Can An Incentive Scheme Raise Competences Among Teachers?

STUDENT
NAME STUDENT NUMBER MA PROGRAMME NAME MODULE NAME MODULE TUTOR WORD COUNT DEADLINE DATE DATE SUBMITTED SIGNATURE Page number on each page Student number in header or footer on each page Cover page 2 before essay and after this cover sheet, stating module title, essay title, student number and word count Two hard copies submitted One copy submitted via e-learning Checked work is properly referenced Word length limits respected All sources are correctly cited in order INITIALS CATALINA RODRIGUEZ MERINO 1133372 MA EDUCATION MANAGEMENT EDUCATION MANAGEMENT DISSERTATION CHRISTOPHER WINCH 18,976 NOVEMBER 23TH, 2012 NOVEMBER 23TH, 2012
Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:
1133372]
Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers?

Catalina Rodrguez Merino M.A in Education Management Kings College London November 2012
Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID: ABSTRACT
1133372]
The supplemental dissertation will try to offer clues on teachers competencies, and how they can be raised through an incentive programme. Empiric evidence shows there is a strong bond between quality of teachers and students performance. However, sometimes teachers do not work on their competencies. One of the solutions to address this issue is to create an incentive scheme motivating teachers to perform in their best quality. The use of incentives to motivate employees is widely used in several industries to align the objectives and results of the firms with those of the employees. The first aim of this dissertation was to identify which competencies were the best ones for evaluating teacher performance. To do so, a case study in a Chilean private school was used to address which competencies were expected in a good teacher. It was imperative to create the set of competencies (indicators) to measure teacher performance on the school and later on, determine which ones of those competencies could be raised if the school determine to give incentives to the teaching staff. The research question of the dissertation was: Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? Also, the dissertation planned to give an answer to seven objectives. (1) Determine what it is understood by competencies, incentives and any relevant topic related to the research. (2) Create a template of competencies. (3) Map the set of competencies that are expected from the administration. (4) Map the set of competencies the teaching staff of the school think they should possess and/or develop. (5) Discover and investigate if objective three and objective four are aligned. (6) Develop a set of competencies using the data collected in the focus groups. (7) Answer the research question. A purposefully methodology was chosen to fulfill the requirements. A Chilean private school was selected because they have freedom and independence to implement any type of teacher evaluation and reward systems they want to. The method chosen was a qualitative research. Four focus groups were conducted to: the administration of the school, Nursery, Primary and Secondary Teachers.
1133372]
People were asked to fill a template that divided different types of competencies in: Systematic Knowledge, Procedural Knowledge, Local Knowledge, Social Competence and Self-Competence. In the light of the data that was gathered during the focus groups, it was possible to say administration and teachers were aligned in their thoughts. In addition, thirty competencies were identified as the most important ones for the participants. However, not all of them were suitable to rise through an incentive system. The findings of the study showed there are some competencies that work better with incentives and some that simply do not work. Among the competencies that could be favored are the ones that are easy to measure and quantify, such as: proficiency in a foreign language, use of technology, literacy and numeracy skills, knowledge of inclusion, and First Aids. On the other hand, soft skills and competencies related to Self- Competence were harder to attach to an indicator and less likely to work in an incentive scheme.
