Appraisal of Job Satisfaction among High School Teachers of District Yamunanagar in Haryana

Centuries ago on this land of Vedas the teacher devoted on his time for the upliftment of his stupid in all direction knowledge moral and values at cetera she was called the Guru of Acharya. The real teacher characteristics on the laid down on the 13th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita are absence of pride, freedom from hypocrisy, non-violence, for giving nature, service of the preceptor, purity of mind and body, straightforwardness stead-fastness and self-control.

At present the situation with regard to teacher pupil relationship and teachers status is contrary to what was obtained in the olden days. In those days the teacher was looked up as Guru or Acharya and not look down as is being done today. He was paid the highest respect by one and all including the rulers. The student and the society as well used to look up at the Archarya for guidance.

Job satisfaction: Job satisfaction is the result of various attitude possessed by an employee. in a narrow sense these attitudes are related to the job and are concerned with specific factors as wages supervision, steadiness of employment, conditions of work, opportunities for advancement, recognition of ability, fair settlement of grievances, fair evaluation of work, fair treatment by employer and the others similar factors.

1. To find the significant difference between job satisfaction of men and women teachers. 2. To find the significant difference between job satisfaction of graduate and postgraduate teachers. 3. To study the role of type of Management related to job satisfaction. 4. To find the significant difference between the job satisfaction of married and unmarried teachers. 5. To compare the job satisfaction of ruler teachers and urban teachers.

1. There would not be any significant difference between the level of job satisfaction of men and women teachers. 2. There would not be any significant difference between the level of job satisfaction of graduate and postgraduate teachers. 3. There would not be any significant difference between job satisfaction of Government and private teachers. 4. There would not be significant difference between the level of job satisfaction of married and unmarried teachers. 5. There would not be any significant difference between the level of job satisfaction of Urban and ruler teachers.

1. The study is limited to the high school teachers only. 2. The study is limited to the district Yamunanagar of Haryana state only. 3. The study is limited to the sample of 200 high school teachers only.

In order to achieve the objectives for data collection a standardized questionnaire prepared by Narsimha Reddy (Appendix-II) was used. It is consisted of 65 items; there are 34 positive items and 31 negative items in the questionnaire. Each of items was arranged on a five point scale with the following alternatives: The numerical value values for the positive and negative items are shown in the table below:- Table -1

Type of statement Strongly agree, Agree. Undecided, Disagree, Strongly disagree Positive Statement 5 4 3 2 1 Negative Statement 1 2 3 4 5

The investigator has taken 200 high school teachers from the school of Yamunanagar district. The teacher and sample for the study were selected by a multistage stratified random sampling. The study was carried out on the basis of different area e.g. sex, qualification, type of Management area, marital status and rural/urban area. Thereby the simple was stratified in these categories and areas explained in the chapter 1 and display in table -2 below:- Table -2:

1 sex Male 125 Female 75 2 Qualification Graduation 149 Post-graduation 51 3 Management Government 117

The first dependent variable considered in the study is job satisfaction. The total score of job satisfaction for each teacher was calculated and presented in the form of a frequency distribution. All the descriptive statistics were calculated and necessary discussions were made to see whether the distribution follows normality. The frequency distribution of job satisfaction scores for the total sample is prevented in Table- 3

S. No. Class Interval Frequency Cumulative Frequency 1 180-189 1 1 2 190-199 3 4 3 200-209 8 12 4 210-219 25 37 5 220-229 36 73 6 230-239 42 175 7 240-249 43 158 8 250-259 25 183 9 260-269 13 196 10 270-279 4 200

Number of Teachers N=200 Mean M = 235.12 Median Md = 222. 84 Mode MD= 231 7 Standard Deviation SD = 17.14 Skewness SK = 2 .14 Kurtosis Ku = 0. 36 From the Table 3: It is clear that the mean job satisfaction scores of High school teachers (Total sample = 200) is 235.12. There are 35 items in job satisfaction inventory. The minimum score is 65(65x1=65), the natural score is 195(65x3=195) and the maximum scores is 325 (35x5=325). It is observed that the mean score is above the neutral score. Hence it is concluded that the Teachers in this investigation on the whole are having satisfaction towards their jobs. The distribution is positively skewed. Hence, it is concluded that the score the massed at the Low end of the scale (left end) and are spread more gradually towards the High end (right end). The value of Kurtosis is 0.36. For the normal curve, the value of the Kurtoris is 0.263. Hence the obtained value is greater the normal value. Therefore the distribution is platy Kurtic. The Histogram for the distribution of job satisfaction scores of the total sample is shown in fig (1). The frequency polygon for the distribution of job satisfaction scores of the total sample is given in figure-2.

