View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Vocational Teachers' Classroom Management Style: The Role of Motivation to Teach and Sense of Responsibility

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Vocational Teachers' Classroom Management Style: The Role of Motivation to Teach and Sense of Responsibility
Language: English
Authors: Berger, Jean-Louis, Girardet, Céline
Source: European Journal of Teacher Education. 2021 44(2):200-216.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 17
Publication Date: 2021
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Vocational Education Teachers, Teacher Attitudes, Teaching Styles, Classroom Techniques, Teaching (Occupation), Career Choice, Teacher Motivation, Teacher Responsibility, Student Motivation, Academic Achievement, Teacher Student Relationship, Personal Autonomy, Correlation, Social Values, Foreign Countries, Secondary Education, Higher Education
Geographic Terms: Switzerland
DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2020.1764930
ISSN: 0261-9768
Abstract: This study aimed to examine the links between motivation to become a teacher, sense of responsibility, and classroom management style. An adapted version of the Factors Influencing Teaching (FIT)-Choice scale, a translated version of the Teacher Responsibility scale, and a vignette instrument inspired by the Problems in School Questionnaire were administered to 154 in-service vocational teachers. Consistent with prior research, path analysis of the data indicated that social utility value for teaching was the most consistent predictor of teachers' sense of responsibility. However, the key motivation predicting responsibility for teaching was intrinsic value, which in turn predicted teachers' endorsement of classroom management styles. The more vocational teachers felt responsible for the quality of their teaching, the more they tended to endorse adaptive or beneficial classroom management styles (autonomy support and structure). Implications for research and teaching are discussed.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2021
Accession Number: EJ1289345
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwF3s3lRmYVK9lpGD59dm-5gAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDI-f-MguiphrAJQZdwIBEICBm0pwQFn0afzHIcc3At2zeSxqqwLQ1KSf1OeOgkmaNgSFM6-pl0u-P1OG5Dp1aqtLh_qq1eh57yvhtvMmKHw6Gf2ZKD-ROAehDuBsGyoUZ9h4EYZ9OcGfgFjxghe4cg7qDDHUGuYmdl7k1EyrAHlyvDPxqDwf90c0LPGLk0NGG63v_cmqvP0Qdn476mKhVn_Hvypmd6JWC5cbuzoz
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0148881333;54n01apr.21;2021Feb25.02:49;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0148881333-1">Vocational teachers' classroom management style: the role of motivation to teach and sense of responsibility </title> <p>This study aimed to examine the links between motivation to become a teacher, sense of responsibility, and classroom management style. An adapted version of the Factors Influencing Teaching (FIT)-Choice scale, a translated version of the Teacher Responsibility scale, and a vignette instrument inspired by the Problems in School Questionnaire were administered to 154 in-service vocational teachers. Consistent with prior research, path analysis of the data indicated that social utility value for teaching was the most consistent predictor of teachers' sense of responsibility. However, the key motivation predicting responsibility for teaching was intrinsic value, which in turn predicted teachers' endorsement of classroom management styles. The more vocational teachers felt responsible for the quality of their teaching, the more they tended to endorse adaptive or beneficial classroom management styles (autonomy support and structure). Implications for research and teaching are discussed.</p> <p>Keywords: Teacher responsibility; motivation to become a teacher; classroom management; teachers' interpersonal motivating style</p> <p>The key role of teacher motivation, attitudes, knowledge, beliefs, and practices in instructional quality is widely acknowledged (Grossman et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref1">14</reflink>]; Kunter et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref2">17</reflink>]; OECD, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref3">27</reflink>]). Specifically, research has shown that classroom management styles and classroom goal structures, have a significant impact on students engagement, the latter influencing their learning outcomes (Brophy [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref4">6</reflink>]; Reeve [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref5">31</reflink>]).[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>] Specifically, students whose teachers provide autonomy support (e.g., by notably nurturing students' needs) and structure (e.g., by providing clear information about their expectations) tend to be more intrinsically motivated and to report higher self-regulation of learning compared to students whose teachers endorse controlling practices such as using rewards and punishment to manage students' behaviour and engagement (Deci et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref7">12</reflink>]; Sierens et al. [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref8">37</reflink>]; Vansteenkiste et al. [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref9">45</reflink>]). In a similar way, a mastery goal structure stressing the significance of learning and understanding was found to promote student engagement, whereas a performance goal structure emphasising the importance of grades and the accuracy of answers typically had detrimental effects on students (Meece, Anderman, and Anderman [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref10">26</reflink>]). While studies such as those reported above identified the effects of classroom management styles on student learning and engagement, less is known about the reasons why certain styles are adopted. In other words, why do teachers adopt one style over another? Among the potential factors explaining teachers' instructional practices are teacher motivation (Butler [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref11">7</reflink>]; Kunter et al. [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref12">19</reflink>]; Pelletier, Séguin-Lévesque, and Legault [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref13">30</reflink>]) and beliefs (Pajares [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref14">28</reflink>]; Richardson and Placier [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref15">35</reflink>]; Stipek et al. [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref16">40</reflink>]), but such research was not conducted regarding classroom management styles specifically. Furthermore, our understanding of the association between motivation, beliefs and instructional practices is still incomplete as Urdan ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref17">44</reflink>]) highlighted in the concluding commentary of the most comprehensive volume on teacher motivation (Richardson, Karabenick, and Watt [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref18">33</reflink>]): 'We still do not fully understand how teachers' motivational beliefs affect their teaching practices (...) Although much is known about the instructional practices that promote learning, less is known about how the motivational beliefs and emotional experiences of teachers affects their tendencies to engage in these practices' (244–245). In sum, Urdan ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref19">44</reflink>]) insists on the need for research on the mechanisms through which motivation can affect instructional practices.</p> <p>Finally, educational psychology research has focused almost exclusively on general education teachers, whereas other populations such as vocational education and training (VET) teachers have been largely neglected despite their importance in several European countries' educational contexts (e.g., Austria, Germany, and Switzerland). Accordingly, the present study investigated potential explanations for Swiss vocational teachers' classroom management style, particularly related to teacher motivation to become a teacher and sense of responsibility. Specifically, this paper examined how motivation to become a teacher related to sense of responsibility, and how the latter related to classroom management styles.