ijcrb.webs.

com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
17
A STUDY OF LECTURERS JOB SATISFACTION IN
SELECTED HARBIN CITY UNIVERSITIES, CHINA
Jiang Na
Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Management, Planning & Policy,
University of Malaya.
Ismail Hussin Am!a"
Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Management, Planning & Policy,
University of Malaya.
Ja#$ Hassan A#%l&ai'a
Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Management, Planning & Policy,
University of Malaya.
A#s"$a("
Tis study e!amines te level of "o# satisfaction among lecturers in te field of teacing $inese
as a foreign language %T$F&' in t(o universities in )ar#in city, $ina. Te instrument used for
te researc metodology (as a modified version of te *o# Descriptive +nde! %*D+'
,uestionnaire (it items on demograpic factors, te (or- itself, co.(or-ers, supervision /
supervisor, income, opportunities for promotion and overall "o# satisfaction. Te data (as
analy0ed using te 1tatistical Pac-age for te 1ocial 1ciences %1P11' version 12.3 troug
fre,uency counts, T.test and 4nalysis of 5ariance %46754'. Te result of te study
indicates tat T$F& lecturers are satisfied (it te (or- itself, teir co.(or-ers and
supervision, #ut are not satisfied (it te income and opportunities for promotion. Tere is no
significant difference #et(een male and female T$F& lecturers (it respect to satisfaction on
five "o# factors. T$F& lecturers (it PD degrees ave iger "o# satisfaction tan lecturers (it
a #acelor8s and master8s degree. &ecturers (it more tan 13 years of service feel more satisfied
in te aspects of supervision, income and opportunities for promotion tan lecturers (it less
tan 13 years e!perience. Permanent lecturers e!press iger satisfaction in terms of income and
opportunities for promotion tan non permanent lecturers.
)*+%$,s9 &ecturer, *o# 1atisfaction, )ar#in $ity, $ina
-. In"$%,u("i%n
&ecturers8 "o# satisfaction is one of te top issues in every scool (orld(ide and it is a
serious topic for de#ate since long time ago. +t is an argumentative topic tat sould #e argued
#ecause lecturer satisfaction and employment are not only contri#uting to te motivation of
lecturers and teir improvement, #ut also to student learning and development %Perie, :a-er &
:leac, 1;;7'. +n $ina, altoug a lot of previous researc as #een conducted on lecturers< "o#
satisfaction, studies of lecturers in te field of teacing $inese as a Foreign &anguage %T$F&'
are muc neglected. 4s a popular profession in recent years, T$F& is attracting te attention #ot
of people interested in te profession and "o# see-ers more =tan ever #efore. To provide some
reference for future candidates and perfect/effective T$F& lecturer administration, tere sould
#e an increment in lecturers8 activity. Tis study e!amines T$F& lecturers8 "o# satisfaction in
t(o universities in )ar#in city, $ina.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
1>
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
Education, to some e!tent, is closely related to te development of te country and its
economy. 6ational development can afford te investment in education. For e!ample, currently
in $ina<s rural areas tuition fees and miscellaneous e!penses at te stage of compulsory
education are all free of carge in contrast (it te previous years (en tuition fees (ere
carged. 7n te oter and, to pay teir de#t to society for teir education talented ig.,uality
educators sould unite for te sustained development of te economy and te country. To some
e!tent, education reflects te national development situation from a certain angle. 1ince entering
te ?1st century, te (orld as #een paying closer attention to $ina tan ever #efore due to te
gro(ing $inese economic and development potential. 4 result of tis is te increased time
devoted to studying Mandarin #y foreigners from different countries.
@it te rise of te popularity of studying $inese #y foreigners, tere as #een a
corresponding gro(t in language teacing institutions, scools, ne( positions and training
courses. 4mong tem, te most famous and influential institution is A)an#anA (ic is
Acommitted to te development of $inese language and culture teacing resources and ma-ing
its services availa#le (orld(ide, meeting te demands of overseas $inese students to te
ma!imum degree, and contri#uting to glo#al cultural diversity and armony. A )an#an selects
and trains lecturers to teac on te T$F& volunteer #oard for te purpose of supporting scools
and colleges a#road and te spread of $inese language and culture. Under its guidance, lots of
lecturers ave #een selected to come on #oard, many $onfucius +nstitutes ave #een esta#lised,
and teacing $inese as a foreign language as also #ecome a popular "o#. Te Ministry of
Education of te People<s Bepu#lic of $ina %M7E of te People<s Bepu#lic of $ina' as T$F&
as an integral part of $ina<s reform #ecause Aeducation is a means #y (ic society perpetuates
and disseminates its o(n culture A%$. *ala"a Cumari, ?337'.
*o# satisfaction plays an important role in (or-ing life. :rayfield and $roc-ets %1;DD'
found tat te iger te individual or group satisfaction, te lo(er te li-eliood tat tey (ill
leave teir "o#s. Tis is #ecause te "o# not only provides economic sta#ility, #ut also te
personal feelings and emotion to (or- every day. From (or- you can get self.confidence,
appiness, a sense of accomplisment, team spirit, etc. Tese feelings lead to "o# satisfaction.
:ut a "o# can also get tedious as a result of (or-ers #eing underpaid, #ored, and stressed and
frustrated (it te "o# tat leads to "o# dissatisfaction.
&ecturer satisfaction (it employment is a -ey determinant of lecturer commitment and
is related to te retention of lecturers %Beyes & 1in, 1;;D'. @iteford %1;;3' identifies some
indicators of lecturer satisfaction (it employment and te sense of efficacy (ic include a
positive relationsip (it colleagues, satisfactory (or-ing conditions, and prestige and esteem
associated (it teacing.
/. P$%#lm S"a"mn"
1o far, according to statistics from te Ministry of Education of te People<s Bepu#lic of
$ina, more tan EE3 universities are offering T$F& programmes in $ina. Te years of rapid
gro(t in te num#er of foreign students eac year ave made a #ig difference for T$F&
lecturers, especially lecturers (o are igly ,ualified. To cange tis situation, today tere are a
lot of universities (o employ very professional T$F& lecturers to encourage tose (o possess
-no(ledge of o( to teac students $inese language. Moreover, a large num#er of graduates
(it degrees in $inese language and literature or te ma"or of Englis are also #ecoming T$F&
lecturers. :eyond all dou#t, T$F& as #ecome a popular occupation.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
1;
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
4 study #y @alde %1;>2' so(s tat te repetitive nature of te tas- (as te factor (ic
most dissatisfied lecturers (ile payment and security are factors of satisfaction. Most T$F&
lecturers8 pay Ais iger tan te traditional ones #ecause more $inese language lecturers are
teacing on an ourly #asis. @ile due to limited classes, lecturers often do not ave ig.
income. +n addition, te proceeds for T$F& lecturers< come in eac semester according to teir
teacing ours. Te more lessons lecturers are (illing to teac, te more income tey earn. 4s
(e -no(, T$F& lecturers ave more opportunities to go a#road to teac, #y te nature of teir
(or-. Tis e!perience a#road could not only sarpen teir a#ility to (or-, #ut also enrices teir
life. )o(ever, not all could ave tese opportunities #ecause of te selection policy and oter
factors.
0. O#'("i1
1. Te level of "o# satisfaction among T$F& lecturers in )ar#in city, $ina.
?. To (at e!tent e!trinsic factors suc as co.(or-ers, supervision and income contri#ute to
"o# satisfaction among T$F& lecturers.
E. To (at e!tent intrinsic factors suc as te (or- itself and opportunities for promotion
contri#ute to "o# satisfaction among T$F& lecturers.
F. Te influence of te demograpic profile suc as se!, education level, years of service
and nature of appointment on te level of "o# satisfaction among T$F& lecturers.
2. Rsa$(& 3us"i%n
1. )o( do T$F& lecturers perceive te caracteristics of te "o#G
?. )o( do T$F& lecturers perceive teir co.(or-ersG
E. )o( do T$F& lecturers perceive te supervisionG
F. @at is te attitude regarding incomeG
D. @at is te comment regarding opportunities for promotionG
2. 4re tere significant differences in "o# satisfaction #et(een male and female, permanent
and nonpermanent T$F& lecturersG Do lecturers (o differ in education level or years of
service ave o#viously diverse comments regarding "o# factorsG
4. Limi"a"i%ns %5 "& S"u,*
Te limitations of te study are as follo(s9
H Te study (as conducted only in t(o universities in )ar#in city, $ina. Tus te findings
and conclusions cannot #e entirely generali0ed to oter areas of te country.
H :ecause of te large proportion of female and young lecturers in te field of teacing
$inese as a foreign language and in te present sample, te vie(s of te male lecturers
may not #e reflected fairly and e!actly.
