalysesdifferentconceptsthatwill

help achieving objective one of the dissertation. What is understood by: incentives,

competencies;theimportanceofmotivationandvocationforateacher;thedifference

between student performance and teachers competencies; which specific qualities a

goodteachershouldhave,amongothers.

The second section offers a succinct background of the Chilean education

environment reality: basic knowledge of the educational system, the culture and how

incentivesandcompetenciesareusedinChileanschools.Theresearchwasconductedin

aChileanprivateschool,soitwasrequiredfortheclarityofthestudytotacklesomeof

thoseissues.

A.Mainconcepts

1.Incentivesasamechanismtoimprovetheeducationallearningprocess

Asseenintheintroduction,theconceptofincentiveshasspreadamongdifferent

industries as a tool to associate the aims and goals of the administration with the

thoughtsandobjectivesoftheemployeesofacertaincompany.Eisenhardt(1989),more

than twenty years ago, determined incentives helped solving the economic problem

knownasprincipal-agent:whengoalsofemployersandemployeesarenotalignedandit

isnecessarytosync them.Incentivesarein chargeoffillingthatgap.Theycanfillthat

space with different approaches: ranging from a public demonstration of value (i.e.

employee of the month) to monetary bonuses, extra days of vacation and fringe

benefits.AsRoss(1973)pointsout,thoseincentivesarenotforfree,theyarelinkedwith

certaingoals andperformances theadministrationisexpectingfromtheemployees to

achieve.


15/87


15

Intheeducationalenvironment,incentivesschemesarewidespreadandprobed

tohaveapositiveeffect(FiglioandKenny,2007,Vegas,2005).AvalosandAssaelsuggest

theschemeaschoolshouldhavemayconsideracombinationofcontrolsandincentives

(asaresultofevaluationprocedures)willactascarrotstoimproveteachersorserveas

instrumentsto removeteacherswho are judged asbeing incompetent (2006, p.255).

ThesameinterrogationhasJulianLeGrand: should theeducationsystemincorporate

incentive structures that reward (or penalise) the knave, or ones that encourage (or

discourage) the knight? (2003, p.24). The best approach is the one where every

participantoftheschemeagreeson.TheconclusionsoftheinvestigationmadebyEberts

etal.regardingtotheimplementationofamerit-paysysteminahighschool,determined

monetaryincentiveswork,onlyifthemeasuresareagreeduponbybothteachersand

administration(2002,p.926).MizalaandRomaguerabelieveintheincentiveschemeas

a method to improve the learning process: the system is based on the idea that if

commonminimalstandardsaretakenintoaccount,schoolscanprepareandpayteachers

forthoseaspectsandfunctionsthattheyneedtodevelop(2004,p.741).Attheend,is

whatLazearaffirmstyingcompensationtotheappropriatemetricprovidesincentivesto

moveinthedirectionthathasbeenagreedon(2003,p.182).Ifthepartiesharmonizeoneveryconcepttheprincipal-agentissuewilltendtodisappear.

Once the idea of givingmonetary incentives is settled in the school is time to

determine andmanage the amount of the incentive in a productiveway: not to low,

otherwise teachers will not make an extra effort to gain it. Not to easy to achieve,

becauseasMizalaandRomaguera(2002)affirm,theideaofawardingbestteacherswill

dilute and itwillbecomeageneralizedraiseofteachers salaries. LikeFiglio andKenny

(2007)stateintheirresearch,thebestapproachtouseincentiveswaswhentherewards

wereverydifficulttogetandonlyasmallnumberofthestaffwasawarded.

AccordingtotheAmericanFederationofTeachers(2000),anaveragemonetary

incentive should be between 10% to 40% of the annual merit pay. Even though,

everybody will say they prefer more than less andwill fight to get that extra pay. As

Glewweetal.analyzelargerincentivesmightinducemoreeffortbyteachers,theycould

alsohaveinducedeffortatcounter-productivesignaling,forexamplethroughcheatingon


16/87


16

testsorforcingweakstudentstodropout(2003,p.32).However,someauthors(Harris

and Sass, 2009, Guarino et al., 2006, Jesus and Lens, 2005) conclude cheating it has

nothingtodowiththeamountoftheincentivebutwiththepersonalcharacteristicsof

theteachingstaff,andtheincentivewillnotchangethosecharacteristics.Thisissuewill

betacklelateroninthemotivationsubtitle.

Asaconclusionoftheimportanceofhavingincentivesintheeducationalprocess,

itisusefultorememberwhatPrendergast(1999)saidinhispaper:Ifanincentiveisgiven

toa teacher shewillmakeanextraeffort and take ahigher riskonteaching, riskshe

wouldnottakeiftheincentivedidnotexist.Understandingthatwithriskinvolvedthere

willbeprogressintheeducationlearningprocess.

2.StudentPerformanceversusTeacherCompetencies

It is clear that using incentives will help with the aim of boosting educational

levels.Thequestionnowiswhattoincentive,wheretheadministrationoftheschooland

government set the carrot. Thereare twomain approaches:reward the output ofthe

process, the student performance (scores innational tests, the object);or reward the

skillsandcapabilitiesoftheteachers(thesubjectitself).

Inmany countries the bonuses to teachersare basedonstudentperformance

ratherthanteacherscompetencies:ItisthecaseofKenya,Glewwe etal.(2003)bonuses

arepaidbasedonteacherattendanceandstudentperformance.Theconclusionsofthe

Kenyanexperienceshowedthatteacherattendancedidnotimprove,thepedagogyused

inside the classroom did not progress and students kept missing classes. The only

significant difference was teachers started teaching to the test and raised students

competenciesinashort-runtogetbetterscoresonthenationaltests.

AdifferentexperimentperformedbyMuralidharanandSundararaman(2006)in

Indiagavebonuspaymentstoteacherswhentheirstudentstestscoresimproved.The

evidence showed there were improvements in math and language. Moreover, they

detectednoadverseconsequencesoftheprogramwithstudentperformanceimproving

onmechanicalaswellasconceptualquestionsandonincentiveaswellasnon-incentive

subjects(2006,p.34).