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-2">Analytical and theoretical background</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0148881333-3">Classroom management style and its effect on students</hd> <p>Rooted in the self-determination theory (SDT) sociocognitive framework (Deci and Ryan [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref20">10</reflink>]), a line of research investigated the so-called 'teachers' interpersonal motivating style' (Deci et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref21">12</reflink>]; Deci and Ryan [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref22">11</reflink>]; Reeve [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref23">31</reflink>]). In the present study, this perspective was adopted to describe classroom management. The underlying position of such a theory of motivation is that student motivation is influenced by the environment, which includes teacher behaviour. Specifically, SDT states that student motivation is adaptively developed when teachers' motivating style fulfils students' basic psychological needs for autonomy (i.e., the sense that one's actions emanate from oneself and are one's own), competence (i.e., the feelings of effectiveness and efficiency) and relatedness (i.e., the experience of having close and meaningful relations). Recent studies and theoretical advances describe classroom management style using two oppositions or continuums: <emph>autonomy support</emph> versus <emph>control</emph> and <emph>structure</emph> versus <emph>chaos</emph> (Jang, Reeve, and Deci [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref24">15</reflink>]; Reeve [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref25">31</reflink>]; Sierens et al. [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref26">37</reflink>]). <emph>Autonomy support</emph> is defined as 'the interpersonal sentiment and behavior teachers provide to identify, nurture, and develop students' inner motivational resources' (Reeve [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref27">31</reflink>], 159), whereas <emph>control</emph> refers to 'interpersonal sentiment and behavior teachers provide during instruction to pressure students to think, feel, or behave in a specific way' (p. 160). Provision of <emph>structure</emph> concerns 'the amount of information in the context about how to effectively achieve desired outcomes' (Skinner and Belmont [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref28">38</reflink>], 572); this is the opposite of <emph>chaos</emph>, in which teachers communicate confusing or contradictory messages and do not provide clear directions and expectations to their students (Jang, Reeve, and Deci [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref29">15</reflink>]). Evidence is accumulating to show that combining <emph>autonomy support</emph> and <emph>structure</emph> as classroom management style is beneficial to student motivation, self-regulation, and learning (Jang, Reeve, and Deci [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref30">15</reflink>]; Kunter, Baumert, and Köller [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref31">18</reflink>]; Sierens et al. [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref32">37</reflink>]). On the contrary, <emph>control</emph> and <emph>chaos</emph> have been found to be detrimental to these same outcomes (Soenens et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref33">39</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-4">Antecedents of classroom management style</hd> <p>Within the SDT, Reeve ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref34">31</reflink>]), drawing on the framework of Pelletier, Séguin-Lévesque, and Legault ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref35">30</reflink>]), identified three types of pressures that participate to the explanation of why teachers adopt a certain classroom management style: pressures from above (e.g., school policies), pressures from below (e.g., student behaviour), and pressures from within (e.g., motivation to teach, beliefs about teaching and learning). In this paper, we address two possible antecedents of classroom management style that we see as pressures from within motivation to become teacher and teacher sense of responsibility. We conjecture that teacher motivation to choose teaching as a career and the student outcomes teachers hold themselves responsible for are likely to act as guides and to prompt teachers to adopt a certain classroom management style. In the literature, teacher motivation has been conceptualised as an antecedent of teachers' sense of responsibility: It is expected that motivation 'translates' into beliefs about one's role in the classroom (Lauermann et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref36">23</reflink>]). The findings regarding the relationship between teacher motivation and sense of responsibility (detailed later) led us to conjecture that teacher sense of responsibility could act as a mediator of the relationship between motivation to become teacher and classroom management style.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-5">Motivation to become teacher and its association to classroom management style</hd> <p>Due to the global teacher shortage, researchers' interest in teacher motivation has recently increased (Watt and Richardson [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref37">48</reflink>]; Richardson, Karabenick, and Watt [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref38">33</reflink>]). A major theoretical model in the study of teacher motivation is the FIT-Choice framework and related scale (Watt and Richardson [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref39">47</reflink>]). Based on the expectancy–value theory (Eccles et al. [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref40">13</reflink>]), it illustrates the most prevalent motivations to become a teacher. <emph>Ability</emph> motivation refers to teachers' perceptions of their ability to teach; this motivation is important because individuals tend to choose occupations for which they consider themselves competent. <emph>Intrinsic value</emph> points to interest in teaching; this can be associated with the construct of intrinsic motivation in other motivational frameworks. <emph>Personal utility value</emph> refers to motivation for some attractive and practical aspects of the career (e.g., job security, time for family). <emph>Social utility value</emph> covers the social aspect of the teaching career, such as working with young people or contributing to society. <emph>Fallback career</emph> applies to choose teaching because the favoured career choice was not available. For this study, we developed the <emph>opportunity</emph> construct to grasp a fairly common way of entering the field of vocational teaching in Switzerland – individuals are often 'recruited' by vocational schools to teach their subject of expertise to apprentices; thus, they embrace a given opportunity and enter the career 'by accident'; they had no clear intention of becoming teachers.</p> <p>Teacher motivation is not only important to understand how to recruit and retain teachers but also to understand instructional practices (Urdan [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref41">44</reflink>]). The body of research on this topic, based on various motivational theories, has revealed that viewing motivation as a factor explaining classroom management styles is highly relevant. For instance, intrinsic types of motivation to teach or to become a teacher relate to instructional practices promoting student engagement and learning such as autonomy support (Pelletier, Séguin-Lévesque, and Legault [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref42">30</reflink>]), students' cognitive challenge, social support (Kunter et al. [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref43">19</reflink>]), and students' feeling of support when seeking help (Butler and Shibaz [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref44">8</reflink>]). In contrast, fallback career motivation relates to classroom management styles detrimental to students' learning such as chaos and control, and lower structure, and also strongly believing in the relevance of promoting student extrinsic motivation to engage them in learning (Berger et al. [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref45">3</reflink>]). Furthermore, according to Richardson and Watt's study ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref46">33</reflink>]), social utility value and ability motivation relate to so-called positive instructional practices (including autonomy support and structure classroom management styles). In brief, research on teacher motivation indicates that it is an important factor in understanding a variety of instructional practices, notably those practices related to classroom management.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-6">Sense of responsibility as a mediator in the relation between teacher motivation and classroo...</hd> <p>Teachers' sense of responsibility refers to 'a sense of internal obligation and commitment to produce or prevent designated outcomes or that these outcomes should have been produced or prevented' (Lauermann and Karabenick ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref47">20</reflink>], 127). Teachers' sense of responsibility is not unidimensional but multidimensional as a teacher might feel more or less responsible depending on different outcomes. Accordingly, four outcomes of responsibility were identified and empirically distinguished: responsibility for (a) student motivation (value, enthusiasm, and interest for the topic), (b) student achievement (learning, performance, and improvement), (c) relationships with students (confidence in the teacher, seeking help when facing difficulties, and knowing that the teacher cares for the students), and d) teaching quality (making one's teaching as efficient and engaging as possible).