1133372]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 7 A. The Background of the Dissertation ...................................................................................................................... 7 B. The Goal of the Study ................................................................................................................................................. 10 C. Research Question and objectives ....................................................................................................................... 11 D. Overview of the Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 12 E. Overview of the Dissertation map ....................................................................................................................... 13 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................... 14 A. Main concepts ............................................................................................................................................................... 14 1. Incentives as a mechanism to improve the educational learning process .......................... 14 2. Student Performance versus Teacher Competencies ....................................................................... 16 3. Competencies: looking for the best set of knowledge, skills and attitudes ........................ 18 4. Personal qualities: an important ingredient of teachers performance ............................... 23 5. Having motivated teachers ................................................................................................................................ 24 6. Final thoughts ............................................................................................................................................................. 26 B. Educational Chilean background ......................................................................................................................... 27 1. The importance of the study ............................................................................................................................. 27 2. The Chilean system of education .................................................................................................................... 28 3. The Chilean system of incentives ................................................................................................................... 28 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................ 31 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 31 B. Qualitative Research .................................................................................................................................................. 31 C. Focus Group the chosen method .......................................................................................................................... 33 D. Validity of the research ............................................................................................................................................ 33 E. Ethics ................................................................................................................................................................................ 34 F. Creation of the template ........................................................................................................................................... 34 G. Sample .............................................................................................................................................................................. 36 H. Data Collection and Management ........................................................................................................................ 37 CHAPTER 4: FOCUS GROUP .............................................................................................. 38 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 38 B. Administration Focus Group .................................................................................................................................. 39 1. Systematic knowledge: ......................................................................................................................................... 39 2. Procedural knowledge: ........................................................................................................................................ 40 3. Local knowledge: ...................................................................................................................................................... 40 4. Social competencies: .............................................................................................................................................. 40 5. Self-Competence: ...................................................................................................................................................... 40 C. Nursery Focus Group ................................................................................................................................................. 40 1. Systematic knowledge: ......................................................................................................................................... 40 2. Procedural knowledge: ........................................................................................................................................ 41 3. Local knowledge: ...................................................................................................................................................... 41 4. Social competencies: .............................................................................................................................................. 41 5. Self-Competence: ...................................................................................................................................................... 41 D. Primary Focus Group ................................................................................................................................................ 41 1. Systematic knowledge: ......................................................................................................................................... 41 2. Procedural knowledge: ........................................................................................................................................ 41
1133372]
3. Local knowledge: ...................................................................................................................................................... 42 4. Social competencies: .............................................................................................................................................. 42 5. Self-Competence: ...................................................................................................................................................... 42 E. Secondary Focus Group ............................................................................................................................................ 42 1. Systematic knowledge: ......................................................................................................................................... 42 2. Procedural knowledge: ........................................................................................................................................ 42 3. Local knowledge: ...................................................................................................................................................... 43 4. Social competencies: .............................................................................................................................................. 43 5. Self-Competence: ...................................................................................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA ............................................... 44 A. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 44 B. Identifying the set of competencies for each group ..................................................................................... 