H Te t(o universities are #ot pu#lic institutions, tus te results of te study cannot #e
completely e!tended to private universities, scools and institutions.
6. D5ini"i%n %5 T$ms
H *o# satisfaction9 *o# satisfaction is a sense of acievement, appiness and en"oyment felt
#y a person (en e fulfils is needs during is (or-ing life. &oc-e %1;72' defines "o#
satisfaction as Ipleasure or positive emotional state resulting from te appraisal of one8s
"o# or "o# e!periencesJ.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
?3
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
H &ecturers8 "o# satisfaction9 Te degree of sense of satisfaction e!perienced #y lecturers.
H Teacing $inese as a foreign language %T$F&'9 &ecturers (ose moter language is
Mandarin $inese use $inese to teac foreign students $inese language.
7. Li"$a"u$ R1i+
Definition of Job Satisfaction
*o# satisfaction as #een defined #y researcers in many (ays. &oc-e %1;72' defines it as a
pleasure or a positive emotional state resulting from te valuation of te "o# or (or- e!perience.
)e also states tat "o# satisfaction is Aa function of te perceived relationsip #et(een (at one
(ants in a (or- and (at tey perceive as an offeringA %&oc-e 1;2;, p.E12'.
7.1 Content Theories
Tere are several teories related to "o# satisfaction. $amp#ell %1;73' classifies tem into
t(o categories, (ic are content teories and process teories. $ontent teories, are te
identification and e!planation of te needs, values or e!pectations of te persons acting on "o#
satisfaction. $ontent teories also e!plain te specific factors tat motivate uman #eaviour and
maintain te canging needs of uman #eings. Maslo(<s ierarcy of needs teory, te t(o.
factor teory of )er0#erg and 4lderfer8s EBK %e!istence, relation and gro(t' are te teories in
,uestion.
7.1.1 Maslows Hierarchy of Needs
Theory
Te ierarcy of needs teory is one of te teories of content tat (as developed #y te
umanistic psycologist Maslo( in 1;FE. )e sees uman needs at different levels. &o(.level
needs must #e satisfied #efore iger level needs. Maslo( says tat te ierarcy of needs from
te lo( to a iger level is as follo(s9 pysiological needs, security needs, social needs, esteem
needs and self.actuali0ation. Pysiological and safety needs are relatively lo(er needs, and te
oter tree are te greatest needs. Furtermore, pysiological needs are te needs at te
grassroots level. Tey are te #asic re,uirements for people to live. Tese people need support to
survive in te (orld. Pysiological needs comprise factors suc as (ater, air, food, sleep and so
on. +f you cannot comply (it tese pysiological needs, your #ody cannot #e continuously in a
ealty condition. 4ccording to Maslo(, if te pysiological needs of te people are met, people
(ill consider paying attention to teir security needs. 1ecurity as to do (it protecting people
from pysical and emotional arm. 1ecurity re,uirements include living in safe and ealty
conditions, and financial security.
7.1.2 Herzbers Two!"actor
Theory
Te t(o.factor teory of )er0#erg is anoter one of te leading teories of content. +t is
also called te teory of Motivation and )ygiene. Tis teory pays attention to individual needs
and te ierarcy of needs teory, and (as created to determine te factors leading to "o#
satisfaction and dissatisfaction. )er0#erg %1;D;' states tat "o# satisfaction and dissatisfaction
are caused #y factors of motivation and ygiene, respectively. Motivating factors are (at ma-e
people (ant to perform (ell at (or- and feel satisfied (it te (or- tey do. 4cievement,
recognition, (or-, responsi#ility, advancement and gro(t are te most important motivating
factors generating "o# satisfaction. )ygiene factors relate to te (or-ing environment, suc as
company policies, supervision, (or-ing conditions, (ages and supervision.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
?1
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
From )er0#erg8s perspective, satisfaction and dissatisfaction are caused #y different factors.
Tat is, (e cannot consider "o# satisfaction as te opposite of "o# dissatisfaction. 1imilarly, "o#
satisfaction is not te opposite of "o# dissatisfaction. +n fact, from te standpoint of )er0#erg, te
opposite of satisfaction is Ano satisfactionA, and te opposite of dissatisfaction is Ano
dissatisfactionA. 4ccording to )er0#erg, (en people feel satisfied (it (or-, te intrinsic
factors usually come into play, suc as acievement, recognition and gro(t. @en tey are not
satisfied (it (or-, tey tend to see- e!trinsic factors, suc as salary, company policies and
(or-ing conditions. )er0#erg states tat employees (ill not #e satisfied (en te ygiene
factors are not met.
7.1.# $lderfers %&'
Theory
+n content teory, tere is anoter teory tat is also #ased on individual needs. Tat is
te teory of EKB tat (as proposed #y 4lderfer in 1;2;. 1imilar to te teory of ierarcy of
needs, 4lderfer8s EBK teory classifies uman needs at different levels. Te difference is tat
4lderfer classifies individual needs at only tree levels9 te needs of e!istence, relationsip
needs and gro(t needs.
7.1.( McClellands Three Needs
Theory
Tis teory (as formulated to elp understand te needs of people, teir motivation and
#eaviour. Mc$lelland classifies tem into tree needs9 te need for acievement, te need for
po(er and te need for affiliation. Te need for acievement means tat people (ant success and
ave te feeling of accomplisment. +f tey (ere given difficult and callenging tas-s, tey (ill
ma-e every effort to complete te tas- in te ope of success. Tis (ill #e a sort of motivation to
ma-e people (or- arder and #e more active. 4ccording to Mc$lelland, te need for po(er
so(s te desire of people to control oters. 7rgani0ationally, tis need is so(n as te desire of
oter leaders or leaders of te organi0ation. +f people ave tis need, #ut do not ave te
opportunity to #e a leader, tey (ill #e disappointed and lose teir passion. Te (ay to motivate
tese people and meet teir re,uirements is to lead tem or put tem in office.oriented positions.
7.1.) $da*s %+,ity
Theory
4dams %1;2D' proposed te e,uity teory of "o# satisfaction (ic empasi0es te
importance of reacing te #alance #et(een employee contri#utions and results. +f te inputs of
(or-ers are iger tan te results, tey (ill #e discouraged and demotivated. +n general, te
inputs include te effort, time, tolerance, loyalty, entusiasm, a#ility, confidence in superiors etc.
Typically tey include safety outputs of employment, salary, self.esteem, sense of
accomplisment, praise, reputation and so on. Eac employee is (illing to #e treated fairly. Tey
(ant to get te results as (ell as e,ual pay. :ut te num#er of outputs and inputs cannot #e
calculated e!actly, so te teory identifies te manager<s responsi#ility to #alance tem.
8. S"u,is %n "& D"$minan"s %5 J%# Sa"is5a("i%n
-.1 .or/
0tself
1c(art0 %1;2E' identifies te (or- itself is an important factor leading to "o#
satisfaction or dissatisfaction. )er0#erg %1;22' ta-es te (or- itself is an intrinsic re(ard tat
can #e an important motivator for a (or-er due to individual development needs
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
??
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
?E
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
-.2 Co!wor/ers
Maslo( %1;FE' identifies social need, (ic means interaction (it people, as te first
top.level re,uirement. Cale,ue %1;>F' states tat tere is no dou#t tat te relationsip (it
one8s colleagues is an important factor in "o# satisfaction.
-.# 0nco*e
6aylor %1;2>' argues tat te encouragement of income as seen as one of te most
important determinants of "o# satisfaction in most investigations. Krune#erg %1;7;' also supports
te argument tat pay is an important element in "o# satisfaction. :ut tere are also some studies
(ic so( little relationsip #et(een income and "o# satisfaction. :utler %1;21' points out tat
te level of satisfaction is no different #et(een groups of different salaries. @ernimont and
Fit0patric- %1;7?' assert te varieties of te sym#olic values of money, #ut confirmed tat tey
differ according to individual merits.
-.( S,1er2ision
&oc-e %1;7D' notes te importance of supervisors in te contri#ution of su#ordinate "o#
satisfaction and satisfaction. Tey can promote or #e em#arrassing to te acievement of value
(or- of su#ordinates. Missa(- %1;71' states tat all levels of people loo- for someting more
tan uman relations s-ills in teir supervisors. 4u"a %1;72' identifies tat if employees are
(or-ing under te supervision of an incompetent, inefficient and unresponsive superior, teir
dissatisfaction (ill increase.
-.) 3ro*otion
4ccording to )er0#erg %1;D;', promotional opportunities #enefit increased "o#
satisfaction. 5an Mannen and Cat0 %1;72' also report a positive correlation #et(een te
opportunities for promotion and "o# satisfaction in general. )o(ever, :lum %1;D?' suggests tat
opportunities for promotion are more important for s-illed (or-ers compared to uns-illed
(or-ers.