</p> <p>Classroom management style may be conceptualised as a consequence of teacher sense of responsibility: Teachers sense of responsibility can act as a pressure from within (Reeve [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref48">31</reflink>]) and guide teachers towards the adoption of a certain classroom management style. Said differently, teachers show a preference for a classroom management style that gives them the opportunity to fulfil what they consider to be their responsibilities. For example, a low sense of responsibility for student motivation may lead to limited effort to mobilise students' interests (i.e., a facet of autonomy support). To the best of our knowledge, only two studies so far have investigated instructional practices as a consequence of teachers' sense of responsibility. A positive association between responsibility for student achievement and mastery goal structure, and between sense of responsibility for student motivation and a performance goal structure were found (Lauermann and Karabenick [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref49">21</reflink>]). Additionally, Daniels, Radil, and Goegan ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref50">9</reflink>]) found that teacher responsibility for their teaching correlated positively with mastery classroom goal structure and negatively with performance goal structure. The other aspects of responsibility were unrelated to classroom goal structures.</p> <p>While research on teacher responsibility and its consequences are still limited, research on teacher causal attributions of students' success and failure can inform about the association of teacher responsibility with classroom management styles and support its relevance (Berger, Watt, and Richardson [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref51">5</reflink>]; Reyna and Weiner [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref52">32</reflink>]; Tollefson and Chen [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref53">43</reflink>]). Indeed, beliefs about the cause of students' failure, notably teachers' perceived control over this failure, are related to teachers' cognitions and emotions and thus to the tendency to react with either punitive or instrumental behaviours (Reyna and Weiner [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref54">32</reflink>]). These observations were corroborated by a study showing that different attributions of students' difficulties in a task lead to specific teachers' behaviour in the classroom (Tollefson and Chen [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref55">43</reflink>]). For instance, if teachers attribute students' problems to a deficit in motivation, this leads them to use criticism towards these students (Medway [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref56">25</reflink>]). Our own study (Berger, Watt, and Richardson [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref57">5</reflink>]) revealed that teachers' desire to make a social contribution (reflecting social utility value motivation) and teachers' causal attribution of students' achievement are associated: The higher the social utility value motivation, the less teachers believe that students' effort is a major cause of their achievement. In other words, this motivation to teach seems related to an increased teacher responsibility for student achievement.</p> <p>If teachers' sense of responsibility was shown to be linked to classroom management style, it was also shown to be influenced by teacher motivation. The rationale for the mediating role of teacher responsibility rely on its relationships with teacher motivation and with classroom management style, notably based on the literature on teacher causal attributions of student achievement.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref58">2</reflink>]</p> <p>A myriad of factors such as contextual factors (e.g., job autonomy) and personal factors (e.g., teacher motivation, personality) might affect teachers' sense of responsibility (Lauermann and Karabenick [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref59">20</reflink>]). Notably, teacher motivation represents a theoretically important predictor of sense of responsibility (Roeser, Marachi and Gehlbach, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref60">36</reflink>]). It is expected that motivation 'translates' into beliefs about one's role in the classroom. In other words, teachers will consider themselves more or less responsible for different outcomes depending on their motivation for teaching. For instance, a strong interest in teaching and the social aspect of the profession may translate into a strong sense of responsibility for student achievement and for having good relationships with them. A rationale for this association can be found in the work on teacher causal attributions of student achievement. According to Ames and Ames ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref61">1</reflink>]), teachers hold motivational systems impacting the causal attributions they formulate. They distinguish three motivational systems (ability, task mastery, and moral responsibility) involving values and goals specific to each system. These values and goals act as filters through which student achievement is interpreted and causally attributed. For instance, in the moral responsibility system, teachers strive for the welfare of students by helping them to learn. They attribute students' failures to their teaching and thus they feel highly responsible for student outcomes. In other words, this suggests an association between social utility value and sense of responsibility.</p> <p>Lauermann and Karabenick ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref62">21</reflink>]) investigated the links between teacher motivation and sense of responsibility. They found that motivation to become a teacher explained a sense of responsibility for several outcomes (e.g., student motivation). Specifically, in a consistent manner and across two samples of German and US teachers, motivation to become a teacher was predictive of the multiple outcomes of responsibility: Higher social utility value was related to a higher sense of responsibility for student achievement, student motivation, and relationships with students. Furthermore, evidence from other studies suggests an association between their motivation and their sense of responsibility: Teachers with strong intrinsic value, social utility value, and ability motivation for teaching feel strongly responsible to foster social, emotional and moral development of students (Thomson, Turner, and Nietfeld [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref63">42</reflink>]). In a recent study, social utility value and intrinsic value were found to be predictive of teachers' higher general sense of responsibility (Lauermann et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref64">23</reflink>]). Taken together, these studies indicate that motivation is a factor explaining why sense of responsibility varies between teachers.</p> <p>In sum, there are theoretical and empirical meaningful associations between motivation, responsibility, and instructional practices. The fact that teacher responsibility as been conceptualised both as an antecedent of classroom management style and as a consequence of teacher motivation led us to the hypothesis that teacher responsibility could act as a mediator of the association between teacher motivation and classroom management style. Our research design aimed to explore this hypothesis.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-7">Research question and hypotheses</hd> <p>In this study, we examined the association between vocational teachers' motivation, sense of responsibility, and their classroom management style. Motivation was examined as an antecedent to sense of responsibility, and classroom management style as a consequence of sense of responsibility; the latter was thus assumed to mediate the relationship between motivation and classroom management style. Accordingly, the following research question was formulated: How does motivation to become a teacher relate to classroom management style and how is this relation mediated by teacher sense of responsibility?</p> <p>Based on theoretical grounding and empirical evidence reviewed above, we formulated the following assumptions. Regarding our research question, we assumed that intrinsic value would relate to a greater sense of responsibility in general, and that social utility value would relate to a greater sense of responsibility for relationships with students and for student achievement. On the contrary, teaching as a 'fallback' career would be negatively associated with sense of responsibility. Moreover, we assumed, based on prior studies uncovering association between teacher responsibility and classroom goal structure (Daniels, Radil, and Goegan [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref65">9</reflink>]; Lauermann and Karabenick [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref66">21</reflink>]), that sense of responsibility would be associated with classroom management style; thus, motivation to become a teacher could indirectly explain teachers' styles. We assumed that sense of responsibility for student motivation and for relationships with students would be positively related to autonomy support and negatively related to control. Sense of responsibility for one's own teaching was expected to positively relate to structure and negatively relate to chaos.</p> <p>The specific context of the present study, teaching in VET, might influence the results. Vocational students are mostly in their late adolescence or young adulthood (15 to 20 years old). Accordingly, vocational teachers might hold themselves responsible for outcomes that are different from those of primary or secondary teachers, and might attribute more responsibility (for all outcomes) to the students and less to themselves. Furthermore, most vocational teachers are foremost experts in the subjects they teach; often their pedagogical expertise comes second (Berger and Lê Van [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref67">4</reflink>]). Consequently, they might feel more or less responsibility depending on the outcome of the responsibility and consider their primary responsibility to be students' achievement but not students' motivation.