17/87


17

Lazearhasadiverseperspectiveregardingtoattachingteachersincentiveswith

students outcomes: the problem is that the relevant earnings do not show up until

manyyearsaftertheindividualhasreceivedtheeducation.Therefore,itis impossibleto

tie teacher compensation to the earningsofher students, even if that is the relevant

metric(2003,p.183).Thatiswhytheauthorprefersusingteacherscompetenciesasa

relevantmetrictorewardteachersthanstudentsachievement.

Inadifferentapproach,Lavy(2002)equaledschoolsgettingmonetaryincentives

andschoolswithoutanincentiveschemewithinthesamecommunityandfoundpositive

effectsofincentivesonstudentsoutcomes(testresults).AuthorssuchasHarbisonand

Hanushek (1992), Hanushek (1996) and Lockheedand Verspoor (1991), claimthat ifa

systemiscreatedtoattachstudentsperformancewithteachersincentives,teacherswill

makeanextraefforttoachievethegoal.Ontheotherhand,authorslikeHolmstromand

Milgrom(1991)andHannaway(1992)stressstandardizedtestsonlyevaluateoneaspect

of a teacher performance and leave behind others properties such as innovation,

creativity, softskills, etc.However, theyrealize this happenbecausecompetenciesare

much harder to measure than observable outputs such as those standardized tests.

Waterreus (2003) agrees with Hannaway and that incipient hazard as teachers facemultiple (and often competing) tasks there is the risk that they focus their efforts on

performancemeasurementindicatorsattheexpenseofothereducationalgoals(p.150).

Theaimoftheschoolsandgovernmentshouldbetofindproperindicatorsthat

donot leavebehindany aspectofthe teachers competencies.AsGoldrick points out,

governments aredesigningperformance-based licensesthat require demonstrationof

subjectknowledgeandteachingskill,ratherthanbasinglicensesoncoursecreditsand

hoursof professional development (2002, p.4). And teachers are being evaluated by

theses demonstrations rather than students outcomes. If the aim is to compare the

performance between schools, using standardized national tests is the best solution

available.However, iftheaim isto compare teacherswithin the school, thenteaching

competencies is the tool thatwill help administrators to improve the performanceof

theirstudents(MizalaandRomaguera,2004).


18/87


18

Eberts et al. address the issue of having performances evaluations saying it is

practicallyimpossibletohavestandardizedinstrumentsforeveryindicatorofteachers

performance,soschoolsmusthaveinminditwillbeasubjectiveevaluation(2002).And

sometimesteachersavoidbeingevaluated,sothetaskofmeasuringthosecompetencies

getsevenharder:surveysindicateaclearpreferenceforextrapayforextrawork.Pay

for performance requires that teachers be sorted or graded in some way, and the

majority of teachers resist this concept (Cornett and Gaines, 2002, p.16). They are

harder tomeasure but not impossible. That is the aimof the research, to be able of

measuringthosecompetenciesandalignthemwiththenecessaryincentive.

3.Competencies:lookingforthebestsetofknowledge,skillsandattitudes

Inordertoanswertheresearchquestionofthedissertation,itwasnecessaryto

clarify two main concepts: incentives and competencies. The first one was already

addressedandnowitistimeforthesecondone.

Theword competencehashadmanymeaningsand interpretations during the

decades.Someofthemlackofsubstanceandothersaretoocomplextoimplement.For

the purpose of thisdissertation the definitionofStoof,Martens and VanMerrinboer

(2000) intheir paperWhatis competence?Aconstructivistapproach asaway outof

confusion,wastakenandwillbeusedduringtheresearch.Thatdefinitionclarifiesthree

mainingredientsthatmustbe integratedwhentalkingaboutcompetencies:knowledge,

skills and attitudes. A set of competencies will be amix of those three ingredients. A

competentteacherwillhavetheknowledgeandtheskillstofulfillhertask,butalsowill

havetheproperattitudeamongherstudents,colleaguesandparents.Oncethecompetenciesaresettled,thereisanunderstandingofthemeaningof

theword;competencieshavetocometolifethroughimplementation.Inthatsense,as

Caprara and Cervone (2003) affirm competencies will be transformed into behavior.

Whenarethosecompetenciestransformedintobehavior?Whentheteacherbelievesin

them: we realize a teachers competencies are determined by his or her beliefs

(Korthagen,2004,p.80).Thisworksbothways,sometimestheteacherwillhavethebelief


19/87


19

andthewillingtochangeherbehaviorbutwillnothavethebeneathcompetencetodoit

(Korthagenetal.,2001).Andsometimes,willhavethecompetencebutnotthewillingof

turnthatcompetenceintobehavior.

Itisclearateachershouldpossessanddevelopasetofcompetencies.But,why

theeffortofidentifyingthelistofcompetenciesagoodteachershouldhave.Themain

reasonisdescribedbyKorthagen(2004).Heemphasizesthattheeffortmadetocreatea

concretelistofcompetenciesisforthepurposesofidentifyingtheteachingbehaviors

thatdisplayedthehighestcorrelationwiththelearningresultsofchildren(p.79).Atthe

end, the aim is to know which competencies affect directly the learning process of

students; those are the ones the administration of the school will try to strengthen

throughincentives.

Since1950manyauthors(Barretal.,1961,Beecher,1953)havestudiedandlisted

themainattributesagoodteachershouldhaveinordertoteachproperly.Amongthose

characteristics they included flexibility, emotional stability, ethical behavior,

expressiveness,andpersonalmagnetism.Allthoseattributesareneededtocreateagood

atmosphereintheclassroom.Andoneofthewaystocheckthoseattributesisthrough

systemsliketheTeachingEvaluationRecordcreatedbyBeecher(1953).Lately,duringtheseventies,theU.S.accountabilitymovementmadeasignificant

efforttoquantifyandidentifythemaincompetenciesateachershouldhaveinorderto

beconsidered asaqualifiedteacher (CruickshankandHaefele,2001).However, itwas

Dodl et al. (1972) who created the biggest collection of teachers competencies

categorizedinthreemaincategories:communicationskills,howtoassessstudentsand

administrativeduties.