9. S"u,is %n "& Rla"i%ns&i: #"+n P$s%nal Va$ia#ls an, J%# Sa"is5a("i%n
4.1 %d,cational 5e2el
1ome studies so( a relationsip #et(een educational level and "o# satisfaction.
)o(ever, te relationsip can #e positive or negative depending on unspecified moderator
varia#les %1rivastva et al., 1;7D'. Bao %1;73' and $arrell and El#ert %1;7F' found tat tere is a
significant relationsip #et(een "o# satisfaction and educational level of lecturers and tis is
considered more as a significant determinant of "o# satisfaction.
4.2 6ears of Ser2ice
Le00i and &ester %?333' reported tat te years of service is not a predictor of "o#
satisfaction. &o(ter et al. %1;>D' indicate tat increases in "o# satisfaction as te e!perience of
years increases. 1imilarly, )odge %1;77' so(s tat te level of "o# satisfaction for lecturers
increases as te years of employment in te institutions increase in num#er. Mean(ile, Clec-er
and &oadman %1;;7' found tat "o# satisfaction decreased (it te num#er of years te person
as #een in te profession.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
?F
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
9.0 S"u,is %n L("u$$ J%# Sa"is5a("i%n
:ased on studies of "o# satisfaction, some researc as #een conducted relating to
lecturers< "o# satisfaction. )er0#erg, Maunser and 1nyderman %1;D;' argue tat recognition and
acievement are te most important factors tat influence a lecturer8s "o# satisfaction. Tis
so(s tat if scool leaders give positive respect and appreciate te value of lecturers, lecturers
(ill #e at a ig level of satisfaction.
Batsoy %1;7E' asserts tat te satisfaction of te "o# lecturers are doing is related to te
organi0ation of scools. Te more #ureaucratic and centrali0ed te scool is, te less te
satisfaction of lecturers. Mis-el, DeFrain and @ilco! %1;>3' suggest tat lecturers (it te #elief
tat tey ave te a#ility to do te "o# and ave received positive response for teir ard (or-
(ill e!perience satisfaction of a ig level. 4t te same time, 6icolson %1;>3' identifies tree
factors tat most affect lecturer satisfaction (it employment, (ic are leadersip, decision
ma-ing and te communication process. )e #elieves tat if lecturers are given g more
opportunities to participate in te process of decision.ma-ing in scools and communicate
openly a#out scool goals, tat (ill lead to an increase in te satisfaction of lecturers (it (or-.
Most lecturers feel more satisfaction (en tey are assigned to (or- as a team. 1ome researc
so(s tat lecturers in scools ave developed a strong sense of professionalism as a result of
te opportunity to (or- togeter on important professional concerns %Karner, 1;;DM &ipsit0,
1;>F'. Te sense of #elonging to a team (it real responsi#ilities tat gives mem#ers callenges
and reasons to #e proud of temselves and te team, tus enances "o# satisfaction %$urtis,
1;;F'.
1ergiovanni %1;;?' reports tat lecturer satisfaction relates to "o# involvement and
performance. Participation ma-es lecturers feel te need for and value of commitment. )e also
empasi0es te importance of recognition, empo(erment and te sense of "o# opportunities in
"o# satisfaction. @iteford %1;;3' identifies some indicators of lecturer satisfaction (it
employment as #eing te sense of efficacy, a positive relationsip (it colleagues, satisfactory
(or-ing conditions, te director8s <leadersip style, and te prestige and esteem associated (it
teacing. To increase "o# satisfaction in te interest of increasing lecturers< commitment and
productivity, organi0ations sould pay more attention to pay, promotion, (or-ing conditions,
supervision and te organi0ation itself %&oc-, 1c(eiger, & &atam, 1;>2M Mitcell, )olton,
&ee, & Kras-e, ?331M Pitt & Foreman, 1;;;'.
Evans %1;;>' descri#es te factors affecting lecturer satisfaction (it employment at
different levels. &evel + includes te policy and conditions of service and a good salary structure.
4fternoon (or- #rings more satisfaction among lecturers. &evel ++ includes te leadersip style
and organi0ational climate. &evel +++ identifies te determinants of "o# satisfaction as generally
meeting te individual needs, e!pectations, personality and emotions. @it regard to lecturer
satisfaction (it employment in $ina %1;;2', Feng8s researc can #e seen as a significant step.
)e suggests five factors (ic must #e ta-en into account9 personal fulfillment, "o# stress,
income, relationsip (it managers and colleagues. Niao and &i %?33E' state tat lecturers in
ur#an $ina are less satisfied (it teir salary, in comparison, #ut more satisfied (it "o#
security, te (or- environment and self.reali0ation.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
?D
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
-;. Sam:ling Dsign
Tere are eleven pu#lic universities in te city of )ar#in, and only a part of tem ave
special colleges of international education. Te sample consists of lecturers (o teac $inese
as a foreign language in t(o selected universities9 )ar#in Engineering University %)EU' and
)ar#in +nstitute of Tecnology %)+T'. Tese t(o universities ave provided $inese language
courses for foreign students for a period of time, and ave already esta#lised teir o(n
organi0ational structure and curriculum system. :ecause of te limited num#er of lecturers in
tis field in eac university, F3 ,uestionnaires (ere distri#uted to )EU and 23 ,uestionnaires to
)+T. Tirty.eigt ,uestionnaires (ere received from )EU and D2 ,uestionnaires (ere o#tained
from )+T. Te response rate (as ;FO. T(o ,uestionnaires from )+T (ere re"ected as tey (ere
incomplete. Tus, te final num#er of analy0ed ,uestionnaires (as ;?.
--. Rsa$(& Ins"$umn"
+n tis study, te researc instrument in te form of a ,uestionnaire (as te main tool for
collecting data. Te ,uestionnaire ad tree sections, 1ection +, ++ and +++. 1ection + comprises te
demograpic profile of respondents. 1ection ++ comprises te *o# Descriptive +nde! %*D+'.
1ection +++ comprises five multiple.coice ,uestions to e!plore respondents8 overall attitudes
a#out te "o#, and tree voluntary.reply su#"ect ,uestions to #enefit from a deeper understanding
of te respondents.
1ection +
Tere (ere ; items in tis section (it te purpose of gatering demograpic data of te
respondents. Tese data (ill not only provide respondents8 #ac-ground information, #ut (ill also
#e useful for data analysis. Te items related to se!, age, marital status, education level, years of
service, nature of te appointment, teacing su#"ect, class level and montly salary.
1ection ++
+n tis section, te *o# Descriptive +nde! is used (ic (as developed #y 1mit, Cendall
and )ulin %1;2;'. Te *D+ is one of te most (idely.used instruments for measuring "o#
satisfaction %DeMeuse, 1;>DM Pedec-, 1;>7'. +t as #een translated into many different languages
including Mandarin $inese. Te *D+ comprises five dimensions of "o# satisfaction9 te (or-
itself, co.(or-ers, supervision, income and opportunities for promotion. Tese dimensions are
measured #y (ords or prases and are easy to read. +n tis study, a fe( items (ere added to te
instrument to ma-e it more suita#le for lecturers teacing $inese as a foreign language and for
te present (or-ing conditions.
Camaruddin %1;;D' made furter canges to te *D+ introducing a five.point &i-ert.type
scale. Bespondents indicate te num#er (ic #est represents teir feelings for eac item.
6um#ers 1 to D represent strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree,
respectively. +n measuring "o# satisfaction, te more satisfied te respondents (ere perceived to
#e, te iger (as te score, (it 1 #eing te minimum score and D #eing te ma!imum score.
Te scores for te positive and negative items are as in Ta#le 1 and ?.
COPY RIGHT 2011 Institute of Interisci!"in#r$
%usiness Rese#rc&
?2
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
MAY
2011
Ta#le 19 1cale Beference of Positive and 6egative +tems
Scale reference Positive item Negative item
1trongly Disagree 1 D
Disagree ? F
6eutral E E
4gree F ?