44 C. Knowledge of the subject ......................................................................................................................................... 45 D. Inclusion ......................................................................................................................................................................... 46 E. Literacy and numeracy skills ................................................................................................................................. 47 F. Foreign language ......................................................................................................................................................... 48 G. Technology ..................................................................................................................................................................... 49 H. Leadership ..................................................................................................................................................................... 50 I. Motivation/vocation ................................................................................................................................................... 51 J. Definitions, the first step to establish an incentive scheme ....................................................................... 52 K. Clarity of the incentive .............................................................................................................................................. 53 L. Type of incentive ......................................................................................................................................................... 55 M. Years of experience v/s performance ............................................................................................................... 55 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 57 A. Expected set of competencies ................................................................................................................................ 57 B. Raising competencies through incentives ........................................................................................................ 60 CHAPTER 7: APPENDICES ................................................................................................. 63 A. Templates in Spanish ................................................................................................................................................ 63 1.Nursery sheet filled by Administration ....................................................................................................... 63 2.Nursery sheet filled by Nursery Teachers ................................................................................................. 65 3. Primary sheet filled by Administration ..................................................................................................... 66 4. Primary sheet filled by Primary Teachers ............................................................................................... 67 5. Secondary sheet filled by Administration ................................................................................................ 69 6. Secondary sheet filled by Secondary Teachers ..................................................................................... 70 B. Templates in English ................................................................................................................................................. 72 7. Nursery sheet filled by Administration ..................................................................................................... 72 8. Nursery sheet filled by Nursery Teachers ................................................................................................ 73 9. Primary sheet filled by Administration ..................................................................................................... 74 10. Primary sheet filled by Primary Teachers ............................................................................................ 75 11. Secondary sheet filled by Administration ............................................................................................. 76 12. Secondary sheet filled by Secondary Teachers .................................................................................. 77 C. Questions made during the focus groups ......................................................................................................... 78 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 79
1133372]
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of the Dissertation
As Mizala and Romaguera (2002) affirm there is a recent interest of quantifying every single result of the education process. The education system has many participants involved: parents, headmaster, classmates, nursery teachers, primary teachers, secondary teachers and every single human being who works in a school and interacts with the student at some point. However, there is one actor who takes the biggest responsibility in this endeavour: the teacher. Schools, governments and parents are looking for good teachers. Teachers with the enough quality to impact in the student learning process. As Waterreus suggests, teacher quality could be defined as teachers ability to contribute to pupil achievement (2003, p.29). Research shows that teacher quality affects students achievement more greatly than any other school-based variable (Goldrick, 2002, p.2). This affirmation made by Goldrick ten years ago was supported by several studies (Darling-Hammond and Loewenberg, 1998, Ferguson and Ladd, 1996, Sanders et al., 1997). Knowing that this variable was so important for the learning process helped the Government of the United States to announce the Act No Child Left Behind (USDE, 2007) where a highly skilled teacher in every classroom was a national aim and still is. As Carnoy et al. stress a key element in better schooling is better teaching (2007, p.190). The main problem and concern is teaching quality is not directly observable. Because of this gap between what it is observable and what it is not, the school has to create a set of indicators that will help the administration with the accountability process (Mizala and Romaguera, 2004). With those indicators, schools generate information that will help in the decision-making and will make possible to evaluate teachers and their quality. This problem is present at schools where different actors such as the headmaster and the parents want to have the best teachers for their children, understanding that a
1133372]
better teacher will produce a better outcome among students. However, it is practically impossible to place every parent and the administration of the school inside the classroom checking that the teacher is doing her1 best effort to teach the students. That was one of the concerns examined by Eberts et al.: Education involves multiple stakeholders, disparate and conflicting goals, complex and multitask jobs, team production, uncertain inputs, and idiosyncratic elements contingent on the attributes of individual students, the efforts and attitudes of fellow teachers, and the classroom environments (2002, p.914). That is way it is so difficult to find an indicator capable of measuring students performance. The complexity of variables and people involved sometimes blurs the final target, which is to help in the learning process. So, the first aim of this dissertation is to identify those indicators, which indicators are the best ones for evaluating teacher performance. To do so, a case study in a Chilean private school will be used to address which competencies are expected in a good teacher. One of the objectives of the research is to create a set of competencies that will be used in the school as indicators to evaluate teacher performance. The first goal is clear, to identify qualified teachers. The second goal of the research is to analyze if it is possible to raise those competencies and having the best teachers inside the classroom. As Santibaez points out to ensure qualified teachers get to the classroom (and remain there), salaries must be set accordingly (2010, p.481). Something that it is well known in the United States, where several studies (Brewer, 1996, Gritz and Theobald, 1996, Kirby et al., 1999, Podgursky et al., 2004, Stockard and Lehman, 2004) imply a positive link between good salaries and lower attrition of good teachers. In Latin America, Gonzalez (2001) analyzed how salaries of primary and secondary teachers raised in Chile between 1990 and 2003 and found a positive effect on students test scores. Same conclusion was obtained by the OECD (2004) in its report about Chilean reality. However, it was impossible to determine which teacher in particular was responsible of that score. One of the concerns is how to identify the individualistic teacher performance on each student: Mizala and Romaguera (2002) find it difficult to address a correlation between students test scores and good teacher: how much of the