AlmostthirtyyearspassedbyandCruickshankandHaefele(2001),afteranalyzing

differenthistorictrends,cameupwithalistofcompetenciesateachershouldhavetoget

the labelof goodteacher.First, they saidagoodteachershouldmealignedwiththe

views and aims of the school she is working and she must share the same ideals.

Otherwise, there is the risk of having teachers objectives and employers objectives

(headmasters, school boards, authorities)mutuallyexclusiveand competing oneswith

the others as Santibaez (2010) addresses, the know problem of the principal-agent.


20/87


20

Second,agoodteachermustbeanalyticandagoodobserveroftheenvironment.Third,

sheshouldbeaseffectiveaspossibleinthedeliveryofpedagogiccontent,settinghigh

standardsforstudents.Fourth,agoodteachershouldperformherdutiesproperlyandon

time.Fifth,agoodteachershouldbecompetentandreflectiveineverytaskshedecides

toperform. Sixth, shemustbeanexpertonherareaofexpertise,alwaysuptodated

knowledge. Finally, a good teacher should be respected because she has earned that

respectwithheractions.

Korthagen(2004)inhisarticlenamedInsearchoftheessenceofagoodteacher:

towardsamoreholisticapproach in teacher education discussed twomainquestions

regardingtothissubject:Whataretheessentialqualitiesofagoodteacher?andHow

canwehelppeopletobecomegoodteachers?(p.78).Theessentialqualitiesofagood

teacher is a task difficult to fulfill, many authors such as Becker, Kennedy and

Hundersmarck(2003)havecreated lists ofcompetencies tohelppolicy-makersin their

labor of creating standards for teaching education. It is difficult but not impossible,

Barnett(1994)andHyland(1994)agreeitis feasibletodescribethequalityofa teacher

bylistingitscompetencies,likeCruickshankandHaefele(2001)didtenyearsago.Amore

pessimisticperspective is the onemade byHamachek (1999) who says none of thesequestions have been answered yet. However, it is possible to create some sort of

frameworkwhereteacherscompetenciescanbeanalyzedandappliedinaconstructive

context.

In very recent study made by Rusu, oitu and Panaite (2012) seventy-seven

studentsfromtheUniversityofIasiinRomaniafromtheFacultyofLettersandtheFaculty

ofPhilosophy and Political Sciencewere asked toanswer the questionWhatare the

characteristicsofthe idealteacher?.Themainanswersemphasizedthatrelationaland

communicational competencies were the most important ones. The ideal teachers

featuresweresummarizedinahierarchizedchartstartingwiththemostimportantone

and descending to the less relevant ones: human relations skills, fair assessment,

knowledge of the subject, facilitator of students intellectual development, respectful,

dynamic teacher, availability, good listener, love for the subject taught, capable of

establishing links between related fields, being able to teach others how to learn for


21/87


21

themselves(p.1018-1019).Oneofthefeaturesthatwassubjectofgreatdiscussionduring

thestudywastheconceptoffairassessmenttheevaluationofthestudentperformance

mustbeobjective, even if teachersare not scoringmachines (p.1019). Adebatewas

createdbecauseitlinkedtwotypesofcompetencies:inonehandthecapabilityofassess

(having the knowledge of the evaluation process) and in the other hand the value if

fairness,apersonalqualitythathadnothingtodowiththeevaluationitself.

Oneofthecompetenciesthatwasnottakenfromgrantedintheresearchwasthe

knowledgeofthesubject,studentswhowereinterviewemphasizedintheimportanceof

demonstrating expertise in the content, always making an effort of gaining new

knowledge:thefeatureequallyhighlightstheself-knowledge,theselfintrospectionand

the tendency of continuous advancing personally and professionally in terms of

competence(p.1019).

LikeRusu,oituandPanaite(2012);Rogers(2006)alsoreportedinhisresearch

that communicational competencies were amain factor inside the classroom: a good

teacher should be able to communicate with the students make them behave and

succeedinthelearningprocess;inaddition,studentswouldbeconfidentandmotivated

bythiscommunicativeteacher.HavingcontroloftheclassissomethingWillingham(2009)paysspecialattention.

He argues that being funny, a good listener, emphatic, etc. it is valuable, but if the

teacher doesnot have the capacityoforganizing the ideas ina structured lesson and

succeedonimplementingthelesson,studentswillnotunderstandthecontentandwill

notrememberwhattheyweretaught.

Jovanova-MitkovskaandHristovska hadthe samequestion fromaboveauthors

regarding to competencies: what are the key competencies the students-future-

teachers-to-beshouldhave,inaccordancewiththecommitmentforqualityinEuropean

teachers education? (2011, p.575). This question was answered with a chart

compressing twenty-must-have competencies in the European environment:

communicating in their native language; communication in at least one foreign

language;mathematical competence; competencies for scienceand technology; digital


22/87


22

competence, learning competencies or learning how to learn; social and civic

competencies(p.576).

Anotherimportantfactortoconsiderwhenlistingtheattributesorcompetencies

expectedistheanxietyorfeelingsofvictimizationateachermayhave.AvalosandAssael

pay attention when teachers are being evaluated beyond what is their experience

specially if publicly the process ispresented asa strategy todealwithunsatisfactory

studentlearningresults(2006,p.255).Inaddition,anothermatterarisinginthistypeof

evaluationistheevaluatoritself.AsPrendergast(1999,p.29-31)addressesitisimportant

to take into account the task of the evaluator and the subjectivity of his labor: in a

competence model, the teacher will be evaluated by her direct boss (usually a

coordinator), colleagues and students. Colleagues maybe affected by a moral hazard

problem,theyareevaluatingandatthesametimetheywillbeevaluated,whichmayend

upwithcompresseddistributionofratings.Becauseofthisissueitisveryimportantto

haveaflawlesssetofindicatorswhendoingtheevaluationsoitwillbeasfairaspossible.