1trongly 4gree D 1
Tere are a total of 71 items used for measuring lecturers8 satisfaction and dissatisfaction (it te teacing
profession in tis section. Tey are divided into five parts9
4. @or- +tself ?1 items
:. $o.(or-ers 1F items
$. 1upervision / 1upervisor 1; items
D. +ncome > items
E. 7pportunities for Promotion ; items
+t consists of #ot positive and negative items as seen in Ta#le ?9
Ta#le ?9 Positive and 6egative +tems on *o# 1atisfaction
Dimensions Positive item numbers Negative item numbers
@or- itself 1, E, D, 2, 7, >, 13, 1?,
1E, 12, 17, 1>, 1;, ?1
?, F, ;, 11, 1F, 1D, ?3
$o.(or-ers 1, F, D, 2, 7, >, 11, 1F ?, E, ;, 13, 1?, 1E
1upervision / 1upervisor 1, F, D, 2, 7, >, ;, 1F,
1D, 12, 17, 1>, 1;
?, E, 13, 11, 1?, 1E,
+ncome ?, 2, 7, > 1, E, F, D
7pportunities 1, E, F, 2, 7 ?, D, >, ;
1ection +++
Tis section comprises five multiple.coice ,uestions to e!plore respondents8 overall
attitudes a#out te "o#, suc as (eter tey are satisfied (it teir "o#, (eter tey li-e
teacing foreign students and cross.culture (or-, and (eter tey (ill tey stay in te
(or-place until tey retire. Tere are also tree voluntary.reply su#"ect ,uestions, (it te
purpose of aving a deeper understanding from te respondents.
-/. Da"a Anal*sis
4ll data collected from te participants (as coded and analy0ed using te 1tatistical
Pac-age for te 1ocial 1cience %1P11' version 12.3. +n tis researc, te follo(ing data analysis
tecni,ues (ere used9
i' Descriptive statistics including fre,uency, percent, mean and standard deviation. Tey (ere
used to analy0e te demograpic profile in 1ection + of te ,uestionnaireM "o# factors in 1ection
++, "o# factors comparisonM and coices related to overall "o# satisfaction in 1ection +++.
ii' T.test and 4nalysis of 5ariance %46754' (as applied to analy0e te significance of te
demograpic profile (it respect to "o# factors.
-0. Fin,ings
1#.1 De*ora1hic 3rofile of the 'es1ondents
4 total of 133 copies of te ,uestionnaire (ere distri#uted to te t(o universities. Tirty.
eigt ,uestionnaires and D2 ,uestionnaires (ere received respectively from te t(o of tem. Te
total num#er of ,uestionnaires received (as ;F (it te response rate of ;FO. :ecause of te
incompleteness of ? ,uestionnaires, te final num#er of analy0ed ,uestionnaires (as ;?. :esides,
from te ;? respondents, a ma"ority of tem are female lecturers, (it 7? female respondents or
7>.E percent. Te sample of male respondents consists of ?3 male lecturers (ic ma-es only
?1.7O of te total num#er. 6early alf %F>.;O' of te respondents are #et(een te age of ?2 to
E3 years old, (ic is te ma"ority group of te sample. Follo(ing tis is te age group from ?3
to ?D (ic comprises ?1 respondents or ??.>O of te total sample. Te E1.ED years age group
consists of 13 respondents or 13.;O of te total. Te oter age groups account for F.EO, 2.DO,
?.?O, and F.EO, respectively.
+n terms of marital status, F1 respondents or FF.2O are single compared to F7 or D1.1O
of te respondents (o are married. Four respondents or F.EO are in oter situations suc as
#eing divorced. 7n te issue of education level, more tan alf %D1 out of ;? or DD.FO' of te
respondents are graduates, EF respondents or E7O old a Master8s degree (ile only 7
respondents are PD olders, accounting for 7.2O of te total. To some e!tent, tis data so(s a
situation in (ic most of te lecturers in te field of teacing $inese as a foreign language
old a #acelor8s or master8s degree, (it only a fe( of tem olding a PD.
4s for years of service, te ma"ority of te respondents ave no more tan D years
e!perience, accounting for 2;.FO. Tis indicates te fact tat at least in tese t(o universities
most of te T$F& lecturers are young and (itout too muc teacing e!perience. 1i!teen
respondents or 17.FO ave (or-place e!perience of 2 to 13 years. 7nly 1EO of te respondents
ave served more tan 13 years. +n terms of te present reality of T$F& lecturers. Most of teir
(or-ing positions are not permanent. Universities sign employment contracts (it T$F&
lecturers, usually from 1 to D years. 4fter te employment contract e!piration, universities ave
te rigt to decide (eter to rene( or end te contract. 4mong te respondents, only ?7 or no
more tan E3O %?;.EO' are on a permanent appointment compared to FE.DO (o ave
contracts. Mean(ile, ?3.7O of te respondents are temporary lecturers and 2.DO are still on
pro#ation.
+n terms of su#"ects taugt, F> respondents or more tan alf %D?.?O' teac more tan
one su#"ect, (ile >.7O, ;.>O, 2.DO, ;.>O, 1EO of te respondents teac listening, reading,
(riting, spea-ing and syntesis, respectively. Te e!actly reflects te teacing reality of T$F&
lecturers. Most of tem teac t(o or even more su#"ects, suc as listening and spea-ing, reading
and syntesis etc. +n terms of te class level, EE.7O of te respondents teac different class
levels, ??.>O %?1 respondents' teac te lo( level follo(ed #y ?E.;O %?? respondents' (o
teac te middle level and 1;.2O %1> respondents' (o teac te ig level. +n terms of montly
income, none of te respondent earns #elo( BM: 1,333 (it E>O of te respondents earning
#et(een BM: ?331. BME333 follo(ed #y ?2 respondents or ?>.EO (o earn BM:E331.
BM:F333 and 1D.?O of te respondents (o earn BM:1333.BM:?333, compared to 1EO (o
earn a#ove BM:D333. Te minority of te respondents %D.FO' earn BM:F331. BM:D333.
-2. / Anal*sis %5 J%# Fa("%$s
Eac of te "o# factors, (or- itself, co.(or-ers, supervision / supervisor, income, and
opportunities for promotion are analy0ed #y calculating mean value and standard deviation. Te
items of eac factor (ere arranged in descending order according to te mean value (it te
purpose of aving a clear vie( of te researc results. Te minimum score is 1 and te ma!imum
is D, a cut.off point of E is cosen. Te iger te score, te more satisfied respondents feel.
@ or- +tself
Ta#le E so(s te mean and standard deviation results for te item of (or- itself. Te
ma"ority of te respondents (ere strongly satisfied tat te information tecnology is used
e!tensively since te mean value of F.3DF is very close to D (it 1.DQ3.;2F;?. +mprovement
from te (or- is also a very important item in "o# satisfaction since te mean value of E.;27F is
very close to F (it 1.DQ1.32EE;. Most of te respondents agree te (or- is callenging,
creative, useful, and also ma-es tem feel fres #ecause of te cross.cultural aspects, since all of
tese four items are a#ove E.;3, near F and #ecome te important factors in "o# satisfaction.
From te negative items (e may see respondents do not feel te (or- is frustrating since te
mean value is E.;1E3 (it 1.DQ3.;D27>. Most of te respondents are not satisfied #ecause of te
stressful nature and simple specialty of te (or- since te mean is #elo( ?. Tese results mean
tat T$F& lecturers ave too muc pressure, tus to enance teir "o# satisfaction administrators
must find solutions to reduce lecturers8 (or- pressure.
Ta#le E Mean score and 1td. Deviation for R(or- itself8 items on "o# satisfaction
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
+nformation tecnology is used e!tensively F.3DF .;2F;?
+ can improve myself from te "o# E.;72F 1.32EE;
$allenging E.;D2D 1.3;>D>
$reative E.;FD7 .>E3?D
Useful E.;EF> .;2;;E
Frustrating S E.;1E3 .;D27>
$ross.culture ma-es me feel fres E.;1E3 .>;7D?
:oring S E.>;1E .>>?72
Kive sense of accomplisment E.2;D7 1.3?FE1
+nteresting E.27E; .>;3>F
Bespecta#le E.2F1E .;>;>2
1atisfying E.D>73 .>DED;
Endless S E.D2D? 1.1;>3?
Pleasant E.D?17 .;;;72
Pleasant environment E.F27F .;F?>;
Fascinating E.F1E3 1.3F;>>
$ross.culture #rings difficulties into te "o# S E.?17F 1.?>?E;
Tiresome S ?.>2;2 1.E1;F;
Boutine S ?.23>7 .;?DE3
1tressful S 1.>>3F 1.3D73>
1imple S 1.>3FE .;2ED3
S denotes negative items
$o.(or-ers
From Ta#le F (e could see tat all tese 1F items are important in determining "o#
satisfaction as te means of all te items are a#ove E. 4mong tem, mean values for te negative
items of #eing unpleasant, #oring, slo(, la0y and te positive item of tal-ative are all a#ove F.
Tat means tat pleasant, interesting, fast, ard(or-ing and tal-ative co.(or-ers could #ring
more satisfaction to T$F& lecturers.