[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref68">3</reflink>]</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-8">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0148881333-9">Participants</hd> <p>The study sample was comprised of 154 in-service vocational teachers from the French-speaking region of Switzerland.[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>] All participants were completing an in-service two- or three-year teacher education program and surveyed during class time. They were recruited using convenience sampling. While participation was on a voluntary basis, all the teachers present on the data collection day agreed to participate. There was no missing data. Accordingly, selection bias is unlikely. Among the 58 women and 94 men who participated in the study, 107 were teaching vocational subjects to upper secondary students, 21 were teaching academic subjects to upper secondary students, and 21 were higher education instructors of vocational subjects. In Switzerland, teachers follow the teacher education program concurrently with teaching in a vocational school or in another educational facility. In other words, teachers are first hired by a vocational school and then later begin their teacher education after months or years of practice. The study participants' mean teaching experience prior to entering teacher education was 4 years and 7 months of (SD = 4 years and 6 months), and they ranged in age from 25 to 57 years old (M = 40.18, SD = 7).</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-10">Instruments</hd> <p>As part of a larger anonymous survey, the participants were asked to complete the following instruments.[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref70">5</reflink>] An adapted version (for a description of the adaptations, see Berger et al. [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref71">3</reflink>]) of the <emph>FIT-Choice scale</emph> (Watt and Richardson [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref72">47</reflink>]) was used to examine vocational teachers' motivation to become teachers, including the following six dimensions: social utility value (5 items; e.g., 'I chose to become a teacher because teaching allows me to provide a service to society'), personal utility value (5 items; e.g., 'I chose to become a teacher because teaching hours fit with the responsibilities of having a family'), intrinsic value (3 items; e.g., 'I chose to become a teacher because I am interested in teaching'), fallback career (5 items; e.g., 'I chose to become a teacher because I did not have any other choice'), opportunity (4 items; e.g., 'I chose to become a teacher because the opportunity to teach appeared'), and subject interest (4 items; e.g., 'I chose to become a teacher because teaching allows me to keep working in my domain of interest'). A six-factor confirmatory analysis (CFA) indicated that the model fitted the data adequately: <emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph>(<reflink idref="bib282" id="ref73">282</reflink>) = 423.462, <emph>p</emph> <.001, CFI =.90, RMSEA =.06.</p> <p>For teachers' sense of responsibility, a translated version of the <emph>Teacher Responsibility Scale</emph> (Lauermann and Karabenick [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref74">22</reflink>]; see Vaudroz and Berger [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref75">46</reflink>] for the validation of the French version) was used (forward–backward process; the original items were not altered). Participants were asked to indicate to what extent they felt personally responsible for four types of educational outcomes (3 items per outcome): student motivation (e.g., 'I would feel personally responsible if a student of mine was not interested in the subject I teach'), student achievement (e.g., 'I would feel personally responsible if a student of mine had very low achievement'), having positive relationships with students (e.g., 'I would feel personally responsible if a student of mine thought he/she could not count on me when he/she needed help'), and the quality of their teaching (e.g., I would feel personally responsible if a lesson I taught was not as effective for student learning as I could have possibly made it"). Similar to the original version, a confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the four-factor model fitted the data adequately: <emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph>(<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref76">48</reflink>) = 60.929, <emph>p</emph> =.10, CFI =.98, RMSEA =.04.</p> <p>Finally, a vignette instrument, inspired by the <emph>Problems in School Questionnaire</emph> (Deci et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref77">12</reflink>]; Pelletier, Séguin-Lévesque, and Legault [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref78">30</reflink>]), was used to investigate classroom management styles. Five vignettes describing problematic situations in terms of classroom management were each followed by four statements (20 items total). These four reactions corresponded to the theoretical dimensions of classroom management: autonomy support, control, structure, and chaos. For example, for a vignette describing the situation of a passive class showing no enthusiasm and not answering questions asked by the teacher, teachers had to rate the extent to which they would use autonomy support ('Remind students of the relevance of the course and ask them about the reasons for their passivity'), control ('Impose surprise tests: in each course, a student, chosen randomly, will be tested. Thus, they will learn the material'), structure ('Tell the students about your expectations regarding class participation and remind them of the importance of being active in learning') and chaos ('Continue teaching in the same way; students will start being active when examinations get close'). In each vignette, the participant had to rate each alternative reaction on a 7-point scale (1 = does not correspond to me at all; 7 = corresponds to me perfectly). A confirmatory factor analysis specifying the four factors showed that, after removing two items that were supposed to assess chaos but did not load significantly on the factor, the model fitted the data adequately: <emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph>(<reflink idref="bib128" id="ref79">128</reflink>) = 164.44, <emph>p</emph> =.02, CFI =.91, RMSEA =.04.[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref80">6</reflink>]</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-11">Findings</hd> <p>Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics, Cronbach's alphas, and zero-order correlations between the mean scores based on the CFA findings.</p> <p>Table 1. Zero-order correlations and descriptive statistics</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td /><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>8</td><td>9</td><td>10</td><td>11</td><td>12</td><td>13</td><td>14</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td /><td><italic>Motivation to become a teacher</italic></td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Personal utility value</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Choice by opportunity</td><td>.21</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Social utility value</td><td>.09</td><td>.05</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Fallback career</td><td>.35</td><td>.30</td><td>−.03</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Interest in the subject</td><td>.13</td><td>.16</td><td>.25</td><td>−.06</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Intrinsic value</td><td>−.01</td><td>−.06</td><td>.47</td><td>−.40</td><td>.33</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>Teacher sense of responsibility</italic></td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Responsibility for student motivation</td><td>.03</td><td>.07</td><td>.24</td><td>.02</td><td>.05</td><td>.15</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Responsibility for relationships with students</td><td>−.07</td><td>−.03</td><td>.33</td><td>−.09</td><td>.21</td><td>.18</td><td>.40</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Responsibility for teaching quality</td><td>−.06</td><td>−.08</td><td>.26</td><td>−.08</td><td>.21</td><td>.32</td><td>.22</td><td>.40</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>Responsibility for student achievement</td><td>.04</td><td>−.09</td><td>.24</td><td>−.08</td><td>.18</td><td>.09</td><td>.47</td><td>.48</td><td>.30</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td><italic>Classroom management style</italic></td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Autonomy support</td><td>.01</td><td>.04</td><td>.41</td><td>−.01</td><td>.17</td><td>.30</td><td>.17</td><td>.34</td><td>.32</td><td>.25</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>Control</td><td>.22</td><td>.16</td><td>.18</td><td>.37</td><td>−.01</td><td>−.14</td><td>.02</td><td>.01</td><td>−.10</td><td>.08</td><td>.02</td><td>1</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>Structure</td><td>.15</td><td>.04</td><td>.27</td><td>.04</td><td>.10</td><td>.17</td><td>.09</td><td>.21</td><td>.26</td><td>.20</td><td>.62</td><td>.18</td><td>1</td><td /></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>Chaos</td><td>.15</td><td>.25</td><td>−.06</td><td>.27</td><td>−.09</td><td>−.27</td><td>.07</td><td>−.16</td><td>−.22</td><td>−.06</td><td>−.33</td><td>.44</td><td>−.20</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td /><td>M</td><td>3.76</td><td>4.34</td><td>5.42</td><td>1.96</td><td>5.16</td><td>6.08</td><td>37.74</td><td>66.53</td><td>72.37</td><td>53.36</td><td>5.47</td><td>2.61</td><td>5.23</td><td>2.49</td></tr><tr><td /><td>SD</td><td>1.40</td><td>1.42</td><td>0.97</td><td>1.18</td><td>1.25</td><td>0.93</td><td>19.32</td><td>22.55</td><td>17.02</td><td>17.4</td><td>0.89</td><td>1.09</td><td>0.92</td><td>1.07</td></tr><tr><td /><td>α</td><td>.77</td><td>.78</td><td>.73</td><td>.85</td><td>.75</td><td>.84</td><td>.78</td><td>.78</td><td>.71</td><td>.81</td><td>.67</td><td>.67</td><td>.68</td><td>.50</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 Note: N = 154; r ≥.16, p <.05; r ≥.21, p <.01; r ≥.27, p <.001.