e-sRC

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
Teachers play a vital role in the society. Their impact are felt by the lives of all children from
different backgrounds, including those children with varying levels of understanding, abilities
and those from families that exhibit wide range of cultural and linguistic diversity. Teachers are
educators or instructors saddled with the responsibility of educating children by grooming and
helping them to discover their talents (Rahman, Nabi, Akhter, Saeed& Ajmal, 2011). According
Rahman et’al (2011), teachers have long-lasting impacts on the lives of students who live to
enjoy the knowledge they avail to them. They have good classroom management skills, ensure
good student behaviour, effective study and work habit (Tehseen, 2015).
Adebomi, Olunfunke, Ibitoye and Oluyemisi (2012) noted that although teachers are recruited
mainly to teach, they are also engaged in a wide variety of activities along with the basic face-toface teaching, such as curriculum design and development, school planning, marketing,
community relations, information technology, workplace, health and safety, resource
management, students‟ welfare, as well as playground and sports regulation. In addition to the
afore-mentioned, teachers are also expected to possess the knowledge of the subject matter they
teach and to always prepare to answer questions and make lessons interesting and interactive for
students. Infact, teachers have been considered as one of the most important determinants of
quality of education (Goldhaber & Hansen, 2010). They are recognized as indispensable human
resource and, indeed, a single most important element in the school system, more important than
the quality of equipment and materials and the level of financing (Yusuf, 2016).
Despite this immeasurable role of teachers in the society, it is becoming worrisome that these
teachers have been reported By Hanushek (2007) to be leaving the teaching profession or
quitting their current teaching job to other jobs or transfer from one school to another, thereby
denying those school children and youths the opportunities that consistency of teachers bring to
the enhancement of quality of education. In 2015, Omonijo, Oludayo, Eche, Uche and Ohunakin
reported that despite the large body of literature on turnover, Nigerian education system still
experiences situation of voluntary turnover of staff. A record obtained from Ministry of
Education Zaria in 2016 showed that for the last six years teachers of public secondary schools in
Zaria metropolis have been quitting their job voluntarily (Ministry of Education Zaria, 2016).
Turnover poses a very serious challenge with critical effect on both the individual teacher and
the institution. Studies such as Amstrong (2012), Ampomah and Cudjor (2015), Benedict, Josiah,
Ogungbenle and Akpeti (2012) and Rajan (2013) have documented negative effects of turnover
on an organization. Hassan and Mara (2014) reported that high turnover brings setback (in the
form of direct and indirect cost and non-profitability) to the organization. This is rightly the case
as funds would have been wasted for the provision of materials, equipment and other facilities as
well as training and development of the individual teacher, who on the completion of his
schooling or training, resigns for some other jobs for one reason or the other. If an organization
has made significant investment in training and developing its employees, that investment is lost
when employees leave (Mello, 2011).The National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES)
observed in 2008, that teacher turnover is a global problem that impacts very negatively on
student achievement and that it is a high cost phenomenon.
However, intention to quit has been viewed as a critical stage before the actual turnover (Balkan,
Serin & Soran, 2014; Qasim, Javed& Shafi, 2014; Saba, Sadia, Muhammad& Mehwish, 2014). It
has been described as the last in a sequence of withdrawal cognitions, a set of cognitions include
thinking of quitting and the intent to look for alternative employment and eventual turnover
(Mobley, Horner, & Hollingsworth, 1978 as cited by Okubanjo, 2014). It has been a critical issue
for management for many years (Chen, Lin & Lien, 2010) and it is a major problem for
organizations now. Turnover intention explains conscious wilfulness to seek for other alternative
jobs in other organizations. This intention may ultimately result in an outcome where an
employee leaves the organization. However, understanding why employees decide to quit is the
first step in getting them to stay. Intention to quit may be triggered by the level of job satisfaction
(Mxenge, Dywili & Bazana, 2014), stress resulting from discharge of duties ( Hassan & Mara,
2014) and the level of employee self efficacy (Muhangi, 2017).Employees may also leave their
jobs when they encounter environments that lack essential professional supports (Duze &
Rosemary, 2013) and these may include job dissatisfaction, poor working conditions and poor
pay, inadequate support from parents, administration, colleagues and the public, discipline,
management and attendance problems, increasing class size, increased in workloads; poor
motivation of students; and lack of space for teachers to participate in key decisions affecting the
school.