1
For the purpose of this dissertation and to simplify the narration, the teacher will be a female character.
1133372]
test score is attributable to certain teacher, to student genetics, to parents education, etc. What it is clear is that empiric evidence shows there is a strong bond between quality of teachers and students performance (Rivkin et al., 1998). But, on the other hand, the relation between quality of teachers and salaries is not as conclusive as the above connection (Ballou and Podgursky, 1997, Figlio, 1997, Hanushek et al., 1999). One of the solutions to address this issue is to create an incentive scheme motivating teachers to perform in their best quality (Gonzlez, 1998). With an incentive scheme the gap is solved, something Santibaez agree with: this situation in a way that improves educational outcomes, incentive programs in education are being increasingly favored (2010, p.481). The use of incentives to motivate employees is widely used in several industries at all levels to align the objectives and results of the firms with those of the employees. This solution was devised to solve what is known in economics as the principal-agent problem when objectives of different parties are not in sync or even diverge greatly (Eisenhardt, 1989). Business and economic literature explore these issues in depth, where the incentives most commonly found are financial, such as stock options, variable pay, bonuses and non-financial incentives that can range from additional days of vacation to pat on the back. In most cases found in the business world, benefits are associated to the accomplishment of specific goals. Particularly true for the case of the sale forces, where salaries are tied to sale levels (Ross, 1973). For the education professionals, setting, measuring and evaluating goals is a less straightforward endeavor since the appraisal of the effort, competencies and performance of teachers is more subjective and specific, needing a careful review vis--vis (Asch, 2005). It is more difficult but it will bring positive outcomes to the governments to use incentives as a carrot to attract university students to the teaching path. Cornett and Gaines explain incentives are helping states recruit new teachers into the workforce, attract persons from outside education, retain teachers in the classroom and support accountability programs that focus on school-by-school efforts to boost student
10
1133372]
achievement (2002, p.4). As Lavy (2007) describes, incentives can be deliver in different ways: to the individual or to a group (teachers, department, schools); they can be seen as a reward or as a system of reward and sanction; they can be a once in a life time event or have a regular periodicity. Finally, they can come in terms of money or offer non-monetary compensation (trips, days off, diplomas, etc.) like Vegas and Umansky (2005) add. Because the scope of the dissertation is not to identify which type of incentive is the best one, but to analyze if an incentive (any) can raise competencies among teachers, no distinction will be made when talking about incentives in general. The distinction and the discussion will be made in the sense of what to reward if the students performance or the teachers competencies. Vegas and Umansky have investigated that most recent incentive programs are merit pay style programs focusing on student test scores as the main measure of teacher performance (2005, p.481), leading to the well known concept teaching to the test (Glewwe et al., 2003, Koretz, 2002). Figlio and Winicki (2005) even affirm the are results where teachers rise the caloric consumption of students the day of the test to increase the obtained results. Not everything are bad news, Lazear believes there are teachers that actually improve students scores in a good sense, but the main difficulty with output-based pay is that even if teachers can affect their students earnings, the evidence does not show up until many years after the student leaves the teachers class (2003, p.179). This time-space gap difficult the using of this indicator as a tool to reward teachers.
B. The Goal of the Study

The main issue is sometimes schools implement incentives scheme without knowing or having clarity of the purpose and expected outcomes. It is a try and error system. As Figlio and Kenny note, teachers and schools engage in this process with virtually no evidence on [their] potential effectiveness (2007, p.902). Because of that, the aim of this research is to have evidence before implementing a new system of incentives in the Chilean school used in the research. At the end, as Carnoy et al.
11
1133372]
emphasize well-designed teacher incentive schemes can have positive effects on student performance (2007, p.192). And that is why the Chilean private school decided to engage in the research and see if an incentive program could raise competencies among teachers, because as seen above and as will be seen in depth in the Literature Review Chapter, qualified teachers affect positively in student performance. The school selected has not implemented an incentive scheme for their teaching staff. The only thing they have done so far, in the past few years, has been to give monetary bonuses to those teachers who prepared students for the National Standardized Tests (SIMCE and PSU) and got excellent results. But, it is not an incentive scheme it is just something extra in the salary for a small and delimited group of teachers. The aim of the school is to create a wider structure where every single teacher of the school could participate, not only the ones involved with the mentioned tests. To do so, it is imperative to create the set of competencies (indicators) to measure teacher performance on the school and later on, determine which ones of those competencies could be raised if the school determine to give incentives to the teaching staff. That is the goal of the study, to determine if it is possible to raise competencies, because as Arumugasamy (2012) indicated, teachers are the most important factor to develop and improve an education of quality, because they are the centre of the process, they are the ones teaching.
C. Research Question and objectives

A. Research Question: Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? 1. Objective one: Determine what is it understood by competencies, incentives and any relevant topic related to the research. 2. Objective two: Create a template of competencies to work with during the research. 3. Objective three: Map the set of competencies that are expected from the coordinators and the headmaster of the school.
12
1133372]
4. Objective four: Map the set of competencies the teaching staff of the school think they should possess and/or develop. 5. Objective five: Discover and investigate if objective three and objective four are aligned. 6. Objective six: Develop a set of competencies for this particular school using the data collected in the focus groups. 7. Objective seven: Answer the research question, analyzing if it is possible to apply an incentive scheme to raise some of the competencies settled in objective six.