</p> <p>Mean comparisons revealed that the four outcomes of responsibility were rated at statistically significantly different levels (repeated measure ANOVA Global <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref81">3</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib453" id="ref82">453</reflink>) = 156.5, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<subs>p</subs><sups>2</sups> =.51): The participants felt the most responsible for the quality of their teaching (M = 72.37) and slightly less responsible for their relationships with students (M = 66.53). They felt moderately responsible for students' achievement (M = 53.36) and largely irresponsible for student motivation (M = 37.74). In terms of motivation to become a teacher, intrinsic value was rated most highly (M = 6.08), followed by social utility value (M = 5.42), subject interest (M = 5.16), opportunity (M = 4.34), personal utility value (M = 3.76), and fallback career (M = 1.96) (repeated measure ANOVA Global <emph>F</emph>(1.53,233.43) = 205.64, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<subs>p</subs><sups>2</sups> =.57). In terms of classroom management styles, autonomy support (M = 5.47) and structure (M = 5.23) were largely preferred over control (M = 2.61) and chaos (M = 2.49) (repeated measure ANOVA Global <emph>F</emph>(2.07,301.12) = 460.53, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<subs>p</subs><sups>2</sups> =.75). Note that no significant differences between the three types of vocational teachers were found on any of the variables. Furthermore, teaching experience was not related to any of the variables.</p> <p>Using structural equation modelling, we examined the relations between motivation to become a teacher as exogenous variables, sense of responsibility as mediating variables, and classroom management style as consequences. The final model, which is shown in Figure 1, had a satisfactory fit to the data: Χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref83">21</reflink>) = 37.68, <emph>p</emph> = 0.01, CFI =.95, RMSEA =.07. We estimated the measurement error, but it is not shown in Figure 1. The explained variance (R<sups>2</sups>) is significant for the four senses of responsibility (R<sups>2</sups> ranged from 7% to 23%) and each of the four classroom management styles (R<sups>2</sups> ranged from 13% to 29%). This sustains the validity of the model; in other words, the explicative variables were found to be relevant (Barrett [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref84">2</reflink>]).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Results of path analysis. All path are significant at p <.05</p> <p>The conducted analysis indicated that motivation to become a teacher had both direct and indirect statistical effects on classroom management style. Specifically, intrinsic value predicted sense of responsibility for teaching quality, which in turn was related to the four classroom management style. This type of responsibility played a central role in positively predicting classroom management style that is adaptive or beneficial (i.e., autonomy support and structure) as well as negatively predicting classroom management styles that are considered to be maladaptive or detrimental (i.e., control and chaos). Social utility value predicted sense of responsibility for student achievement, motivation, and interpersonal relationships; however, these three aspects of responsibility were unrelated to classroom management styles. Social utility value had a direct statistical effect on both autonomy support and control. Finally, personal utility value, choice by opportunity, fallback career, and interest in the subject were unrelated to responsibility and styles and therefore not shown in Figure 1.</p> <p>Unexpectedly high correlations between the four classroom management styles were observed. Whereas the theoretical model assumes two continuums – autonomy support vs. control and structure vs. chaos – our data indicate that autonomy support and control are independent dimensions (no significant correlation) and that structure is only moderately correlated to chaos (<emph>φ</emph> = −.31, <emph>p</emph> <.01), though in the expected negative direction. The strongest associations were found between autonomy support and structure (<emph>φ</emph> =.70, <emph>p</emph> <.001) and between control and chaos (<emph>φ</emph> =.70, <emph>p</emph> <.001). These observations suggest a misfit between the theory and the data, the validity issues used in the vignette instrument, or a combination of the two.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-12">Discussion</hd> <p>This study indicates that motivation to become a teacher has implications for teachers' sense of responsibility as well as for their classroom management style. Specifically, we found two significant motivational antecedents to responsibility: social utility value and intrinsic value. The four other motivations to become a teacher (i.e., personal utility value, subject interest, opportunity, and fallback career) were related neither to teachers' sense of responsibility nor to classroom management styles. The more teachers were motivated by the social utility value of the profession, the greater their sense of responsibility for their relationships with students, for students' achievement, and for student motivation. These results replicate exactly those of Lauermann and Karabenick ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref85">21</reflink>]). However, in contrast to this prior study, a higher intrinsic value is reflected into feeling highly responsible for the quality of one's own teaching; therefore, the diverse areas of responsibility are based on different motivational antecedents. We were surprised that only two types of motivation were found to be significant. One possible interpretation is that responsibility might solely depend on motivations considered to be mostly adaptive (i.e., intrinsic motivation and social utility value).</p> <p>A clear picture of the consequences of responsibility was found sense of responsibility for the quality of teaching positively predicted adaptive classroom management styles (i.e., autonomy support and structure) and negatively predicted maladaptive styles (i.e., control and chaos). In contrast, the three other types of responsibility were found to be unrelated to classroom management styles. It is surprising that responsibility for student motivation did not predict classroom management style, since the styles are derived from a motivational theory and are supposed to foster (or discourage) student motivation. Our results suggest that feeling responsible for student motivation might not be sufficient to adopt an adaptive classroom management style, or to adopt any style at all. One possible interpretation is that teachers feeling responsible for the quality of their teaching are those who are interested in planning pedagogical content and learning situation that facilitates the provision of classroom management styles deemed beneficial for their students. Further studies should be conducted in order to explore this interpretation.</p> <p>In addition, two direct effects of social utility value on classroom management styles were found: the higher the social utility value, the higher the autonomy support and control. These results are counterintuitive. A possible explanation is that teachers who value the social aspect of their profession are more active in managing their classroom (i.e., they use both more control and more autonomy support) and may combine the two styles. Finally, the independent measurements of autonomy support and control could be one reason for this finding. In other words, if we had measured these two styles with a single scale (such as the PCT), we would not have gotten these results.