Job satisfaction explains how contented an individual is with the job he/she is currently doing;
whether he/she likes the job or not. The inability of employees to achieve their needs may
amount to dissatisfaction which could eventually lead to turnover intention of workers. Thus
employees who are satisfied with their workplace / work environment are less likely to want to
leave their organization. The improvement of performance in schools totally depends on
teachers‟ job satisfaction (Shah & Jumani, 2015).This may be true because dissatisfied teachers
may not be efficient in discharging their duties. Smilansky (1984) as contained in Kayastha,
(2012) observed teachers’ work satisfaction and revealed that teachers’ general satisfaction and
stress at work were related mostly to their reported feelings about happening within class (such
as interaction with pupils, the process of teaching, and pupils‟ behaviour in school) rather than to
administrative or policy questions.
Previous research results showed that turnover intention is affected by job stress (Sheraz, Wajid,
Sajid, Wajahat Hussain, & Rizwan, 2014; Siddiqui & Jamil, 2015).These studies have
established a strong relationship between work stress and turnover intention but failed to
integrate the influence of individual efficacy. Challenging demands of most jobs today may have
put excessive pressures on employees which cause them to feel exhaustion and nervous. Stress
occurs when individuals recognize that the pressures or requirements of the job are greater than
their abilities to cope with them (Kyriacou, 1987). Furthermore, Mark and Smith (2013) reported
a great deal of research on occupations that are typically seen as stressful such as those with low
status, control, or financial benefits, as well other demanding occupations such as nursing, police
work, and teaching. Ekundayo and Kolawale (2013) posited that teachers‟ job is fast becoming
more stressful in recent times, and this tends to affect the level of teaching effectiveness.
Teachers‟ self-efficacy is considered to be one of the most important factors affecting teachers‟
job satisfaction during their tough teaching years (Wolters & Daugherty, 2007). It is the
perception teachers have that they can effectively perform the professional tasks such as helping
students to learn. According to Aloe, Amo and Sanan (2014), direct relationships between selfefficacy and burnout have also been confirmed in several meta-analyses. Demirdag (2015)
observed that there is evidence demonstrating an association between teachers‟ self-efficacy and
student and teacher outcome. In recent researches, empirical evidence has been found for several
possible roles of self-efficacy, for example, self efficacy may serve as an indirect predictor of
strain via stress as mediator(Wang, Hall, & Rahimi, 2015), as a mediator between stress and
strain (Yu, Wang, Zhai, Dai, & Yang, 2014), and as a moderator of the stress and strain
relationship (Schwarzer & Hallum, 2008).Self-efficacy determines behaviors and behavioral
changes of teachers (Canrinus, Helms-Lorenz, Beijaard, Buitink & Hofman, 2012) and also
influences thoughts, feelings, attitudes and effort dedicated to teaching. Teachers with a high
sense of self-efficacy exert much effort at work and are rational about teaching. Researchers
(e.g., Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2007 & Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010) reported that teachers with low
self-efficacy were less satisfied with their jobs and would quit jobs soon.
Thus, the current study focuses on determining the effect of work stress and job satisfaction on
turnover intention among public secondary school teachers in Zaria Metropolis and the
moderating role of self-efficacy.
1.2 Statement of the Research Problem
A healthy educational system is known to be the backbone of a developing nation and the teacher
is the pivot around which the entire educational system revolves. The success of any educational
system depends on the quality and ability of the teachers who are essential to the system and
thus, they are an important force in the development of a society. Contemporary educational
theories hold that one of the major causes of inadequate school performance is the inability of
schools to adequately staff classroom with qualified teachers (Ingersoll& Smith, 2001). This
however is not unconnected with shortage of teachers commonly observed among schools.
Ingersoll and Smith (2001) noted that the rate of turnover on account of retirement is relatively
low when compared to turnover associated with other factors, such as job dissatisfaction, job
stress and pursuance of other jobs. Omonijo, Oludayo, Eche, Uche and Ohunakin (2015)
reported that despite the large body of literature on turnover intention, Nigerian education system
still experiences situation of voluntary turnover of staff.
In 2016, records obtained from the Ministry of Education in Zaria have shown that in Zaria
metropolis about 43% of public secondary school teachers who have left service in the last six
years left voluntarily. A breakdown of this showed that in 2014, total teachers turnover was 44 of
which 25 were on retirement and the remaining 19 were voluntary resignation or withdrawal.
Likewise, in 2015 a total of 66 left, 41 on retirement, 2 death and 23 on voluntary resignation.
These figures rose in 2016, where the total teachers‟ turnover stood at 72 of which 42 went on
retirement, 1 death and 29 voluntary resignations. However, going by the position of theory of
planned behavior (TPB), the intention to perform a behavior is the determinant of the actual
behavior. Also, Albattat and Matsom (2013) noted that turnover intention is the crucial stage
before the actual turnover occurs. Past studies have revealed that majority of staff that may have
left their organization had initially intended to quit working with the organization (Hassman &
Mara, 2014).By implication, the teachers that have left may have intended to quit their job. The
question is why would a teacher decide to quit his/her current job?