D. Overview of the Methodology

To accomplish the aim of the dissertation and answer the research question made above a purposefully methodology was selected to fulfill the requirements of the dissertation goal. First, it was selected Chile as a country of research because the investigator is a Chilean citizen and is currently living in Santiago, the country capital. Second, a private school was selected to develop the research because they have freedom and independence to implement any type of teacher evaluation and reward systems they want to. Public schools and subsidized schools were left out of the discussion because they have their own system of evaluation and they depend from the Ministry of Education (Contreras and Rau, 2009). The private school selected was chosen because it was keen to investigate which competencies were necessary to have qualified teachers and wanted to create an incentive scheme inside the school. The investigator knew the headmaster (she is also one of the owners) of the school who said yes to the invitation of participating in this research. In addition, it is a small school for the Chilean standards (700 hundred students). So, it was not difficult to gain the support of the entire teaching staff of the school to participate in the investigation. Qualitative investigation was chosen because it was not necessary to create indicators and information for ulterior purposes outside the school, no need of having a transferable study. The scope of the investigation was to find answers and solutions
13
1133372]
within the school. Moreover, the author of the dissertation wanted to know the opinion of the teachers and how each opinion dialogued with the opinion of the colleague. The idea was to create a set of indicators using the inputs of everybody. That is why a Qualitative investigation was chosen; and the method selected was focus groups. The staff of the school was divided in four groups: administration, nursery teachers, primary teachers and secondary teachers. Eight people participated in the administration group (including the headmaster), eight nursery teachers, twenty-four primary teachers and nineteen secondary teachers. Therefore, the study is limited to the data that was provided by the people involved in the focus groups.
E. Overview of the Dissertation map

The dissertation will be divided in six chapters. The first chapter is the introduction. The second chapter includes the literature review regarding to using incentives to raise competencies among teachers. This section offers a brief overview on competencies, incentives, motivation among other concepts related to the subject. Also, provides a concise background of the Chilean reality, since the research took place in a Chilean private school. The third chapter of the dissertation describes the methodology used in the research, a background of the study, significance of the study, limitations and definitions. Chapter four provides an overview of the data collected in the focus groups and presents empirical results. Fifth chapter presents the findings from the focus groups and the relation between what the administration of the school think and what teaching staff believes. It also, includes discussion and interpretation of the data; and final chapter contains the conclusion of the dissertation. Regarding to the research question and objectives: objective one will be answered in the Literature Review Chapter; objective two in the Methodology Chapter; objectives three and four in the Focus Group Chapter; objective five in the Discussion and Interpretation of the Data Chapter. Objective six and research question will be answered in the conclusion of the dissertation.
14
1133372]
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
In the second chapter of the dissertation a brief overview on implementing incentives to raise competencies among teachers will be addressed. The chapter will be divided in two sections. The first one describes and analyses different concepts that will help achieving objective one of the dissertation. What is understood by: incentives, competencies; the importance of motivation and vocation for a teacher; the difference between student performance and teachers competencies; which specific qualities a good teacher should have, among others. The second section offers a succinct background of the Chilean education environment reality: basic knowledge of the educational system, the culture and how incentives and competencies are used in Chilean schools. The research was conducted in a Chilean private school, so it was required for the clarity of the study to tackle some of those issues.
A. Main concepts

1. Incentives as a mechanism to improve the educational learning process As seen in the introduction, the concept of incentives has spread among different industries as a tool to associate the aims and goals of the administration with the thoughts and objectives of the employees of a certain company. Eisenhardt (1989), more than twenty years ago, determined incentives helped solving the economic problem known as principal-agent: when goals of employers and employees are not aligned and it is necessary to sync them. Incentives are in charge of filling that gap. They can fill that space with different approaches: ranging from a public demonstration of value (i.e. employee of the month) to monetary bonuses, extra days of vacation and fringe benefits. As Ross (1973) points out, those incentives are not for free, they are linked with certain goals and performances the administration is expecting from the employees to achieve.