</p> <p>The specific context in which the study was conducted must be considered when interpreting the results. For instance, the relatively low sense of responsibility for student motivation may be explained by the fact that vocational students have, for the most part, chosen their education. Accordingly, teachers expect them to be motivated during class, presumably attributing this responsibility to the students and not to themselves. In contrast, as vocational teachers are considered to be experts in the subjects they teach, they are expected to provide high-quality teaching that integrates their practical expertise. This may have been reflected in a relatively high sense of responsibility for the quality of their teaching. Additionally, teachers' sense of responsibility for the quality of their teaching is the single outcome that is not directly related to students; accordingly, sharing responsibility on this aspect is not possible like it is for student-related outcomes, such as their motivation or achievement. Further investigations of the role of the four types of responsibility are needed in order to make their degree of population specificity clear.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-13">Limits and further research</hd> <p>Interpretations of the results suffer from several limitations. Due to the study's cross-sectional design, we relied on theoretical arguments and relevant literature to assume relationships between the constructs and therefore no causal conclusion can be drawn. Furthermore, the self-reported nature of the data, particularly for classroom management styles, might be problematic. One advantage of self-report is that it is non-intrusive, whereas observing behaviour during teaching is highly intrusive. However, teachers may have reported the ideal behaviour they would adopt in the given situations, which may differ from the real behaviours they would have adopted in the classroom. Moreover, such measurement instruments might not be nuanced enough to get a clear picture of teachers' classroom management styles. Another limit is related to the sample: It consisted of a modest number of teachers whose context of teaching is highly specific. Replication is thus necessary. The internal consistency of the scores representing the four classroom management styles were not fully satisfying, which is the reason why we took into account measurement error in the model. The instrument should be revised to improve its reliability.</p> <p>Finally, we only chose to study two predictors of classroom management styles. However, teachers' styles can be influenced by a multitude of factors, including pressures from below that were not assessed in our model (e.g., teacher self-efficacy, beliefs about how to motivate students, general pedagogical beliefs), as well as by contextual predictors acting as pressures from below (e.g., students' behaviour), and pressures from above (e.g., school culture, social norms, institutional habits). The incompleteness of the model, though valid, is supported by the moderate explained variances and the acceptable (but not optimal) model fit. Therefore, we cannot advocate for our model total accuracy in explaining teachers' classroom management style in its entirety. However, it adds to the knowledge about the chosen variables, and especially regarding sense of responsibility, which has not been intensively researched yet.</p> <p>Further research might use another measure of classroom management styles, for instance, students' reports of these styles in order to overcome the limitations of self-reports. In addition, a longitudinal design would improve the rationale for the assumed ordering of the variables.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-14">Implications for research and for teacher education</hd> <p>The present study expanded upon prior research on several points. First, it demonstrated consistent links between motivation to become a teacher and sense of responsibility. Second, it confirmed the applicability of this conceptual framework to another population of teachers (i.e., vocational teachers) and to another cultural context (i.e., Switzerland). Finally, it tested the implications of motivation to become a teacher and sense of responsibility for classroom management style. If our results do not allow us to conclude that there is an existing link between teachers' motivation to choose the career and classroom management styles, the study does contribute to the growing body of literature on teacher motivation and teacher responsibility and how these are associated with classroom management styles. Given the central role of responsibility in the quality of teaching, further consideration in theory and research is warranted.</p> <p>The study conclusions suggest that educating teachers to support autonomy and to structure their teaching while at the same time encouraging them to take responsibility for the quality of their instruction should help them to adopt adaptive practices that are beneficial to students. This raises the issue of promoting teachers' sense of responsibility: If feeling responsible for the quality of one's teaching is so central to instructional practices, then how can we increase this sense in teachers who do not feel responsible? Another implication relates to changing teachers' classroom management style. It is not sufficient to promote autonomy support and structure: teachers' sense of responsibility and motivation to become a teacher have to be considered. To change practices, we need to change teachers' beliefs and motivation. These questions open possibilities for further research using person-oriented and longitudinal approaches.</p> <hd id="AN0148881333-15">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0148881333-16"> <title> Notes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref6" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Classroom management styles, or motivating styles, are interpersonal sentiments and behaviours teachers provide during instruction. Each style is associated with specific instructional practices (Reeve [31]). Classroom goal structures refer to the various classroom- and school-level policies and practices that make mastery or performance goal salient, as well as the explicit goal-related messages teachers communicate to their students (Kaplan et al.[16]).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref58" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Although this theory focuses on student achievement rather than on student motivation, it was deemed appropriate to enlighten the association between sense of responsibility and teacher motivation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref45" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> To our knowledge, there is no research studying the differences between sense of responsibility when teaching children vs young adults, or when teaching general education vs speciality. We consider these hypotheses to be relevant based on our knowledge of our context and of vocational teachers, who we train in our institution.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref67" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> In Switzerland, vocational education and training is the most popular educational track after compulsory schooling. Two out of three young people pursue an apprenticeship (Swiss Federal Statistical Office [41]), for the majority of them in a dual form – that is, by spending one or two days per week at a vocational school and the rest of the week at a training company. This dual training system allows apprentices to learn a trade by focusing on the practical side of it while developing the necessary theoretical and general knowledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref51" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Survey was deemed the most appropriate method to gather data given the sample size and the importance of anonymity for limiting social desirability bias.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref4" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> In comparison, a two-factor model (factor 1: autonomy support and control, factor 2: structure and chaos) inadequately fitted the data: <emph>χ<sups>2</sups></emph>(133) = 306.65, <emph>p</emph> <.001, CFI =.58, RMSEA =.09. To investigate convergent validity, the correlations were observed between the vignettes and two other scales: the Psychologically Controlling Teaching scale (PCT; Soenens et al.[39]) and the Behaviour and Instructional Management Scale (BIMS; Martin and Sass [24]). As expected, control correlated positively (<emph>r</emph>(153) =.52, <emph>p</emph> <.001) with the PCT Scale, while autonomy support correlated negatively (<emph>r</emph>(153) = –.19, <emph>p</emph>=.02). Furthermore, structure correlated positively with the two dimensions of the BIMS: behaviour management (<emph>r</emph>(153) =.33, <emph>p</emph> <.001) and instructional management (<emph>r</emph>(153) =.24, <emph>p</emph> <.001). Chaos did not significantly correlate with either behaviour management or instructional management. In order to gauge this instrument's sensitivity to socially desirable responding, two scales based on Paulhus' ([29]) conceptualisation of socially desirable responding were administered. A significant but rather small correlation between the autonomy support score and impression management was found: <emph>r</emph>(153) =.22, <emph>p</emph> <.01. No other significant correlations between social desirability and vignette scores were found. This indicates that the vignette instrument is relatively independent of social desirability.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0148881333-17"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Ames, C., and R. Ames. 1984. " Systems of Student and Teacher Motivation: Toward a Qualitative Definition." Journal of Educational Psychology 76 (4): 535 – 556. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.76.4.535.