Some researchers have over a number of years attempted to answer the question of what makes
employees intend to leave the organisation. They have documented a number of possible factors
responsible for this, some of which are work place stress (Mxenge, Dywili & Bazana, 2014;
Ekundayo & Kolawale, 2013; Siddiqui and Jamil,2015; Arshadi & Damiri,2013), job insecurity
(Benjamin, 2008), loss of trust, future prospect, leadership, better pay elsewhere, unfair
treatment, level of job satisfaction (Hassan& Mara,2014; Wu, 2012;Shah & Jumani, 2015), self
concept (Varshney,2014), organizational commitment and salary level (lee, Huang & Zhau,2011)
as reasons why employees would want to quit a current job. Among these factors, work stress
7
and job satisfaction have been reported as key and most predictors of intention to quit (Mxenge
et al., 2014; Hassan& Mara, 2014).
A number of studies (e.g., Arshadi & Damiri, 2013; Bashir, 2014; Liu & Onwuegbuzie, 2012;
Peterson, 2009 & Siddiqui & Jamil, 2015) have documented a strong relationship between work
stress and turnover intention but only few studies (e.g., Moreno-Jiménez, 2012; Arshadi &
Damiri, 2013; Lin, 2013) have considered the inclusion of a moderator variable as recommended
by Baron and Kenny (1986) as contained in Kim, Kaye and Wright (2001). According to Arshadi
and Damiri (2013) and Mosadeghrad (2013), individual differences in terms of self esteem and
self efficacy can play a role in the work stress and its outcome relations. This may be so because
individuals differ in their perception of job stress resulting from differences in their abilities.
Robbins and Judge (2013) and Yu, Wang, Zhai and Dai (2014) posited that employees with high
self efficacy tend to overcome work stress than employees with low self efficacy.
In most turnover theories and researches, job satisfaction has been identified as a key variable
that influences turnover intention (Hassan & Mara, 2014). Employee job satisfaction is his/her
ultimate feeling after the performance of the task. It is the extent that the work meets the basic
needs of employees, and is consistent with their expectations and values, and will be working
satisfactorily. Studies on the relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention have
been inconsistent (Hakim, Dardar, Jusoh, & Rasli, 2012 & Tarigan & Ariani, 2015). Some
studies(e.g., Chen, Chang & Yeh, 2004; Korunka, Hoonakker & Carayon, 2005; Lai & Chen,
2012; Peterson, 2009; Hassan & Mara, 2014; Shah & Jumani, 2015; Tnay, Ekhsan, Othman,
Siong, Lim, & Lim, 2013) documenting significant negative relationship and others (e.g., Khatri,
Fern & Budhwar, 2001 & Wang, Tsai, Jia, Lei, Chio, & Lai, 2016 & Hakim et al., 2012) had
positive relationship betweeen the variables. In addition, Chen (2005) documented a non-
significant relationship between job satisfaction and turnover intention. It is on the basis of these
differences in results and the recommendation of Baron and Kenny (1986) that the current study
integrated a third variable that can possibly explain this inconsistencies. In line with this,
Robbins and judge (2013) noted that employees with high self efficacy are more likely to be
satisfied with their job than employees with low self efficacy.
A strong sense of efficacy enhances human success and personal welfare in many ways. People
with high assurance in their abilities approach complex tasks as a challenge to be mastered rather
than as threats to be avoided (Adebomi et al., 2012). To them, such an efficacious attitude fosters
basic interest and deepens commitment. They heighten and sustain their effort in the face of
failure. They quickly recover from failures and setbacks. They attribute failures to insufficient
effort or deficient knowledge and skills which are acquirable. Bandura (2001) asserted that
efficacious people approach threatening situations with assurance that they can exercise control
over them. He further noted that such an efficacious stance produces personal achievement,
reduces stress and lowers vulnerability to depression.
In view of this, it becomes evidently clear that intention to quit can be counter-productive to the
achievement of schools’ objectives and as such it is necessary to examine the effect of work
stress and job satisfaction on teachers‟ turnover intention and the role of teachers self efficacy.
1.3 Research Questions
The research questions are to what extent does:
i. Work stress affect teachers‟ turnover intention among public secondary schools in Zaria
Metropolis?
ii. Job satisfaction affects teachers‟ turnover intention among public secondary schools in Zaria
Metropolis?
iii. Self efficacy affects teachers‟ turnover intention among public secondary schools in Zaria
Metropolis?
iv. Self efficacy moderates the relationship between work stress and teachers‟ turnover
intention among public secondary schools in Zaria Metropolis?
v. Self efficacy moderates the relationship between job satisfaction and teachers‟ turnover
intention among public secondary schools in Zaria Metropolis?