Ta#le F Mean score and 1td. Deviation for Rco.(or-ers8 items on "o# satisfaction
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
Unpleasant S F.E1D? .>E773
:oring S F.??>E .71ED>
1lo( S F.1F1E .>1;>E
&a0y S F.1F1E .7;?D7
Tal-ative F.1E3F .;F312
4ctive F.3333 .7DD;E
6o privacy S E.;>;1 .;7771
Besponsi#le E.;D2D .>?F?2
+ntelligent E.;FD7 ,;DEF7
1mart E.>;1E .;77?;
6arro( interest S E.>2;2 .>;?1>
1timulating E.2;D7 .;>3F2
4m#itious E.2F1E .;>;>2
$ooperative E.D>73 1.37321
S denotes negative items
1upervision/1upervisor
Te items of impolite, -no(s "o# (ell, la0y and influential ave te igest mean value
of F.?23;, F.?E;1, F.13>7 and F.3721, respectively (ic are all a#ove F (it te 1.DQ3.>F;;D,
3.;1>E1, 1.3;F33, 1.3F3?? . From tis, (e could see te information tat #eing polite, -no(ing
te "o# (ell, #eing ard(or-ing and influential are e!tremely vital factors contri#uting to "o#
satisfaction. 1ince nearly all te items8 means are a#ove E e!cept te item of Raround (en
needed8, (e could infer, to some e!tent, tat respondents are satisfied (it teir supervisors and
teir supervision. Te item of #eing Raround (en needed8 only as a mean value of ?.22E3,
#elo( E, (ic indicates a pro#lem of te untimely elp from te supervisor. 1o, (en
supervisors consider (ays of ma-ing T$F& lecturers more satisfied (it teir (or-, giving
prompt instruction is someting tey cannot neglect as it is so(n in ta#le D.
Ta#le D9 Mean score and 1td. Deviation for Rsupervision8 items on "o#
satisfaction
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
+mpolite S F.?23; .>F;;D
Cno(s "o# (ell F.?E;1 .;1>E1
&a0y S F.13>7 1.3;F33
+nfluential F.3721 1.3F3??
1upervise clearly E.;7>E .>D1ED
Besponsi#le E.;D2D .>E7F;
4nnoying S E.;FD7 .;1>?F
Cno(ledgea#le E.>;1E 1.3?1?7
Trust(orty E.>2;2 .>1F;E
Praises good (or- E.>E73 1.33>D3
Tactful E.>3FE 1.11177
Up to date E.7D33 .;?1E2
Tuic- tempered S E.2D?? 1.3D?>E
1tu##orn S E.D2D? 1.321>7
Tell me (at + stand E.D13; 1.1EE>F
)ard to please S E.F27F 1.?17D2
4s- my opinion E.FEF> 1.3F3;7
Cno(s o( to #e a good
supervisor
E.EF7> 1.1>37D
4round (en needed ?.22E3 1.12;;E
S denotes negative items
+nco m e
+n terms of income, te means of four items are a#ove E and te oter four are #elo( it.
From Ta#le 2 (e may see most of te respondents tin- te income is sufficient to cover normal
e!penses since te mean value is E.F2D (it te 1.DQ1.3>EF7. :ut te negative item of insecure
(it a mean of ?.2F1E so(s tat te income is not secure and not ig %meanQ?.3>7'.
Bespondents are not ,uite satisfied (it teir income %meanQ?.7>?2', and even tin- it is less
tan (at tey deserve %meanQ?.;?E;'. From tese results (e could see dissatisfaction of te
(or-ers for te income tey receive and perceived tat teir efforts (ort tan (at is given.
Ta#le 29 Mean score and 1td. Deviation for items of Rincome8 on "o# satisfaction
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
1ufficient to cover normal E.FD2D 1.3>EF7
e!penses
&o( paid S E.E2;2 1.33?E;
Motivation for (or- E.1>F> 1.1E>3D
:arely live on income S E.1E3F 1.??FFD
&ess tan (at + deserve S ?.;?E; 1.3211F
1atisfactory ?.7>?2 .>7F>>
+nsecure S ?.2F1E 1.?DF?>
)ig paid ?.3>73 .;EEDE
S denotes negative items
7pportunity for Pro m otion
$ompared to oters, items under te Ropportunities for promotion8 do not #ring muc
satisfaction from te respondents. 4ltoug tey do not completely #elieve it is a dead.end "o#
(it te mean value of E.?>?2, most of tem do not tin- tere is a good opportunity for
promotion since te mean value is ?.2E3 (it te 1.DQ3.;.D1F as it is so(n in Ta#le 7.
Ta# le 7 9 Mean sco re and 1td . Dev iation for Ro ppo rtun ities fo r pro mo tio n8 ite ms
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
Dead.end "o# S E.?>?2 1.E3E2F
Promotion #ased on seniority E.11;2 1.17D??
+nfre,uent promotion S ?.;1E3 1.??>ED
Promotion on a#ility ?.>;1E 1.?DE1;
Promotion policy is unfair S ?.>3FE 1.1>>?1
Begular promotion ?.D333 1.13FFF
7pportunity some(at limited S ?.EE73 1.31;EF
Kood opportunity for advancement ?.?;ED .;22;3
Fairly good cance promotion ?.12E3 .;3D1F
S denotes negative items
*o# Factors $o m parison
Eac item of te five "o# factors as #een calculated in te a#ove. Tey supply detailed
information a#out te elements influencing T$F& lecturers8 "o# satisfaction. Furtermore, (e
could troug te total mean of eac "o# factor ave a general vie( a#out lecturers8 "o#
satisfaction as it is so(n in Ta#le >.
Ta#le >9 Mean score and 1td. Deviation for Ropportunities for promotion8 items
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
Dead.end "o# S E.?>?2 1.E3E2F
Promotion #ased on E.11;2 1.17D??
seniority
+nfre,uent promotion S ?.;1E3 1.??>ED
Promotion on a#ility ?.>;1E 1.?DE1;
Promotion policy is unfair ?.>3FE 1.1>>?1
S
Begular promotion ?.D333 1.13FFF
7pportunity some(at ?.EE73 1.31;EF
limited S
Kood opportunity for ?.?;ED .;22;3
advancement
Fairly good cance
promotion
S denotes negative items
?.12E3 .;3D1F
$o m parison of *o# Factors
From Ta#le ;, it is o#vious tat te ma"ority of respondents feel satisfied (it (or- itself,
co.(or-ers, supervision and teir supervisor, since teir mean values are all a#ove E. 4mong
tem, co.(or-ers #ring te most satisfaction to respondents as te mean value of E.;222 is very
close to F. Most of te respondents are not satisfied (it teir income and opportunities for
promotion since te mean values of ?.;F37 and ?.733D respectively are #ot #elo( E.
Ta#le ;9 Mean $omparison of *o# Factors
I"ms Man S"an,a$, D1ia"i%n
@or- itself E.FDEF .E7ED?
$o.(or-ers E.;222 .F7>EE
1upervision / 1upervisor E.7DD7 .D1F1>
+ncome ?.;F73 .2ED>?
7pportunities for promotion ?.733D .7?712
1). $nalysis of 72erall Job Satisfaction
1ection +++ of te ,uestionnaire comprises five multiple.coice ,uestions to e!plore
respondents8 overall attitudes a#out te "o#, suc as (eter tey are satisfied (it teir "o#,
(eter tey li-e teacing foreign students and cross.cultural (or-, and (eter tey (ill stay
in te (or-place until tey retire.
From Ta#le 13 (e see tat te ma"ority of te respondents are satisfied (it te "o# since
all teir means are a#ove E. Furtermore, tey indicate a ig level of satisfaction (it teacing
foreign students and doing cross.cultural (or- (it means of F.1D?? and F.1F1E.Moreover,
2F.?O of te respondents feel satisfied (it teir "o# %FD.7O satisfied and 1>.DO strongly
satisfied'.Mean(ile, >?.2O of te respondents li-e or e!tremely/very muc li-e doing cross.
cultural (or- and nearly >3O of tem %7>.EO' li-e teacing foreign students. )o(ever, only
FF.2O of te respondents see teacing as teir lifelong career and F3.?O #elieve tey (ill stay in
te (or-place until tey retire. 7n te oter and, EF.>O of te respondents old neutral vie(s
on tese t(o aspects.