It was found that the mean score of total male teachers was 235.82 with a standard deviation of 17 56. The mean score of total Female teachers was 234 80 with a standard deviation of 16.52. The male teachers mean score is higher than the mean of Female teachers and it is represented graphically of figure-3. The following null hypothesis was tested HYPOTHESIS-1 There would be no significant different in the attitude scores towards job satisfaction between Male Female teachers HYPOTHESIS -1 was tested by employing — Technique and results are presented in Table-4. Table-4: Mean and S.D.'s of Male and Female teacher’s attitude scores towards job satisfaction and results of‘t’ test.

The different between two means was tested by ‘t’ test. The obtained t value was 0.21. The table values for 198 df was found to be 1.97 at 0.05 level and 2.60 at 0.01 level. The table value is greater than calculated value. Hence the difference between Male and Female teachers was not significant at both levels. Therefore the null hypothesis that H2 is accepted.

It was found that mean score of Graduate teachers was 235.61 with a S.D. of 16.56 and Post Graduate Teachers was 233.71 with a S.D. of 18.83. The Graduate teachers and it is graphically represented in Figure -4. In order to find the significance of difference between graduate and post-graduate teachers in their job satisfaction, the following null hypothesis was tested. Hypothesis-2: There would be no significant difference between graduate and Post graduate teachers in their attitude towards job satisfaction.

Qualification Mean SD `t' Value Graduate 235.61 16.56 0.64@ Post Graduate 233.71 18.83

The difference between two means was tested for significance by t' test. The obtained t value is 0. 64 the table value for 198 df was found to be 1.97 at 0.05 level and 2.60 at 0.01 level. The table value is greater than the calculated value Hence the difference between Graduate the Post graduate teachers was not significant at both levels. Therefore the null hypothesis Hz is accepted

It was found that mean score of Government teachers was 235.66 with a SD of 17.69 and Private School teachers was 237.37 with SD of 16.41. The government teachers were showing higher mean than the private teachers and it is graphically represented in figure -5.

Hypothesis-3: There would be no significant difference between in the attitude scores towards job satisfaction between Government and private teachers. Hypothesis- 3 is tested by employing ‘t’ technique and results are presented in

Management Mean SD `t' Value Government 235.66 17.69 0.53@ Private 237.37 16.41

The difference between two means was tested for significance by test. The obtained t value is 0.53. The table value for 198 df and found be 1.97 at 0.05 level and 2.60 at 0.01 level. The table value is greater than the calculation value. Hence the difference between Government and Private Teachers was not significant at both levels. Therefore this null hypothesis was also accepted. Thus the teachers in Private and Government schools are equally satisfied with their job.

It was found that mean scores of Married and Unmarried teachers are 235.26 and 234.73 respectively with a SDs 17.12 and 17.35 respectively. The married teachers were showing a higher mean score than the Un-married teachers and it is graphically represented in figure -6. In order to find the significance if difference between married and unmarried teachers in their job satisfaction the following null - hypothesis was formulated.

Management Mean SD `t' Value Married 235.26 17.12 0.19@ Unmarried 234.73 17.35 @ 'V is not significant at 0.05 level

The difference between two means was tested for significance by‘t’ technique. The obtained t value is 0.19. The table value for 198 df and found be 1.97 at 0.05 level and 2.60 at 0.01 level. The table value is greater than the calculation value. Hence the difference between Married and unmarried teachers was not significant at both levels. Therefore this null hypothesis was also accepted.

It was found that mean score of urban teachers was 233.88 with a S.D of 17.93 and rural teachers was 236.67 with a S.D of 16.06. The rural teachers were showing higher mean score than the urban teachers and it is graphically repeated in figure 8. In order to find the significance of difference between Urban and Rural teachers in their job satisfaction, the following null hypothesis was tested. Hypothesis-5: There would be no significant difference between Urban and Rural Teachers in their attitude towards job satisfaction. Hypothesis-5: is tested by using‘t’ technique and the results are presented in Table -8

The difference between two means was tested for significance by‘t’ test. The obtained‘t’ value is 1.15. The table value for 198 df and found be 1.97 at 0.05 level and 2.60 at 0.01 level. The table value is greater than the calculation value. Hence the difference between Urban and Rural teachers was not significant at both levels. Therefore this null hypothesis was also accepted.

Based on the analysis of this study, the following conclusions are drawn: 1. Sex has no significant effect on the job satisfaction. 2. It has found that there is no significant effect of variable qualification on the job satisfaction. 3. Rural teachers have been found more satisfied towards job than the teachers of urban area. 4. It was also found that type of management of school does not influence the job satisfaction. 5. Marital status is not an important variable which influences job satisfaction.