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Barrett, P. 2007. " Structural Equation Modelling: Adjudging Model Fit." Personality and Individual Differences 42 (5): 815 – 824. doi: 10.101.6/j.paid.2006.09.018.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berger, J.-L., C. Girardet, C. Vaudroz, and C. Aprea. 2017. " The Motivational Basis of Classroom Management Practices and Beliefs of Swiss Vocational Teachers." In Global Perspectives on Teacher Motivation, edited by H. M. G. Watt, P. W. Richardson, and K. Smith, 125 – 160. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berger, J.-L., and K. Lê Van. 2019. " Teacher Professional Identity as Multidimensional: Mapping Its Components and Examining Their Associations with General Pedagogical Beliefs." Educational Studies 45 (2): 163 – 181. doi: 10.1080/03055698.2018.1446324.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berger, J.-L., H. M. G. Watt, and P. W. Richardson. 2018. " Motivations and Attributions that Predict Teachers' Interest and Confidence in Their Classroom Teaching: A Longitudinal Study." Paper presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction Special Interest Group 8 Motivation and Emotion conference, Aarhus, August 15-17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brophy, J. 2004. Motivating Students to Learn. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref11" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Butler, R. 2007. " Teachers' Achievement Goal Orientations and Associations with Teachers' Help Seeking: Examination of a Novel Approach to Teacher Motivation." Journal of Educational Psychology 99 : 241 – 252. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.241.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref44" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Butler, R., and L. Shibaz. 2008. " Achievement Goals for Teaching as Predictors of Students' Perceptions of Instructional Practices and Students' Help Seeking and Cheating." Learning and Instruction 18 : 453 – 467. doi: 10.106/j.learninstruc.2008.06.004.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref50" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Daniels, L. M., A. I. Radil, and L. D. Goegan. 2017. " Combinations of Personal Responsibility: Differences on Pre-service and Practicing Teachers' Efficacy, Engagement, Classroom Goal Structure and Wellbeing." Frontiers in Psychology 8 (906): 1 – 12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00906.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York, NY : Plenum Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 1987. " The Support of Autonomy and the Control of Behavior." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53 (6): 1024 – 1037. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024. PMID:3320334.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deci, E. L., A. J. Schwartz, L. Sheinman, and R. M. Ryan. 1981. " An Instrument to Assess Adults' Orientations toward Control versus Autonomy with Children: Reflections on Intrinsic Motivation and Perceived Competence." Journal of Educational Psychology 73 : 642 – 650. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.73.5.642.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eccles, J., T. F. Adler, R. Futterman, S. B. Goff, C. M. Kaczala, J. Meece, and C. Midgley. 1983. " Expectancies, Values, and Academic Behaviors." In Achievement and Achievement Motives. Psychological and Sociological Approaches, edited by J. T. Spence, 75 – 146. San Francisco, CA : W.H. Freeman.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grossman, P., S. Loeb, J. Cohen, and J. Wyckoff. 2013. " Measure for Measure: The Relationship between Measures of Instructional Practice in Middle School English Language Arts and Teachers' Value-added Scores." American Journal of Education 119 (3): 445 – 470. doi: 10.3386/w16015.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jang, H., J. Reeve, and E. L. Deci. 2010. " Engaging Students in Learning Activities: It Is Not Autonomy Support or Structure but Autonomy Support and Structure." Journal of Educational Psychology 102 (3): 588 – 600. doi: 10.1037/a0019682.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaplan, A., M. J. Middleton, T. Urdan, and C. Midgley. 2002. " Achievement Goals and Goal Structures." In Goals, Goal Structures and Patterns of Adaptive Learning, edited by C. Midgley, 21 – 53. Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum. doi: 10.4324/9781410602152.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kunter, M., J. Baumert, W. Blum, U. Klusmann, S. Krauss, and M. Neubrand, eds. 2013. Cognitive Activation in the Mathematics Classroom and Professional Competence of Teachers: Results from the COACTIV Project. New York : Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kunter, M., J. Baumert, and O. Köller. 2007. " Effective Classroom Management and the Development of Subject-related Interest." Learning and Instruction 17 : 494–509. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kunter, M., Y.-M. Tsai, U. Klusmann, M. Brunner, S. Krauss, and J. Baumert. 2008. " Students' and Mathematics Teachers' Perception of Teacher Enthusiasm and Instruction." Learning and Instruction 18 : 468 – 482. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.008.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lauermann, F., and S. A. Karabenick. 2011a. " Taking Teacher Responsibility into Account(ability): Explicating Its Multiple Components and Theoretical Status." Educational Psychologist 46 (2): 122 – 140. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2011.558818.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lauermann, F., and S. A. Karabenick. 2011b. " Motivation to Become a Teacher, Teacher Responsibility, and Implications for Mastery and Performance Approaches to Instruction." Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April 8–12.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lauermann, F., and S. A. Karabenick. 2013. " The Meaning and Measure of Teachers' Sense of Responsibility for Educational Outcomes." Teaching and Teacher Education 30 : 13 – 26. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2012.10.001.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lauermann, F., S. A. Karabenick, R. Carpenter, and C. Kuusinen. 2017. " Teacher Motivation and Professional Commitment in the United States: The Role of Motivations for Teaching, Teacher Self-efficacy and Sense of Professional Responsibility." In Global Perspectives on Teacher Motivation, edited by H. M. G. Watt, P. W. Richardson, and K. Smith, 322 – 348. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin, N. K., and D. A. Sass. 2010. " Construct Validation of the Behavior and Instructional Management Scale." Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (5): 1124 – 1135. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.12.001.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Medway, F. J. 1979. " Causal Attributions for School-related Problems: Teacher Perceptions and Teacher Feedback." Journal of Educational Psychology 71 (6): 809 – 818. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.71.6.809.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meece, J. L., E. M. Anderman, and L. H. Anderman. 2006. " Classroom Goal Structure, Student Motivation, and Academic Achievement." Annual Review of Psychology 57 : 487 – 503. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2009. Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS. Paris : Author. doi: 10.1787/9789264068780-en.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pajares, F. 1992. " Teachers' Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning up a Messy Construct." Review of Educational Research 62 (3): 307 – 332. doi: 10.3102/00346543062003307.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Paulhus, D. L. 1984. " Two-component Models of Socially-desirable Responding." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46 (3): 598 – 609. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.598.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pelletier, G. L., C. Séguin-Lévesque, and L. Legault. 2002. " Pressure from above and Pressure from below as Determinants of Teachers' Motivation and Teaching Behaviors." Journal of Educational Psychology 94 : 186 – 196. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.186.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reeve, J. 2009. " Why Teachers Adopt a Controlling Motivating Style toward Students and How They Can Become More Autonomy Supportive." Educational Psychologist 44 (3): 159 – 175. doi: 10.1080/00461520903028990.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reyna, C., and B. Weiner. 2001. " Justice and Utility in the Classroom: An Attributional Analysis of the Goals of Teachers' Punishment and Intervention Strategies." Journal of Educational Psychology 93 (2): 309 – 319. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.309.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richardson, P. W., S. A. Karabenick, and H. M. G. Watt, eds. 2014. Teacher Motivation: Theory and Practice. New York : Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203119273.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richardson, P. W., and H. M. G. Watt. 2014. " Why People Choose Teaching as a Career? An Expectancy-value Approach to Understanding Teacher Motivation." In Teacher Motivation: Theory and Practice, edited by P. W. Richardson, S. A. Karabenick, and H. M. G. Watt, 3 – 19. New York : Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203119273.