A different matter it is important to add to the equation, when using

competenciesasatoolofevaluation,istheexecutionofthelistcreated.Eventhough,if

theteacherknowsandagreesonthelistofcompetenciesthatwillhelphertoimproveherproductivityandworkinsidetheclassroom,Hamilton(2005)suggeststeacherswill

need help and support on figuringout how to implement those competencies during

theirlectures.Theyknowwhatit isbestforstudentachievementbutsometimesdonot

knowhowtoaccomplishthattask,andfailintheprocess.

As it has been seen, it is a widespread tool to use a list of competencies to

evaluateteachersperformance,however,asKorthagensaidlongdetailedlistsofskills

were formulated,whichgradually resulted ina kindof fragmentationof the teachers

role(2004,p.79).Attheend,agoodteachershouldnotbeminimizedtoalistofisolated

competenciesthataresusceptibletobelearnedbytraining.Thosecompetenciesshould

beusedasaguide,somenecessarybutnotsufficienttoevaluatetheoverallperformance

of the teacher. Tickle (1999) is one of the authors who advocates for personal

characteristicssuchasenthusiasmandloveofchildren,toaddtothelistofcompetencies

related to the occupational skills and abilities to evaluate teachers performance. It is


23/87


23

better for the purpose of the incentive scheme to use a holistic approach in the

evaluation process and aggregate competencies involving personal qualities of the

teacher.

4.Personalqualities:animportantingredientofteachersperformance

Oneoftheareasthatitiswidespreadinthecompetenciesenvironmentistheone

regarding topersonal qualities.Qualities suchas trust,motivation, courage, creativity,

fairness,commitmentandflexibilityareexpectedamongteachers(Tickle,1999)butalso

qualitiesthataremoreholisticlikespirituality,transcendenceandvocation(Petersonand

Seligman, 2000).Others authors such asOfman (2000) chose a different word to talk

about personal qualities, but at the end it worked as a synonymous: core qualities.

SeligmanandCsikszentmihalyianalyzedifferenttypesofpersonalcharacteristicsandsay

itisimportantnottofocusontheweaknessandliabilitiesofapersonbutonthegood

ones:thebesttreatmentisnotjustfixingwhatisbroken;itisnurturingwhatisbest

(2000,p.7).Nurturingthosebestpersonalqualitiesthroughincentivesisthetrendthese

authorsagreeon.

AspinwallandStaudinger(2003)talkaboutcharactersstrengths,asamechanism

tosustainthegoodqualitiesamongteachers.Schoolsshouldfocusonstrengthensthose

characters rather than complaining about the weak ones. Stoddard (1991) creates a

concept for thisapproacheducationforgreatness,wheretheeducationprovided to

the teachers incentives the development of great human beings who will make a

contribution tothe humansociety. Inaddition, the author emphasizes thereare three

maincharacteristicsthatahumanbeingshouldnurturetobecomeagreathumanbeing:

astrong senseofself-worth,deep feelingsof love and respect for all people,and an

insatiablehungerfortruthandknowledge(p.221).

Themain concern isone Korthagen addresses and pays special attention: such

qualities or strengths are rarely included inofficial listsof teacher competencies and

assessments procedures (2004, p.93). They are harder to quantify and usually left

behind.Attheend,oneofthemostimportantquestionsheadmastersandpeoplefrom


24/87


24

the administration ask themselves in order to define an accurate salary and bonus

scheme for the teachers is the one Steiner askswithout finding and answer: How to

placethevocationonthepayroll?(2005,p.19).

5.Havingmotivatedteachers

JesusandLensaffirmacommonteacherscomplaintisthedifficultyofkeeping

studentsmotivatedtolearnintheclassroom:Howmuchmoredifficultisitiftheteachers

themselves are not motivated? (2005, p.120). Motivation is a key factor among the

expected competencies ofa teacher,because asBentea and Anghelache stress work

motivationisarelevantconstruct,boththeoreticalandpractical,duetoitsassociation

anddirect implicationsonperformances at individual andorganizational levels (2012,

p.563).Amotivatedteachingstaffwillhavebetterperformancesthatwillaffectpositively

studentsoutcomes.

Almost fifty years ago, McClelland (1965) created a model of motivation that

companies and institutions are still using these days. The author suggests the school

shouldbeableofofferingtotheteachersthechanceoffulfillingthreetypesofneeds:

achievement (getting high standards, great performance and mastering of skills);

affiliation(feelingpartofacommunity,agroup,cooperationandfriendship);andpower

(tobecapableofinfluencingintheenvironment,berelevanttothecommunity).Ifthe

teacheraccomplishesthesethreeneeds,itwillbeamotivatedteacher.

OtherauthorssuchasHarrisandSass(2009)saidmotivationisnotsomethingthe

schoolshouldgive,ratherthanthepersonshouldpossess.Theyelaboratedacategoryof

threetypesofteachers:(1)peoplewithinnatevocationandtalent,(2)teacherswhoare

selfmotivated but donot possess the technical professional skills and (3) peoplewho

choseto teachbecause ofdifferent reasonsbutmotivationwas not one of them.For

example, sometimes the teacher iswilling and motivated toperform ather best, she

prepares the lesson, she isenthusiastic, but despite all her efforts the students show

disinterestandtheydonotachievetheexpectedlearningresults.Asaconsequencethe


25/87


25

teacher is not longermotivated and becomes inhibited and stressed asEsteve (1992)

addresses.

It is important to clarify some concepts and vocabulary to make a distinction

betweenmotivationandbehaviour:thetermbehaviour[isused]todescribeasetof

actionsoractivitiesundertakenbyanindividual.Motivationisapsychologicalstatethatis

one,butonlyone,ofthefactorsthatmaydeterminebehaviour(LeGrand,2003,p.25).