Ta#le 139 7verall "o# satisfaction
I"ms SD D N A SA Man S",. D
+ feel satisfied D 2 ?? F? 17 E.2D?? 1.3E17D
(it my "o# %D.FO' %2.DO' %?E.;O' %FD.7O' %1>.DO'
+ li-e doing E E 13 E> E> F.1F1E .;27F3
cross.cultural %E.EO' %E.EO' %13.;O' %F1.EO' %F1.EO'
(or-
+ li-e teacing ? ? 12 E? F3 F.1D?? .;E2>D
foreign students %?.?O' %?.?O' %17.FO' %EF.>O' %FE.DO'
+ see teacing as 7 1? E? 17 ?F E.F?E; 1.??F23
my lifelong %7.2O' %1E.3O' %EF.>O' %1>.DO' %?2.1O'
career
+ (ill stay in > 1D E? 12 ?1 E.?;ED 1.?E2?D
tis (or-place %>.7O' %12.EO' %EF.>O' %17.FO' %??.>O'
until + retire
18. Sinificance $nalysis between De*ora1hic 3rofile and Job "actors
To ma-e it facilitate te data analysis, some canges (ere made to te demograpic part
of te ,uestionnaire. Four of te demograpic caracteristics (ere cosen9 se!, education level,
years of service and nature of appointment. For education level, (e deleted te option of Roters8
since no respondents cose it. For years of service, (e com#ined five options into t(o, 1.13
years and a#ove 13 years. For nature of appointment, (e com#ined tem into t(o options,
namely permanent and non.permanent. Te T.test (as applied to compare demograpic profiles
tat contained only t(o groups, suc as se!, years of service, and nature of appointment. For te
demograpic profile tat contained more tan t(o groups suc as education level, te 4nalysis
of 5ariance %46754' (as conducted. For te purpose of analysis, p.values (ic are a#ove
3.3D are considered as not significant, (ile te p.value (ic is e,ual to 3.3D and #elo( is
considered as significant.
-7. S< an, J%# Fa("%$s
From Ta#le 11, (e can see tat tere is no significant difference #et(een male and
female on five "o# factors since all te p.values are a#ove 3.3D. @e could also see tat te mean
for male and female on five "o# factors are all nearly te same (itout muc mean difference.
Tat is sufficient to say tat males and females ave a similar attitude on "o# factors and old te
similar levels of "o# satisfaction from te five aspects of te "o#.
Ta#le 119 T.test analysis for five "o# factors #y
1e!
J%# 5a("%$s S< N Man S",. D "=1alu Sig.
@or- itself Male ?3 E.F7 .?7 .1> .>2
%?1.7O'
Female 7? E.FD .F3
%7>.EO'
$o.(or-ers Male ?3 E.>7 .E7 .1.3F .E3
Female 7? E.;; .D3
1upervision / Male ?3 E.22 .E2 ..;; .E7
1upervisor Female 7? E.7> .DD
+ncome Male ?3 E.31 .7> .F7 .2F
Female 7? ?.;E .23
7pportunities Male ?3 ?.>7 .>2 1.12 .?D
for promotion Female 7? ?.2D .2>
-8. E,u(a"i%n L1l an, J%# Fa("%$s
Ta#le 1? so(s tat people at different education levels ave significant differences in
teir attitudes to te factors of (or- itself, supervision, income and promotion since te p.values
of tese factors are e,ual to or #elo( 3.3D. Tere is no significant difference in te factor of co.
(or-ers #y education level (it te p.value of 3.;F. From te mean value (e could see tat
graduates and PDs are more satisfied (it (or- itself tan lecturers (it a master8s degree.
PD lecturers ave muc iger levels of satisfaction in te supervision factor tan graduates
and master8s degree lecturers (it te mean value of E.;D. +n terms of income, graduates are less
satisfied tan master8s olders (it te mean of ?.7E and E.12, respectively. $ompared to tat,
PD lecturers are te most satisfied (it teir income (it te mean value of E.DF. 7n te issue
of opportunities for promotion, graduate lecturers do not feel satisfied since te mean is only
?.E>. Masters and PD lecturers are satisfied (it te opportunities (it a mean difference of
3.F2 #et(een tem.
Ta#le 1?9 46754 for "o# factors #y education level
*o# factors Mean
1um of
1,uares
df
Mean
1,uare
F.ratio 1ig.
Kraduate Master PD
% DD .F O' % E7 .3 O' %7.2O'
@or- itself E.DE E.E3 E.2E 1.E7 ? .2; D.F3 .31
$o.(or-ers E.;> E.;D F.33 .3E ? .31 .32 .;F
1upervision E.71 E.7> E.;D .E7 ? .1; .71 .D3
+ncome ?.7E E.12 E.DF 2.FF ? E.?? ;.FD .33
Promotion ?.E> E.3? E.F> 1E.31 ? 2.D1 12.D3 .33
-9. Ya$s %5 S$1i( +i"& J%# Fa("%$s
Te years of service groups are recoded from te original five groups into t(o groups to
facilitate te analysis. Te t(o groups are9
i' 1.13 years
ii' 4#ove 13 years
From Ta#le 1E, (e see tat tere is no significant difference #et(een service years (it
respect to (or- itself and co.(or-ers since te p.value is a#ove 3.3D %3.D1 and 3.;D
respectively'. +n terms of supervision or te supervisor, income and opportunities for promotion,
tere is a significant difference #et(een te t(o groups (it te p.value of 3.3E, 3.33 and 3.33
respectively. &ecturers (it more tan 13 years of service feel more satisfied from te
perspective of supervision tan lecturers (it no more tan 13 years (it a mean difference of
3.EF. 1.13 years of service lecturers do not feel satisfied (it teir income (it te mean value
of ?.>>. 7n te contrary, lecturers (it more tan 13 years of service are satisfied (it te
income since te mean is E.FE. Tis is similar to te income situation in (ic lecturers (it
more tan 13 years of service feel muc more satisfaction from te perspective of opportunities
for promotion tan tose (it no more tan 13 years (it te mean difference of 3.2;.
Ta#le 1E9 T.test for five "o # factors #y years of serv ice
J%# 5a("%$s Ya$s %5 s$1i( Man S",. D "=1alu Sig.
@or- itself 1.13 E.FF .E> ..22 .D1
%>7O'
4#ove 13 E.D? .E3
%1EO'
$o.(or-ers 1.13 E.;7 .D3 .32 .;D
4#ove 13 E.;2 .?>
1upervision/ 1.13 E.71 .D? .?.1; .3E
1upervisor 4#ove 13 F.3D .EF
+ncome 1.13 ?.>> .23 .?.;? .33
4#ove 13 E.FE .71
7pportunities 1.13 ?.21 .7? .E.1; .33
for promotion 4#ove 13 E.E3 .D1
/;. Na"u$ %5 A::%in"mn" +i"& J%# Fa("%$s
Te nature of appointment is recoded from te original four groups into t(o groups to
facilitate te analysis. Te t(o groups are9
i' Permanent
ii' 6on.permanent
Ta#le 1F so(s tat tere is no significant difference #et(een permanent and non.
permanent lecturers in te aspects of (or- itself, co.(or-ers and supervision since teir p.values
are all a#ove 3.3D %3.??, 3.FE, 3.1D, respectively'. +n contrast, tere are significant differences in
terms of income and opportunities for promotion (it p.values of 3.3? and 3.33, respectively.
6on.permanent lecturers are not ,uite satisfied (it teir income (it te mean of ?.>F.
$ompared to tat, permanent lecturers are satisfied (it teir income (it te mean value of
E.1;. Teir mean difference is 3.ED. 1imilar to tis, permanent lecturers are satisfied (it te
opportunities for promotion (it a mean value of E.17, #ut non.permanent lecturers are not
satisfied (it te opportunities (it a mean value of only ?.D3.
Ta#le 1F9 T.test for five "o# factors #y nature of appointment
J%# 5a("%$s Na"u$ %5
a::%in"mn"
Man S",. D "=1alu Sig.
@or- itself Permanent
%?;.EO' 6on.
permanent
E.E>
E.F>
.EE
.E;
.1.?E .??
$o.(or-ers
%73.7O'
Permanent E.;3 .?; ..>3 .FE
6on.permanent E.;; .DF
1upervision/ Permanent E.>> .D3 1.F7 .1D
1upervisor 6on.permanent E.71 .D1
+ncome Permanent E.1; .23 ?.E7 .3?
6on.permanent ?.>F .2E
7pportunities Permanent E.17 .D2 F.F3 .33
for promotion 6on.permanent ?.D3 .73
/-. Summa$*
+n terms of te demograpic profile of te respondents, tere are more female
respondents tan males, accounting for 7>.EO of te total num#er. Most of tem old a
#acelor8s or master8s degree. More tan 73O %71.7O' are no more tan E3 years old, and >7O
ave no more tan ten years of teacing e!perience. More tan alf of respondents %D?.?O' teac
more tan one su#"ect. 7nly less tan E3O %?;.EO' of respondents are permanent lecturers, and
te oter 73.7O are (or-ing on contract, on pro#ation or are temporary T$F& lecturers. Te
result of te data analysis indicates tat T$F& lecturers are satisfied (it te (or- itself, teir
co.(or-ers and supervision, #ut not satisfied (it te income and opportunities for promotion
%(it mean values of ?.;F73 and ?.733D, respectively, #ot less tan E'.