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richardson, V., and P. Placier. 2001. " Teacher Change." In Handbook of Research on Teaching, edited by V. Richardson, 905 – 945. Washington, DC : American Educational Research Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Roeser, R. W., R. Marachi, and H. Gehlbach. 2002. " A Goal Theory Perspective on Teachers' Professional Identities and the Contexts of Teaching." In Goals, Goal Structures, and Patterns of Adaptive Learning, edited by C. Midgley, 205 – 241. Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sierens, E., M. Vansteenkiste, L. Goossens, B. Soenens, and F. Dochy. 2009. " The Synergistic Relationship of Perceived Autonomy Support and Structure in the Prediction of Self-regulated Learning." British Journal of Educational Psychology 79 : 57 – 68. doi: 10.1348/000709908X304398.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Skinner, E. A., and M. J. Belmont. 1993. " Motivation in the Classroom: Reciprocal Effects of Teacher Behavior and Student Engagement across the School Year." Journal of Educational Psychology 85 (4): 571 – 581. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Soenens, B., E. Sierens, M. Vansteenkiste, F. Dochy, and L. Goossens. 2012. " Psychologically Controlling Teaching: Examining Outcomes, Antecedents, and Mediators." Journal of Educational Psychology 104 : 108 – 120. doi: 10.1037/a0025742.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stipek, D. J., K. B. Givvin, J. M. Salmon, and V. L. MacGyvers. 2001. " Teachers' Beliefs and Practices Related to Mathematics Instruction." Teaching and Teacher Education 17 : 213 – 226. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00052-4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Swiss Federal Statistical Office. 2017. " Choix de formation au degré secondaire II, évolution." [ The Choice of Education at Secondary Level II, Evolution. ]. https://<ulink href="http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/fr/home/statistiques/education-science/indicateurs-formation/systeme-formation-suisse/degre-formation/degre-secondaire-ii/formations-degre-secondaire.assetdetail.2924593.html">www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/fr/home/statistiques/education-science/indicateurs-formation/systeme-formation-suisse/degre-formation/degre-secondaire-ii/formations-degre-secondaire.assetdetail.2924593.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomson, M., J. Turner, and J. Nietfeld. 2012. " A Typological Approach to Investigate the Teaching Career Decision: Motivations and Beliefs about Teaching of Prospective Teacher Candidates." Teaching and Teacher Education 28 : 324 – 335. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2011.10.007.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tollefson, N., and J. S. Chen. 1988. " Consequences of Teachers' Attributions for Student Failure." Teaching and Teacher Education 4 (3): 259 – 265. doi: 10.1016/0742-051X(88)90005-4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Urdan, T. 2014. " Concluding Commentary: Understanding Teacher Motivation." In Teacher Motivation: Theory and Practice, edited by P. W. Richardson, S. A. Karabenick, and H. M. G. Watt, 227 – 246. New York : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vansteenkiste, M., E. Sierens, L. Goossens, B. Soenens, F. Dochy, A. Mouratidis, N. Aelterman, L. Haerens, and W. Beyers. 2012. " Identifying Configurations of Perceived Teacher Autonomy Support and Structure: Associations with Self-regulated Learning, Motivation and Problem Behavior." Learning and Instruction 22 : 431 – 439. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaudroz, C., and J.-L. Berger. 2019. " Validation De La Version Francophone De L'échelle Du Sentiment De Responsabilité Des Enseignants (Teacher Responsibility Scale)." Mesure et évaluation en éducation 41 (3): 87 – 117. doi: 10.7202/1065166ar.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watt, H. M. G., and P. W. Richardson. 2007. " Motivational Factors Influencing Teaching as a Career Choice: Development and Validation of the FIT-Choice Scale." Journal of Experimental Education 75 : 167 – 202. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.75.3.167-202.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watt, H. M. G., and P. W. Richardson. 2008. " Special Issue: Motivation for Teaching." Learning and Instruction 18 (5): 405–407. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.009.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Jean-Louis Berger and Céline Girardet</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib282" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib128" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib453" firstref="ref82"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1289345
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Vocational Teachers' Classroom Management Style: The Role of Motivation to Teach and Sense of Responsibility
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Berger%2C+Jean-Louis%22">Berger, Jean-Louis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Girardet%2C+Céline%22">Girardet, Céline</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Teacher+Education%22"><i>European Journal of Teacher Education</i></searchLink>. 2021 44(2):200-216.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 17
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Vocational+Education+Teachers%22">Vocational Education Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Styles%22">Teaching Styles</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classroom+Techniques%22">Classroom Techniques</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+%28Occupation%29%22">Teaching (Occupation)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Career+Choice%22">Career Choice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Motivation%22">Teacher Motivation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Responsibility%22">Teacher Responsibility</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Motivation%22">Student Motivation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Student+Relationship%22">Teacher Student Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personal+Autonomy%22">Personal Autonomy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Correlation%22">Correlation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Values%22">Social Values</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Switzerland%22">Switzerland</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/02619768.2020.1764930
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0261-9768
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study aimed to examine the links between motivation to become a teacher, sense of responsibility, and classroom management style. An adapted version of the Factors Influencing Teaching (FIT)-Choice scale, a translated version of the Teacher Responsibility scale, and a vignette instrument inspired by the Problems in School Questionnaire were administered to 154 in-service vocational teachers. Consistent with prior research, path analysis of the data indicated that social utility value for teaching was the most consistent predictor of teachers' sense of responsibility. However, the key motivation predicting responsibility for teaching was intrinsic value, which in turn predicted teachers' endorsement of classroom management styles. The more vocational teachers felt responsible for the quality of their teaching, the more they tended to endorse adaptive or beneficial classroom management styles (autonomy support and structure). Implications for research and teaching are discussed.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2021
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1289345
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1289345
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/02619768.2020.1764930
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 200
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Vocational Education Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Styles
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Classroom Techniques
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching (Occupation)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Career Choice
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Motivation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Responsibility
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Motivation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Student Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Personal Autonomy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Correlation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Values
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Switzerland
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Vocational Teachers' Classroom Management Style: The Role of Motivation to Teach and Sense of Responsibility
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Berger, Jean-Louis
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Girardet, Céline
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2021
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0261-9768
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 44
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Teacher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1