Aswecanseethebehaviourofateacherwillbeaffectedbyhermotivation,butalsoby

herresources,skills,abilities,etc.Motivationwillbealwayslinkedwithbehaviour,ifthe

teacherexertsgreateffort, littleeffortornoeffortatall, the resultswillbethesame

(lowexpectancyofsuccess)(JesusandLens,2005,p.126).Motivationwillbethemotor

thatwillaffecttheperformanceoftheteacherintheclassroomandbecauseofthatitis

very important topay special attention to this variablewhen evaluating teachersand

incentive them to raise their competencies. Coming back to the question made by

Korthagen (2004) whatare the essential qualities ofagood teacher? A good teacher

whohasallthecompetenciesneededforthejobandappropriatebeliefsnotalwayswill

showgoodteachingandwillnotbehaveaccordingtheexpectations(ZeichnerandGore,

1990)ifmotivationisnotpresent.Guarinoetal.(2006)intheirresearchshowedthedesireofcontributingwiththe

development of young people and make a donation to the society as the principal

motivation for teachers toenter into the education field. One of the risksofhaving a

monetary incentive is that this firstmotivation comes to second place. Some authors

(Fehrand Schmidt,2004, Kreps, 1997)maintain that explicitmonetary incentivesmay

remove the intrinsic motivation a teacher should have. Kadzamira (2006) suggests a

monetaryincentivewillhaveapositiveeffect onteachersmotivationonly if they feel

theyarebeingunpaidfromthebeginning.Underpaidteacherswillhavelowmotivation

andmoral,byusingandincentiveschemethatissuemaydisappear.But,iftheteacher

feelshersalaryisfine,amonetaryrewardwillnotaffecthermotivation,becausethe

intrinsically motivated teacher undertakes and completes professional tasks for their

inherentvalue,asanendinitself(JesusandLens,2005,p.126).


26/87


26

Asaconclusion,BenteaandAnghelachestatestudieshaveshownthatteachers

aremotivatedmore intrinsic than extrinsic (2012, p.564),professors knowteaching is

notawellpaidjobanddecidetobecometeachersbecauseofthesatisfactionofteaching

students. A paperpresented by LeGrand confirms altruistic behaviour exists (2003,

p.38). It is possible to find teachers who will not change theirmindset because of a

monetaryincentive.Theywillhaveanintrinsicaimtobethebestteacher,justbecause

theybelieveinthat.

Attheend,whyisitsoimportantfortheadministrationoftheschooltolookfor

motivated teachers? Does it make a difference? Beyond matters like happiness,

satisfaction and self-esteem; many authors (Jesus and Conboy, 2001,Mowday et al.,

1984,PorterandSteers,1973)havediscoveredamotivatedteacherwillhavelowerlevels

of absenteeism and the attrition of the school will decrease. In addition, if they have

intrinsic motivation, there is a greater chance of them staying in the teaching

environment (Jesus, 1996, Nuttin, 1984) and develop a long term relation with the

learningpathofthestudents.

Tosolvetheproblemofmotivationinadvance,Dixit(2002)suggestsheadmasters

shouldpaymoreattentiononintrinsicmotivationwhenrecruitingteachingstaff,becausethatwilllightentheissueregardingtoincentivesonlaterstages.

6.Finalthoughts

Allthosecompetenciesthathavebeenaddressedduringthisdissertationshould

bepresentwhenateacherisstartingherprofessionaljourney;however,duringtheyears

manyoftheteachersforgetsomeofthosecompetenciesthatmadethemgoodteachers.

Jovanova-Mitkovska and Hristovska emphasize the need for lifelong learning, lifelong

educationispresentamongallpeopleinallprofessions,andparticularlyhighlightsthe

needforcontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentofteachers(2011,p.573).AsJesusand

Lenspointout(2005)iftheteacherisseekingforcontinuousimprovementinhercareer,

it is easy to say that teacher is amotivated teacher, and as said above, amotivated

teacherwillencouragestudentstotheirbestandqualityeducationwillbethemainaim.


27/87


27

AsSantibaez(2010)explainsincentivesprogramsnotonlyhelpschoolstosolve

aligningtheaimsoftheadministrationwiththeaimsoftheteacher.Theyalsoencourage

teacherstoworkbeyondandimprovetheircompetenciesonestepforwardofwhatthey

arebeingaskedtodo.ThereisastudymadebyTheNationalBoardofCertificationPilot

ProjectinIowa(Dethlefsetal.,2001)whereteacherswhohaveanincentiveschemeare

moreengaged toget aprofessional development than teacherswho lackan incentive

scheme. The same happened in Mexico with the incentive program called Carrera

Magistral: the biggest achievement of the monetary incentives was teachers have

improved their professional development (Ornelas, 2002). Now, it is time to see how

incentivesandcompetenciesdialogueintheChileanenvironment.

B.EducationalChileanbackground

1.Theimportanceofthestudy

TheChileangovernmenthasmadegreateffortsinmakingeducationaccessibleto

every child; but there is a lot to be done yet in thequalityof education that is being

taught.Thereisanurgentneedtoimprovehowteachersdeliverthecurricularcontent.

There is a lack of competencies among Chilean teachers (Waissbluth, 2011). As an

example,curriculumsmust be soonadapted to the information technologies,however

teachersdonot have the enough skills touse technologyduring their lessons.Chile is

nowadaysacountryworkingitswaytobecomeadevelopedcountry.JustlastyearChile

enteredtheOCDE,andinordertoturnintoadevelopedcountry,themostimportantand

urgentissuetoimproveiseducation.AsMizalaandRomaguera(2004)explain,inmostof

developingcountries,suchasChile,theissueregardingtoaccesstoeducationhasbeen

solved,however,problemsremainintermsofeducationalqualityandthedistributionof

qualityeducationamongthedifferentpopulationsegments(p.739).

Thatiswhy;oneofthetacticalaimsassociatedwiththedevelopmentofChileis

improving the competencies level of teachers. There is a need of establishing high

standards, providing innovationto thedeliveryof content.As Jovanova-Mitkovskaand


28/87


28

HristovskaaddressintheirpaperregardingtoMacedoniareality,aneducationalsystem

shouldprovide:quality;efficiency,mobility,recognition,competence(2011,p.574).One

ofthemethodstoimprovethecompetencieslevelofteachersisthroughincentives.The

aimoftheresearchistofigureoutiftheChileanenvironmentisreadytoalignthosetwo

topicsandboosttheeducationalprogress.