15
1133372]
In the educational environment, incentives schemes are widespread and probed to have a positive effect (Figlio and Kenny, 2007, Vegas, 2005). Avalos and Assael suggest the scheme a school should have may consider a combination of controls and incentives (as a result of evaluation procedures) will act as carrots to improve teachers or serve as instruments to remove teachers who are judged as being incompetent (2006, p.255). The same interrogation has Julian Le Grand: should the education system incorporate incentive structures that reward (or penalise) the knave, or ones that encourage (or discourage) the knight? (2003, p.24). The best approach is the one where every participant of the scheme agrees on. The conclusions of the investigation made by Eberts et al. regarding to the implementation of a merit-pay system in a high school, determined monetary incentives work, only if the measures are agreed upon by both teachers and administration (2002, p.926). Mizala and Romaguera believe in the incentive scheme as a method to improve the learning process: the system is based on the idea that if common minimal standards are taken into account, schools can prepare and pay teachers for those aspects and functions that they need to develop (2004, p.741). At the end, is what Lazear affirms tying compensation to the appropriate metric provides incentives to move in the direction that has been agreed on (2003, p.182). If the parties harmonize on every concept the principal-agent issue will tend to disappear. Once the idea of giving monetary incentives is settled in the school is time to determine and manage the amount of the incentive in a productive way: not to low, otherwise teachers will not make an extra effort to gain it. Not to easy to achieve, because as Mizala and Romaguera (2002) affirm, the idea of awarding best teachers will dilute and it will become a generalized raise of teachers salaries. Like Figlio and Kenny (2007) state in their research, the best approach to use incentives was when the rewards were very difficult to get and only a small number of the staff was awarded. According to the American Federation of Teachers (2000), an average monetary incentive should be between 10% to 40% of the annual merit pay. Even though, everybody will say they prefer more than less and will fight to get that extra pay. As Glewwe et al. analyze larger incentives might induce more effort by teachers, they could also have induced effort at counter-productive signaling, for example through cheating on
16
1133372]
tests or forcing weak students to drop out (2003, p.32). However, some authors (Harris and Sass, 2009, Guarino et al., 2006, Jesus and Lens, 2005) conclude cheating it has nothing to do with the amount of the incentive but with the personal characteristics of the teaching staff, and the incentive will not change those characteristics. This issue will be tackle later on in the motivation subtitle. As a conclusion of the importance of having incentives in the educational process, it is useful to remember what Prendergast (1999) said in his paper: If an incentive is given to a teacher she will make an extra effort and take a higher risk on teaching, risk she would not take if the incentive did not exist. Understanding that with risk involved there will be progress in the education learning process. 2. Student Performance versus Teacher Competencies It is clear that using incentives will help with the aim of boosting educational levels. The question now is what to incentive, where the administration of the school and government set the carrot. There are two main approaches: reward the output of the process, the student performance (scores in national tests, the object); or reward the skills and capabilities of the teachers (the subject itself). In many countries the bonuses to teachers are based on student performance rather than teachers competencies: It is the case of Kenya, Glewwe et al. (2003) bonuses are paid based on teacher attendance and student performance. The conclusions of the Kenyan experience showed that teacher attendance did not improve, the pedagogy used inside the classroom did not progress and students kept missing classes. The only significant difference was teachers started teaching to the test and raised students competencies in a short-run to get better scores on the national tests. A different experiment performed by Muralidharan and Sundararaman (2006) in India gave bonus payments to teachers when their students test scores improved. The evidence showed there were improvements in math and language. Moreover, they detected no adverse consequences of the program with student performance improving on mechanical as well as conceptual questions and on incentive as well as non-incentive subjects (2006, p.34).
17
1133372]
Lazear has a diverse perspective regarding to attaching teachers incentives with students outcomes: the problem is that the relevant earnings do not show up until many years after the individual has received the education. Therefore, it is impossible to tie teacher compensation to the earnings of her students, even if that is the relevant metric (2003, p.183). That is why the author prefers using teachers competencies as a relevant metric to reward teachers than students achievement. In a different approach, Lavy (2002) equaled schools getting monetary incentives and schools without an incentive scheme within the same community and found positive effects of incentives on students outcomes (test results). Authors such as Harbison and Hanushek (1992), Hanushek (1996) and Lockheed and Verspoor (1991), claim that if a system is created to attach students performance with teachers incentives, teachers will make an extra effort to achieve the goal. On the other hand, authors like Holmstrom and Milgrom (1991) and Hannaway (1992) stress standardized tests only evaluate one aspect of a teacher performance and leave behind others properties such as innovation, creativity, soft skills, etc. However, they realize this happen because competencies are much harder to measure than observable outputs such as those standardized tests. Waterreus (2003) agrees with Hannaway and that incipient hazard as teachers face multiple (and often competing) tasks there is the risk that they focus their efforts on performance measurement indicators at the expense of other educational goals (p.150). The aim of the schools and government should be to find proper indicators that do not leave behind any aspect of the teachers competencies. As Goldrick points out, governments are designing performance-based licenses that require demonstration of subject knowledge and teaching skill, rather than basing licenses on course credits and hours of professional development (2002, p.4). And teachers are being evaluated by theses demonstrations rather than students outcomes. If the aim is to compare the performance between schools, using standardized national tests is the best solution available. However, if the aim is to compare teachers within the school, then teaching competencies is the tool that will help administrators to improve the performance of their students (Mizala and Romaguera, 2004).