Tere is no significant difference #et(een male and female T$F& lecturers (it respect
to satisfaction on five "o# factors since pU3.3D. T$F& lecturers (it PD degrees ave iger
levels of "o# satisfaction tan lecturers (it #acelor8s and master8s degrees. +ndeed,, graduates
are not satisfied (it te income and opportunities for promotion (it te mean value #elo( E.
Tere is no significant relationsip #et(een lecturers (it more tan 13 years of service and
lecturers (it no more tan 13 years of e!perience in te factors of te (or- itself and co.
(or-ers, #ut tere are significant differences #et(een ten in terms of supervision, income and
opportunities for promotion. Tere are significant differences #et(een permanent and non.
permanent lecturers (it respect to income and opportunities for promotion since pV3.3D.
Permanent lecturers so( iger levels of satisfaction tan non.permanent lecturers (it tese
t(o "o# factors. .
@it regards to te tree voluntary.reply su#"ect ,uestions, only a fe( lecturers ans(ered
tem. 6early all of te respondents prefer #eing T$F& lecturers to #eing traditional $inese
lecturers due to te strong usa#ility of language -no(ledge in te process of T$F&. Most of te
reasons for leaving te position are te insecure income and fe( opportunities for promotion.
//. Dis(ussi%n %5 Fin,ings
Te findings of te study reveal tat nearly four.fifts of te respondents are female
lecturers. 4ctually, female T$F& lecturers account for a large part of te total T$F& lecturers8
group. &ess tan one.tird of te respondents are a#ove E3 years old and less tan a ,uarter of
tem ave more tan ten years of service. :eing young and aving a lac- of ric teacing
e!perience is a universal penomenon among T$F& lecturers. More tan alf of te respondents
teac more tan one su#"ect. Tis #rings certain pressure to #ear on T$F& lecturers due to te
need to prepare different contents of teacing plans at te same time. Most of tem old
#acelor8s or master8s degrees, and less tan one .tird are permanent lecturers. *o# security is a
#ig pro#lem for T$F& lecturers.
Te result of te study indicates tat T$F& lecturers are satisfied (it te (or- itself,
teir co.(or-ers and supervision, #ut not satisfied (it teir income and opportunities for
promotion. Te results of te data analysis indicate tat tere is no significant difference #et(een
male and female T$F& lecturers (it respect to satisfaction on five "o# factors. Tis finding is
contrary to te studies of :enge %1;FF' and $ole %1;F3' (ic report tat females are more
satisfied tan men or males are more satisfied tan females. +t is consistent (it studies (ic
so( no significant difference #et(een males and females in terms of "o# satisfaction.
Te analysis results so( tat tere are significant differences among lecturers at
different education levels in te aspect of (or- itself, supervision, income and opportunities or
promotion. From te mean value (e could see tat T$F& lecturers (it a PD degree ave a
iger level of "o# satisfaction tan lecturers (it #acelors and master8s degrees. Te current
study is in line (it te studies conducted #y Bao %1;73' and $arrell and El#ert %1;7F' (ic
indicates tat tere is a significant relationsip #et(een "o# satisfaction and te educational level
of individual lecturers and it is considered as a significant determinant of "o# satisfaction.
4noter finding is tat tere is no significant difference #et(een lecturers (it more tan
13 years of service and lecturers (it no more tan 13 years of e!perience in te factors of (or-
itself and co.(or-ers, #ut tere are significant differences #et(een tem in terms of supervision,
income and opportunities for promotion. &ecturers (it more tan 13 years of service feel more
satisfied tan lecturers (it less tan 13 years in nearly in all "o# factors related to tis study,
especially in terms of income and promotion. Tese results run counter to te studies of :everly
Clec-er and @illiam E. &oadman %1;;7' (ic so(s tat "o# satisfaction decreased (it te
num#er of years te person as #een in te profession. Tey are, o(ever, it consistent (it te
study of )odge %1;77' (ic so(s tat te level of "o# satisfaction increases for professors as
years of employment at te institutions increase in num#er.
/0. C%n(lusi%ns
Five determiners of "o# satisfaction are related to test te level of T$F& lecturers8 "o#
satisfaction9 (or- itself, co.(or-ers, supervision / supervisor, income and opportunities for
promotion. 7n te issue of (or- itself, tere is no significant difference #et(een male and
female T$F& lecturers. :ut lecturers at different education levels ave different attitudes to te
(or-. T$F& lecturers (it PD degree so( most satisfaction to it follo(ed #y lecturers (it
#acelor8s degrees. &ecturers (it master8s degrees feel less satisfied (it it. Tere is no
significant difference among lecturers (it different teacing e!perience and in permanent or
non.permanent positions. +n terms of co.(or-ers, all te four demograpic caracteristics ave
no o#vious influence on te five "o# factors. 4ll te lecturers so( ig levels of satisfaction
(it teir co.(or-ers.
@it respect to supervision or te supervisor, tere is no significant difference #et(een
male and female lecturers, lecturers (it different education levels, permanent or non.permanent
lecturers to(ards supervision or te supervisor. :ut lecturers (it different years of teacing
e!perience ave different satisfaction levels regarding supervision. &ecturers (it more tan ten
years8 e!perience so( a ,uite ig level of satisfaction. $ompared to tat, lecturers (it no
more tan ten years of service do not ave tat -ind of ig level satisfaction (it te
supervision. 4ll of te demograpic caracteristics differ to(ards income e!cept for gender. PD
lecturers are more satisfied tan master8s olders, in a similar (ay to graduates. &ecturers (it
more tan ten years of service feel satisfied (it te income, (ile lecturers (it no more tan
ten years of service do not feel satisfied. 6on.permanent lecturers are not ,uite satisfied, (ile
permanent lecturers are satisfied (it te income. Tese seem to so( te pro#lem of fres
lecturers not aving ig incomes #ecause of limited classes. Permanent lecturers are more
satisfied tan non.permanent lecturers due to lo( pressure a#out te "o# insecurity.
+n terms of opportunities for promotion, males and females #ot so( less satisfaction.
&ecturers (it master8s and PD degrees e!press satisfaction (it te opportunities for
promotion compared to te e!tremely lo( satisfaction e!i#ited #y lecturers (it a #acelor8s
degree. &ecturers (it more tan ten years of (or-ing e!perience feel more satisfied (it te
opportunities for promotion tey ave o#tained. Tere is a significant difference #et(een
permanent lecturers and non.permanent lecturers in terms of te opportunities for promotion.
6on.permanent lecturers are not satisfied (it te availa#le opportunities. Tis indicates tat
graduate lecturers, less e!perienced lecturers and non.permanent lecturers sould #e given more
opportunities for practising teir s-ills. From te results of overall "o# satisfaction (e see tat
T$F& lecturers are satisfied (it teir (or-, and are especially ,uite satisfied (it doing cross.
cultural (or- and teacing foreign students.
R5$n(s
4dams, *. 1. %1;2D'. +ne,uity in social e!cange. +n &.:er-o(it0 %Ed.', Advances in
experimental social psychology. 6e( Lor-9 4cademic Press.
4u"a, D.$., RMental ealt )a0ards among 1cool Teacers8, The Educational Revie, >,
1;72, 1DD W 1D7.
:lum, M. &., & 6aylor, *. $. %1;2>'. !ndustrial psychology" !ts theoretical and social
foundations. 6e( Lor-, 6L9 )arper & Bo(.
:lum, :. +. %Ed.'. %1;>?'. Proceedings of te si!t annual symposium on computer applications
in medicine. &os 4ngeles, $49 +EEE $omputer 1ociety Press.
:lum, M. &. %1;D>'. !ndustrial psychology and its social foundations. %Bev. ed.' 6e( Lor-9
)arper.
:rayfield, 4. )., & @. $. $roc-ett %1;DD'. AEmployee 4ttitudes and Employee Performance.A
Psychological #ulletin$ %D?', D E;2.F?F.
:ulter, T. ). %1;21'. 1atisfactions of #eginning teacers. %learing &ouse$ '($11.
$ *ala"a Cumari.%?337'. )ob Satisfaction of *ecturers. Discovery Pu#lising )ouse. 13?
p, +1:6 9 >1.>ED2.E?;.D
$amp#ell, *. P. et al. %1;73'. +anagerial #ehavior$ Performance$ and Effectiveness. 6e( Lor-9
McKra(.)ill
$arrell, M. & El#ert, 6. %1;7F'..1ome personal and organi0ational determinants of "o#
satisfaction of postal cler-s. Academy of +anagement )ournal$ 12, DE.22.
Mis-el,c., DeFrain, *., and @ilco!, C. %1;>3'. I4 Test of E!pectancy Motivation Teory in
Education 7rgani0ationsJ Education Administration ,uarterly, 129 73.;?.