2.TheChileansystemofeducation

As Contreras and Rau (2009) explain, the school system in Chile is organized

depending on their source of funding and administration. The schemes under which

schoolsareclassifiedinChilearethree:(1)Publicschools:whicharemanagedandfunded

by the Ministry of Education. (2) Private state-subsidized or schools: the government

funds these types of schools, also called Municipal Schools, and the council of the

Boroughassumestheadministrationwheretheschoolsarelocated.(3)Privatefee-paying

schools:whereaprivateschooloperatorprovidesbothfundingandmanagement.

The Chilean system also incorporates a voucher system, which gives families

absolute freedom to choose the school they deem more suitable for their children

educational needs. Chilean families can choose from one of the three above options.

Either a private state-subsidized or public school; additionally they can opt for a fee-

payingprivateschoolpayingthedifferencebetweenthetuitionfeeandthevoucher.

3.TheChileansystemofincentives

InChileexistssince1990TheNationalSubsidizedSchoolPerformanceEvaluation

System(SNED),inwordsofContrerasandRautheprogramseekstoimproveteacher

performance(productivity)viaamonetaryincentive(bonus)(2009,p.2).Thatisthegoal

theMinistryofEducationwaslookingfor[SNEDs]principalobjectiveistosupportthe

improvementofthequalityofeducationdeliveredbythepubliclyfundedpartof[Chiles]

educationalsystem,providingincentivesandrecognitiontoteachersinhigher-achieving

schools (MINEDUC, 2004, p.6). However, as Contreras and Rau (2009) address, this

tournamentcover90%oftheschoolsinChile,leavingoutsideprivateschoolsthatarenot


29/87


29

ruledby thegovernment,hence,theyarenot forced totake theevaluation.This issue

was gravitating when choosing a private school for the research, because no data is

availableandthestudywouldhelpincreatingthatdata.

Theincentiveisgiventoeachschool,andteacherswithintheschool,takinginto

account the last students results on the national standardized test called SIMCE. The

mainand only criteria istheacademicresultsof the students(MizalaandRomaguera,

2002).Eachschoolispartofahomogenousgroup(demographics,size,location,etc.)and

they compete with each other to win the incentive every year. Every teacher of the

winningschoolwillgetabonusdespiteofherparticularperformanceandifshehelpedto

get thosestudentsscores.The aim ofthe governmentbehind the incentive scheme is

havingmoremotivatedteachers,improvequalityofeducation,andhenceanincreasein

participantschoolsmeantestscores(ContrerasandRau,2009,p.3).

As it was discussed in the section related to incentives, it is important to

implementtheincentiveinawaywhichisdifficulttoachievebutnotimpossible:Inthe

caseofChile,nearlyhalfofeligibleschoolshaveneverwontheawardafterelevenyears

of implementation (Contreras and Rau, 2009, p.24). Mizala and Romaguera (2003)

considerthisawardhasapositiveeffectforthoseschoolswhohaveacertainprobabilityofwinningthemonetaryincentive.Thoseschoolswill improveandmakeaconsiderable

efforttochangetheirpractices,buthalfoftheschoolswithoutachanceofwinningwill

remainthesameandtheincentiveschemewillnotaffecttheiroutcomes.

Anotherissueregardingtotheimplementationofthesetypesofincentivesisthe

ceilingeffect.AsCarnoyetal.explain,schoolswithhighrelativetestscoresinthefirst

yearandagain,highrelativetestscoresonthenextyear,willnotbebenefitedwiththis

structure: their relative gain score may be low because they are near the highest

possibleabsolutescoreonbothtests(2007,p.201).Ontheotherhand,theschoolthat

gotalowscoreonthefirsttesthasalotmoreroomtoimproveonthenextoneanda

betterchancetogettheincentive

The SNED is themost successful system implemented inChile, mainly because

evaluatestheschoolandteacherswithintheschoolratherthantheteacheritself.There

isanimportantdifferencebetweenthesubjectsofevaluation,whichhelpsthecultureof


30/87


30

Chileregardingtoevaluation.InChileitisimperativetocreateanevaluationculture

and a culture of professional responsibility (Colegio de Profesores and MINEDUC.,

1999). Chileanteachersarenotusedtobeingevaluatedandmostof the time feelthe

evaluation isunfairorstressful.Thisisnotanissue regardingonly toChile. Ingeneral,

Latin-American teachers are not used to being evaluated and avoid any type of

measurement. That trend is starting to change: although teachers initially rejected

evaluations and incentives payments, more recent experiences have successfully put

theseissuesonteachersagendaandledtogrowingacceptance(MizalaandRomaguera,

2004, p.750). Because of this Latin-American trend, the Ministry of Education (2003)

decidedtochangethisrealityandcreatedasetofstandardsforcompetentteaching.A

systemthat isnotpartoftheSNEDstructurebutitprovidesa frameworkofwhatit is

expected.

This system of competent teaching has the aim of improving the quality of

teaching, and by doing that, improving education results. It is designed to stimulate

teacherstofurthertheirownimprovementthroughlearningabouttheirstrengthsand

weakness(AvalosandAssael,2006,p.262).Thegoodthingaboutthisevaluationsystem,

allocated in the Centre for In-Service trainingof theMinistryof Education (Centro deperfeccionamiento, experimentacin e investigacin pedaggica), it has a formative

approachrests on teachers disposition to review and improve theirpractice, and so

studentresultsarenotusedasratingcriteria(AvalosandAssael,2006,p.264).Theonly

matteristhesystemhasnotbeenabletosolvewhatshouldbedonewiththoseteachers

whogetunsatisfactoryresultsonthetestscores.Itiseasieranditismorewidespreadto

usetheSNEDscores,thatiswhythisformativeassessmentdoesnothavethetribunethe

SNEDhas(MizalaandRomaguera,2002).


31/87


31

CHAPTER3:METHODOLOGY

A.Introduction

Goldrick(2002)establishesteacherevaluationisnotonlyatooltomeasurejob

performance but also to give positive feedback to teachers and improve their

performanceduringtheyears,alsoaligningthatperformancewiththeaimsoftheschool.