18
1133372]
Eberts et al. address the issue of having performances evaluations saying it is practically impossible to have standardized instruments for every indicator of teachers performance, so schools must have in mind it will be a subjective evaluation (2002). And sometimes teachers avoid being evaluated, so the task of measuring those competencies gets even harder: surveys indicate a clear preference for extra pay for extra work. Pay for performance requires that teachers be sorted or graded in some way, and the majority of teachers resist this concept (Cornett and Gaines, 2002, p.16). They are harder to measure but not impossible. That is the aim of the research, to be able of measuring those competencies and align them with the necessary incentive. 3. Competencies: looking for the best set of knowledge, skills and attitudes In order to answer the research question of the dissertation, it was necessary to clarify two main concepts: incentives and competencies. The first one was already addressed and now it is time for the second one. The word competence has had many meanings and interpretations during the decades. Some of them lack of substance and others are too complex to implement. For the purpose of this dissertation the definition of Stoof, Martens and Van Merrinboer (2000) in their paper What is competence? A constructivist approach as a way out of confusion, was taken and will be used during the research. That definition clarifies three main ingredients that must be integrated when talking about competencies: knowledge, skills and attitudes. A set of competencies will be a mix of those three ingredients. A competent teacher will have the knowledge and the skills to fulfill her task, but also will have the proper attitude among her students, colleagues and parents. Once the competencies are settled, there is an understanding of the meaning of the word; competencies have to come to life through implementation. In that sense, as Caprara and Cervone (2003) affirm competencies will be transformed into behavior. When are those competencies transformed into behavior? When the teacher believes in them: we realize a teachers competencies are determined by his or her beliefs (Korthagen, 2004, p.80). This works both ways, sometimes the teacher will have the belief
19
1133372]
and the willing to change her behavior but will not have the beneath competence to do it (Korthagen et al., 2001). And sometimes, will have the competence but not the willing of turn that competence into behavior. It is clear a teacher should possess and develop a set of competencies. But, why the effort of identifying the list of competencies a good teacher should have. The main reason is described by Korthagen (2004). He emphasizes that the effort made to create a concrete list of competencies is for the purposes of identifying the teaching behaviors that displayed the highest correlation with the learning results of children (p.79). At the end, the aim is to know which competencies affect directly the learning process of students; those are the ones the administration of the school will try to strengthen through incentives. Since 1950 many authors (Barr et al., 1961, Beecher, 1953) have studied and listed the main attributes a good teacher should have in order to teach properly. Among those characteristics they included flexibility, emotional stability, ethical behavior, expressiveness, and personal magnetism. All those attributes are needed to create a good atmosphere in the classroom. And one of the ways to check those attributes is through systems like the Teaching Evaluation Record created by Beecher (1953). Lately, during the seventies, the U.S. accountability movement made a significant effort to quantify and identify the main competencies a teacher should have in order to be considered as a qualified teacher (Cruickshank and Haefele, 2001). However, it was Dodl et al. (1972) who created the biggest collection of teachers competencies categorized in three main categories: communication skills, how to assess students and administrative duties. Almost thirty years passed by and Cruickshank and Haefele (2001), after analyzing different historic trends, came up with a list of competencies a teacher should have to get the label of good teacher. First, they said a good teacher should me aligned with the views and aims of the school she is working and she must share the same ideals. Otherwise, there is the risk of having teachers objectives and employers objectives (headmasters, school boards, authorities) mutually exclusive and competing ones with the others as Santibaez (2010) addresses, the know problem of the principal-agent.