4lderfer, $. %1;2;'. 4n Empirical Test of a 6e( Teory of )uman 6eeds. 7rgani0ational
:eavior and )uman Performance, vol. F, pp. 1F? . 17D.
$urtis, 1. %1;;F'. Telepone conversation. :ris#ane.
DeMeuse, C. P. %1;>D'. 4 compendium of fre,uently used measures in industrial/organi0ational
psycology. The !ndustrial-.rgani/ational Psychologist$ 0'$ DE.D;.
Evans, &. %1;;7'. Understanding Teacers Morale and *o# 1atisfaction. Teaching and teacher
Education$ 1E%>'. >E1.>FD
Feng, :. %1;;2'. *iaosigong0uomanyi"i,iying!iangyinsu de yan"iu XFactors affecting lecturer
"o# satisfactionY. )iaoyuyan1iu$ 0$ F?.F;.
Karner, C. %1;;D'. &eadersip for scool restructuring. 5olume E3, 6o F.1;.E3. Krune#erg, M.M.
%1;7;'. 2nderstanding )ob Satisfaction$ &ondon9 Te Macmillan Press. )er0#erg, F %1;;2' 3or4
and the Nature of +an. 6e( Lor-9 $leveland9 @orld Pu#lising. )er0#erg, F., Mausner, :., &
1nyderman, :. :. %1;D;'.The motivation to or4. 6e( Lor-9 *on
@iley and 1ons.
)ert0#erg, F. %1;22'.@or- and te 6ature of Man. @orld, $leveland.
)odge, M. ). %1;77'. +edical information systems. Kermanto(n, MD9 4spen 1ystems
$orporation.
)er0#erg. F., Mausner, :, & 1ynderman, : %1;D;'. The +otivation to 3or4. 6e( Lor-9 *on
@iley and 1ons.
Camaruddin Mod )asim % 1;;D '. ICepuasan Cer"a di -alangan Kuru Penolong Canan )al
E(al Murid di 1e-ola Menenga 6egeri Pera-.J1into- 9Universiti Utara Malaysia.
% Tida- diter#it-an '.
Cale,ue, 4., & $oudary, 6. %1;>F'. *o# facets and overall "o# satisfaction of industrial
managers. !ndian )ournal of !ndustrial Relations, ?3, DD.2F.
Clec-er, :., & &oadman, @. E. %1;;7'. E!ploring Teacers *o# 1atisfaction 4cross Lears of
Teacing E!perience. Unpu#lised Manuscript, 7io 1tate University.
&a(ler, E. E., +++, & )all, D. T. %1;73'.Belationsip of "o# caracteristics to "o# involvement,
satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. )ournal of Applied Psychology, DF, E3D.TE1?.
&ipsit0, *. %1;>F'. Successful Schools for 5oung Adolescent. 6e( :runs(ic-, 6*9 Transaction
:oo-s.
&oc-e, E.4 %1;27'. @at is *o# 1atisfaction. .rgani/ational #ehavior and &uman Performance,
F9 E3;.EE2.
&oc-e, E.4 %1;72'. Te 6ature and $auses of *o# Satisfaction. +n M.D. Dunnette %Ed.',
&andboo4 of !ndustrial and .rgani/ational Psychology, 1E3? $icago9 Band Mc6ally
&oc-e, E.4 & )enne, K %1;>2' @or- Motivation Teories. +n $.&. $ooper and +.T Bo#ertson.
!nternational Revie of !ndustrial and .rgani/ational Psychology, 1.ED.
&a(ler, E. E. & 7<Kara, P. @. %1;27' Teacer 1tress and 1atisfaction. Educational Research,
?1%?'9 >;.;2.
&o(ter, M. 4. %1;>D'. 4ge and Determinants of &ecturer *o# 1atisfaction. 6erontologist$ 07879$
D?3.D?D.
Maslo(, 4. ). %1;FE'. 4 teory of )uman Motivation. Psychological Revie$ 7:$p. ';:.
Maslo(, 4.). %1;DF' +otivation and Personality. 6e( Lor-9 )arper and Bo(
Maslo(, 4. ). %1;FE'. 4 teory of )uman Motivation. Psychological Revie, D3, p. E73.
Mitcell, T.B, )oltom, :.$, & &ee, T.@. %?331'. &o to 4eep your best employees" Developing
an effective retention policy. 4cademy of Management E!ecutive, 1D%F', ;2.13;.
+issha4$ +.). 8<=;<9 1upervisory 1-ills and Employee 1atisfaction$ Personnel Administration$
E;9 ?;.EE.
6icolson, *. %1;>3'. 4nalysis of communication satisfaction in an ur#an scool system.
Unpu#lised doctoral dissertation, 5ander#ilt University, 6asville, T6.
Perie, M., :a-er, D. P. & @iterner, 1. %1;;7'. *o# 1atisfaction among 4merica8s &ecturers9
Effects of @or-place $onditions, :ac-ground $aracteristics, and &ecturer $ompensation.
2.S. Department of Education.
Pitt, &. F. & Foreman, 1. C. %1;;;'. +nternal mar-eting role in organi0ations9 4 transaction cost
perspective. )ournal of #usiness Research,.FF, ?D.E2.
Bao, K. B. 1. %1;73'. 1ocio.Personal $orrelates of *o# 1atisfaction. !ndian )ournal of Applied
Psychology. pp. 7,?.
Batsoy, E.@. %1;7E'. Participative and ierarcical management of scools9 1ome emerging
generali0ations. )ournal of Educational Administration. (7$ 121.173.
Beyes, P. & 1in, ). %1;;D'. &ecturer $ommitment and *o# 1atisfaction9 4 $ausal 4nalysis.
)ournal of School *eadership$ 7%1', ??.E;.
1rivastva, 1ures, 1alipante, *r. Paul F.., $ummings, Tomas K.. 6ot0, @illiam @ :igelo(,*on
D & @aters, *ames 4.. %1;7D'. *o# Satisfaction and Productivity" An Evaluation of Policy
Related Research on Productivity$ !ndustrial .rgani/ation and 1ob Satisfaction" Policy
Development and !mplications. %ase @estern Beserve University, $levelandM Department
of 7rgani0ational :eavior.
1c(art0, M., E. *enusaitis, E., &. 1tar-. ).%1;2E'. AMotivational Factors 4mong 1upervisors in
te Utility +ndustry,A Personnel Psychology$ 5ol. 12, pp. FD.DE.
1ergiovanni, T. *. %1;;?'. Moral autority and te regeneration of supervision. +n $. Klic-man
%Ed.', Supervision in transition %pp. ?3E.?1F'. Beston, 549 4ssociation for 1upervision
and $urriculum Development.
1mit, P. $., Cendall, &. M., & )ulin, $. &. %1;2;'.Te measurement of satisfaction in (or- and
retirement. $icago, +&9 Band Mc6ally.
5an Maane, *. & Cat0, B. %1;72'. +ndividuals and teir careers9 some temporal considerations
for (or- satisfaction. Personnel Psychology.?; %F'.23.21>.
@alder, 4. K. %1;>2'. %ommunist Neo-traditionalism. :er-eley, $49 University of $alifornia
Press.
@ernimont %1;7?, 4 system vie( of "o# satisfaction, )ournal of Applied
Psychology,5ol.D2,p.17F.
@iteford, Patricia $..%1;;3'.Differences #et(een Teacers @o )ave and )ave 6ot Taugt
$ontinuously during te First Five Lears after Kraduation. Paper presented at te 4nnual
Meeting of te Mid(estern Educational Besearc 4ssociation. $icago.
Niao, P. & &i, $. %?33E'.@oguo"iaosi!uyaoyan"iusuping XTeacers8 needs in $inaY.)ournal
of &ebei Normal 2niversity 8Educational Science Edition9$ No. '$ 0>-'< 8%hinese9.
Available at" ttp9//(((.pep.co m .cn/?33F32/caF>7112.tm
Le00i, *., & &ester, D. %?333'.*o# 1atisfaction in Teacers. Psychological Reports$ >;8<9$ 772.
Pedec-, 1. %1;>7, 7cto#er'.1atisfaction in union mem#ers and teir spouses. Paper presented at
te *o# 1atisfaction9 4dvances in Besearc and Practice $onference, :o(ling Kreen, 7io.
$opyrigt of +nterdisciplinary *ournal of $ontemporary Besearc in :usiness is te property of
+nterdisciplinary *ournal of $ontemporary Besearc in :usiness and its content may not #e copied or emailed to
multiple sites or posted to a listserv (itout te copyrigt older<s e!press (ritten permission. )o(ever, users
may print, do(nload, or email articles for individual use.