However, a viable evaluation system must first gain the acceptance of classroom

teachers (p.7).And togainthatacceptance itis important tohaveclarity inboth: the

contentandformofwhatisbeingevaluated.In thisresearch,contentwasaddressedin

theliteraturereview:havinganunderstandingofthemaintopics,definitions,etc.Formwillbeaddressedinthischapter:whatisgoingtobemeasured,whyaqualitativemethod

was chosen, how is going to be measured the information and opinions (creation of

certaintemplates),whenisgoingtotakeplacethemeasurementandwhere.

With that idea behind, this chapter begins with a succinct overview of the

characteristics and advantages of using a qualitative method to answer the research

question. Then, itmoves to the type of qualitativemethod selected for the research:

focusgroup. Lateronit discusses the validityof the studyand its implications.Also, it

coversethicsprocedures.Afterthat,thereisanimportantsectionwhereobjectivetwoof

thedissertation isanswered: thecreationof the templatethatwillhelpto absorb and

digesttheopinionsanddiscussionsofeachfocusgroup.Next,samplingandtheamount

ofparticipantsinvolvedinthestudywillbetackled.Andfinally,itwillbeaddressedhow

thedatawascollectedandhowitwasmanaged.

B.QualitativeResearchTheschoolchosentoperformthestudydoesnothaveanincentiveschemebased

on competencies. Also, it does not even exist a base or template of expected

competencies for the teachingstaff.Thisstudywas the firstapproachoftheschool to

actually create a proper incentive scheme basedoncompetencies. Strauss and Corbin

(1990)suggestintheirresearch,aninvestigatorshoulduseaqualitativeapproachwhen


32/87


32

thereislimitedknowledgeofthefieldinvestigatedandanexploratorymethodisthebest

tactictofillthatgap.Thatwasthemainreasonaqualitativemethodwaschosentofulfill

thepurposesofthisinvestigation.Therewasaneedofhavinganexploratoryperspective

ofthesubject.

Inaddition,the sameauthorsofabove(StraussandCorbin,1990)claimpeople

use this type of research to acquire detailed information on a matter that with a

quantitativeresearchishardandalmostimpossibletoget.Thatwasasecondreasonwhy

therewasaninclinationtoopttoaqualitativemethodoveraquantitativeforthisstudy.

AuthorssuchasTooleyandDarby,emphasizeoneoftheadvantagesofimplementinga

qualitativemethodistheinformationobtainedwillbeintense,rich,andfine-grained

(1998,p.42);oneoftheaimsoftheresearch,istobeabletogetvaluableinsights.Strauss

andCorbin(2007)ina laterpapersuggestqualitativemethodsarethebestapproachto

understandeverythingrelatedtosocialbehaviorandculturalperspectives.Thishappens

because according to Hoepfl (1997) using a qualitative research gives depth to the

investigation.

Furthermore, as Bryman explains, a qualitative research is associated with

participant observation and unstructured, in-depth interviewing (1988, p.1). Besides,collectingtheopinionsoftheteachersandtheadministrationoftheschool,oneofthe

purposeswastoobservehowthey interactedwitheachotherandhow itaffected the

opinionofthecolleagueintheirownopinion.Sometimestheopinionofthecolleagueis

soimportantthatpeoplemaychangetheirview.AccordingtoLeGrand,itwasimportant

totakeintoconsiderationwhenapplyingfocusgroups(thequalitativemethodchosen)

the thehaloeffect: people responding intheway they thinktheyoughtto respond

ratherthanrevealingtheirtruemotivation(2003,p.34).

Attheendaqualitativemethodwaschosen,followingtheadviceofCohenetal.

(2000)arguingtheselectedmethodshouldmatchandfacilitatetheaimsandobjectives

oftheresearch.Inthisscenario,toanswertheresearchquestionofthisdissertationwas

veryrelevanttobeabletodeeplyunderstandtheviewsoftheschoolandtheteachers,

andtohavegreatinsightsoffeelingsandthoughts,becauseitwasasensitiveissuefor

both parties. A focus groupwas the best way to give them space and time to simply


33/87


33

transmit what they believed and felt, and to collect every single detail of the

conversation.

C.FocusGroupthechosenmethodAssaidbeforeintheliteraturereview,thosecompetenciestheteachersthinkare

valuablearetheonestheywillputintoactionandtransformintobehavior,becauseof

thatreason,fourfocusgroupswereperformedtocheckifthelistofcompetenciesthe

administrationoftheschoolconsideredasthemainsetofknowledge,skillsandattitudes

were the same ones as the teachers, andno gapwould be foundbetweenwhat was

desirableandwhatwasputintopractice.AsClark(1986)andPajares(1992)addressitis

veryrelevantforanorganisationtoknowtheirteachersbeliefsbecauseitwilldetermine

theiractionsinsidetheclassroom.

Asitwas saidbefore, fourfocusgroupswereconducted.The firstone involved

participants from the administration of the school (including the headmaster and

coordinators), the second one was with nursery teachers, the third one with primary

teachersand the lastonewith secondary teachers. The longer onewas the first focus

group because coordinators discussed which competencies should have each type of

teacheroftheschool;itwasdividedintwosessions(twoMondaysafternoonsofJune)

lastingalmostfourhoursintotal.Therestofthefocusgroupswereconductedinatwo-

hourslot,onWednesdaysafternoonsduringthemonthofJuly.

D.Validityoftheresearch

As Pound et al. (1995) stress there is a common conviction that the most

important aimofa researchis togeneralize its conclusionsand findings, and replicate

them in different environments. That is why most investigators opt for quantitative

approaches and bigger samples over qualitative and small samples to conduct their

researches.However, qualitative investigationswill have different typesofbenefitsas

seenabove,replicabilitywillnotbeoneofthem.

It is well known a qualitative research will lack of validity compared to a

quantitative one. Cohen, Manion andMorrison (2000) say that is true, however it is


34/87


34

possibletoovercomethatproblemifthestudyfocusesonhavingabetterscopeofthe

dataandemphasesonhavingdepthintheresearch.Bothideaswereintroducedinthe

studytogainvalidityandtoincreasetherichnessofthefindings.