There present study is limited to High School teachers and size of the sample is 200.The following suggestions are given for further investigation is the area of job satisfaction. 1. A similar study may be undertaken for B.Ed. degree, polytechnic and university teachers. 2. A similar study may be undertaken on a large sample covering different districts. 3. Science and Non-Science teachers have not been studied in this investigation. It may be taken up in future studies. 4. Teacher’s cadre is not studied in this investigation. It may be taken up in further studies. 5. A similar study may be undertaken for the

teachers on the bases of their experience.

Blum M.L. and Russ J. (1942). A study of Employee Attitudes towaues vinous incentives. Personnel, 434444. Borrow H. (1964). Personal values Job satisfaction and Job behaviour. pp. 341-358. Bryson (1978). Family size, satisfaction and productivity in dual -career couples Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3. pp. 67-77. Chase F. (1951). Factors of satisfaction in teaching Phi Dettakappan. 33. pp. 127-132. Edwards A. L. (1969). Techniques of attitudes scale construction. pp. 152-156. Friend Lander F. and Walton E. (1964). Positive and Negative Motivators toward work Administrative Science Quarterly, 9. pp. 94-207. Gopal Garrot and Valecha (1992). Teacher appraisal in technical Education and management Institutions perspectives in Education. 8, pp. 11-17 Gutman, American, L. (1947). A basis for scaling qualitative data. Social Review, 9. pp. 139-150. Hertzberg, Mausner and Synderman B. B. (1959). The motivation to work Willey Newyork. Hull. R.L. and Kotstad A. (1942). Mork, on the lots (m) Goochen tea) Cheek Mora, Reyal k Hitchcock Nev.york. pp. 349-354. Katzel (1964). Personal values. Job satisfaction and job behavior (In) Borwo H (Ed) 1964 Man in a world at wort Houghton. Muffin Company Boston. Kentle, J.V.L. (1985). A follow up study of Industrial education decimal graduates of the period of 1972 through 1982 to investigate the degree of rob satisfaction. Dissertation Abstracts International 45. 2421-A Likert, It (1932). A technique for the measurements of atcheires of psychology. No. 140. Locke, E.A.A.M. (1964). Convergent and discriminant validity for areas and methods of rating fob satisfaction. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation psychological review, 50. pp. 370-396. Morgan, J.J.B. (1934). Keeping a Sound Mind 2"` Ectrtan. New York, Macmillan. Morse, N.C. (1953). Satisfaction in white collar lob (Annual report Michigan Institute for Social Research. University of Michigan) 72. MyOrS, M.N. (1964). Who are your motivated workers? [lanyard Business Review, 42. pp. 73-68. Neeraja, Dwivedi and Pestanjec D. M. (1975). Soto personal correlates of job satisfaction psychological studies. 20. pp. 30-49. O'Neal, O.W. (1986). Classifying job characteristic of educational administrators An examination of satisfiers and rnotivators. Dissertation Abstracts International. Feb. 87. p. 47. Pendaeli, J. (1992). School Science and Technology Education for National Development to Tanzania. Perspectives in Education. 8. pp. 3-10. Pestanjee, D.M. and Signs A.P. (1973). Morale of first level supervisors. Indian Journal of Social Work, 34, pp. 189-193. Report of the Education Commission (1966). Ministry of Education, Govt. of India. Report of the National Commission on Teachers, (1985) In Biswas A and Agarwal S.P 1986. Publishing Company. New Delhi. Report of the Secondary Education Commission (1954). Ministry of Education Govt. of India. Richard, D.A. and Dewhirst H.D. (1979). Relationship between diversity of interests. age job satisfaction and job performance, Journal of occupational Psychology, 52. pp. 17-23. Rosen, R.A. and Rosen H. (1966). A suggested 'notifications in lob satisfaction surveys, Personnel Psychology, 8. pp. 303-314. Smith, J. J. (1977). Job satisfaction of convent public senior high school principals as related to. Sucher, J.H (1982). A study of Morale in Education utilizing incomplete sentences Journal of Educational Research, 56. pp.75-81. UNESCO, (1990) (In) Pendalli J. (1992). School Science and technology Education for National Development in Tanzania, Perspective in Education, 8. pp. 3-10. V.H. Vroom (1964). Work and Motivation. Wiley, New York. V.R. Reddy and Krishna Reddy, N. (1978). Job satisfaction of teachers working under different managements. The education quarterly. 30, p. 28-29.

S. N. College of Education, Ambala Road, Jagadhri, Distt.Yamunanagar (Haryana)