Despiteofthe effortsmade togainvalidity, the results fromthis studyarenot

valid or transferable to Chilean schools. This study is confined/bound to a specific

segmentofthepopulationsinceabespokedesignwasmadetotargetspecificresearch

objectivesconcerningthatgroupandnotthewholepopulation.Extendingtheseresults

totherestoftheschoolsinChilewouldbeamethodologicalerror.Thefindingsarefor

theuseofthisparticularschool,theymaybeusefulasa backgroundand literature for

furtherinvestigations,buttheydonotrepresenttheChileanreality.

E.Ethics

At the beginning of the year, the dissertation topic was submitted to Kings

College London ResearchEthics Committee with the aim of getting the permission to

conduct this postgraduate research project in a private school in Santiago, Chile. The

author followed the code of conduct of AARE Code of ethics (Association for active

educationalresearchers).Thenameoftheschoolandofeveryteacherwhoparticipated

inthestudyisprivateinformation;thereforetheydonotappearinanychapterand/or

appendicesofthedissertation.Eachparticipantoftheresearchcompletedtheconsent

formtwoweeksinadvanceofthefocusgroup.Theywereinformedtheyhadtherightto

withdrawfromthestudyuntilthebeginningofthefocusgroup,sincelateritwouldbe

practicallyimpossibletoisolatethedata.

F.Creationofthetemplate

The first thing to do in order to fulfill the research was to create the set of

competencies the administrationof the school was expecting from the teaching staff.

Oneofthechallengesofthedissertationwastocreateapropertemplatetobefilledby

theparticipantsofthefocusgroupsandtobeusedasaframetoinitiatethediscussion

regardingtoteacherscompetencies.Asitwasaddressedintheliteraturereview,there


35/87


35

are many lists of competencies as authors willing to investigate the matter. As an

example, Cruickshank and Haefele (2001) analyzed plenty of historic tendencies and

endedupcreatingalistofcompetenciesrangingfromcommunicativeskillstomastering

thesubject.

The idea of the template was to replicate the successful study made by

Brockmann,ClarkeandWinch(2010)intheirresearchBricklayingismorethanFlemish

bond.Theycameupwithatemplatethathelpedthemmappingthequalificationsand

skillsneededandexpectedinthebricklayingindustry.Oneoftheaimswasto:Developa

frameworkforthecomparativeassessmentofbricklayingqualifications(p.7). Thefirst

draft of the template for this study was created using the nomenclature and

classificationsoftheTable11(p.21)oftheresearch:

Structureofrequirements

OccupationalCompetence PersonalCompetence

Knowledge KnowHow SocialCompetence Self-Competence

Itwasrelevant,forthepurposesofthefocusgroupandtoguidetheparticipants,

todividethecompetenciesexpectedintheteachingstaffbetweenthosecompetencies

related tothe job descriptionand those inherent inthe humanbeing. The schoolwas

very keenongiving incentives inbothareas, asthey thought theyworked together in

helpingthelearningprocessofthestudents.

Alongwith the Bricklaying Research, inputs were taken from the investigation

made byOddenand Kelley (1997). In theirwork,competencies were divided in three

main categories. The first category was having competencies inside the classroom:

everything related to mastering the classroom, preparing lessons, knowledge of the

subject,etc.Thesecondonewasrelatedtocompetenciesrelatedtoeducationbutnotto

thesubjectitself,likeevaluation,curriculum,innovation,creativity,etc.Thelastonewas

relatedtohavingcompetenciesinleadershipandadministrationskills.

Personal Competence remained the same as the Bricklaying project. However,

Occupational Competence was split in three categories to address the insightsof the


36/87


36

OddenandKelleyswork.Thefirstcategorywassystematicknowledgethatanswered

specificknowledgeforthatposition.Thesecondonewasproceduralknowledge;itwas

relatedtopractical,know/howknowledgethatitisusefulforacertainposition.Thelast

onewaslocalknowledge,itwasrelatedtomasteringcompetenciesthatwouldhelpthe

workoftheteacherinsidetheclassroomandoutside,buttheywerenottotallyrelatedto

thepositionitself.SocialCompetenceitwasrelatedtocharacteristicsoftheteachers

within her environment and Self-Competence addressed characteristics of the

personalityoftheteacher.

Attheend,bothinvestigationswerecombinedtocreatethetemplatethatwould

befilledbytheparticipantsofthefocusgroup:

Structureofrequirements

OccupationalCompetence PersonalCompetence

Systematic

Knowledge

Procedural

Knowledge

Local

Knowledge

Social

Competencies

Self-Competence

G.Sample

TheschoolhasalmostsevenhundredstudentsfromNurseryschooltoSecondary

school(fromtwoyearstoeighteenyearsold).Thereareonehundredandsixtystudents

inNursery,twohundredandforty-fivestudentsinPrimaryandtwohundredandninety-

three students in Secondary. Each year has two levels, and each classhas in average

twenty-fivestudents.

To fulfill the needs of these students, the school has eighty-two teachers:

seventeen in Nursery, twenty-eight in Primary and thirty-seven in Secondary. It was

practically impossible to interview every single teacher of the school, not because of

willingnessbutbecauseofagendascomplications.Becauseofthat,itwasdecidedtodo

anopensampling,invitingeverysingleteacheroftheschooltoparticipateinthefocus

groupscheduledforeachlevel.EightnurseryteachersshowedupfortheNurseryFocus

Group,twenty-fourteachersforthePrimaryFocusGroupandnineteenfortheSecondary

Group.


37/87


37

Inthefocusgroupdonetotheadministrationstaff,nosamplingwasdone.The

headmasterwantedtohavefullassistanceanditwasnotdifficulttoachievethatbecause

the focus group was performed during their Monday weekly meetings. Eight people

participated: The headmaster, two psychologists, two inspectors, the nursery

coordinator,theprimarycoordinatorandthesecondarycoordinator.

H.DataCollectionandManagement

Thefocusgroupinterviewshadtosections.Thefirstsectionlastedhalfanhour

and the second part anhourand ahalf.First, the emptytemplatewas projected ina

screen and the author of the studywas in charge of writingdownwhat the teachers

started tosay out lo

Can an incentive scheme raise competences among teachers?

Documents