20
1133372]
Second, a good teacher must be analytic and a good observer of the environment. Third, she should be as effective as possible in the delivery of pedagogic content, setting high standards for students. Fourth, a good teacher should perform her duties properly and on time. Fifth, a good teacher should be competent and reflective in every task she decides to perform. Sixth, she must be an expert on her area of expertise, always up to dated knowledge. Finally, a good teacher should be respected because she has earned that respect with her actions. Korthagen (2004) in his article named In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic approach in teacher education discussed two main questions regarding to this subject: What are the essential qualities of a good teacher? and How can we help people to become good teachers? (p.78). The essential qualities of a good teacher is a task difficult to fulfill, many authors such as Becker, Kennedy and Hundersmarck (2003) have created lists of competencies to help policy-makers in their labor of creating standards for teaching education. It is difficult but not impossible, Barnett (1994) and Hyland (1994) agree it is feasible to describe the quality of a teacher by listing its competencies, like Cruickshank and Haefele (2001) did ten years ago. A more pessimistic perspective is the one made by Hamachek (1999) who says none of these questions have been answered yet. However, it is possible to create some sort of framework where teachers competencies can be analyzed and applied in a constructive context. In very recent study made by Rusu, oitu and Panaite (2012) seventy-seven students from the University of Iasi in Romania from the Faculty of Letters and the Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science were asked to answer the question What are the characteristics of the ideal teacher?. The main answers emphasized that relational and communicational competencies were the most important ones. The ideal teachers features were summarized in a hierarchized chart starting with the most important one and descending to the less relevant ones: human relations skills, fair assessment, knowledge of the subject, facilitator of students intellectual development, respectful, dynamic teacher, availability, good listener, love for the subject taught, capable of establishing links between related fields, being able to teach others how to learn for
21
1133372]
themselves (p.1018-1019). One of the features that was subject of great discussion during the study was the concept of fair assessment the evaluation of the student performance must be objective, even if teachers are not scoring machines (p.1019). A debate was created because it linked two types of competencies: in one hand the capability of assess (having the knowledge of the evaluation process) and in the other hand the value if fairness, a personal quality that had nothing to do with the evaluation itself. One of the competencies that was not taken from granted in the research was the knowledge of the subject, students who were interview emphasized in the importance of demonstrating expertise in the content, always making an effort of gaining new knowledge: the feature equally highlights the self-knowledge, the self introspection and the tendency of continuous advancing personally and professionally in terms of competence (p.1019). Like Rusu, oitu and Panaite (2012); Rogers (2006) also reported in his research that communicational competencies were a main factor inside the classroom: a good teacher should be able to communicate with the students make them behave and succeed in the learning process; in addition, students would be confident and motivated by this communicative teacher. Having control of the class is something Willingham (2009) pays special attention. He argues that being funny, a good listener, emphatic, etc. it is valuable, but if the teacher does not have the capacity of organizing the ideas in a structured lesson and succeed on implementing the lesson, students will not understand the content and will not remember what they were taught. Jovanova-Mitkovska and Hristovska had the same question from above authors regarding to competencies: what are the key competencies the students-future- teachers-to-be should have, in accordance with the commitment for quality in European teachers education? (2011, p.575). This question was answered with a chart compressing twenty-must-have competencies in the European environment: communicating in their native language; communication in at least one foreign language; mathematical competence; competencies for science and technology; digital
22
1133372]
competence, learning competencies or learning how to learn; social and civic competencies (p.576). Another important factor to consider when listing the attributes or competencies expected is the anxiety or feelings of victimization a teacher may have. Avalos and Assael pay attention when teachers are being evaluated beyond what is their experience specially if publicly the process is presented as a strategy to deal with unsatisfactory student learning results (2006, p.255). In addition, another matter arising in this type of evaluation is the evaluator itself. As Prendergast (1999, p.29-31) addresses it is important to take into account the task of the evaluator and the subjectivity of his labor: in a competence model, the teacher will be evaluated by her direct boss (usually a coordinator), colleagues and students. Colleagues maybe affected by a moral hazard problem, they are evaluating and at the same time they will be evaluated, which may end up with compressed distribution of ratings. Because of this issue it is very important to have a flawless set of indicators when doing the evaluation so it will be as fair as possible. A different matter it is important to add to the equation, when using competencies as a tool of evaluation, is the execution of the list created. Even though, if the teacher knows and agrees on the list of competencies that will help her to improve her productivity and work inside the classroom, Hamilton (2005) suggests teachers will need help and support on figuring out how to implement those competencies during their lectures. They know what it is best for student achievement but sometimes do not know how to accomplish that task, and fail in the process. As it has been seen, it is a widespread tool to use a list of competencies to evaluate teachers performance, however, as Korthagen said long detailed lists of skills were formulated, which gradually resulted in a kind of fragmentation of the teachers role (2004, p.79). At the end, a good teacher should not be minimized to a list of isolated competencies that are susceptible to be learned by training. Those competencies should be used as a guide, some necessary but not sufficient to evaluate the overall performance of the teacher. Tickle (1999) is one of the authors who advocates for personal characteristics such as enthusiasm and love of children, to add to the list of competencies related to the occupational skills and abilities to evaluate teachers performance. It is
23
1133372]
better for the purpose of the incentive scheme to use a holistic approach in the evaluation process and aggregate competencies involving personal qualities of the teacher. 4. Personal qualities: an important ingredient of teachers performance One of the areas that it is widespread in the competencies environment is the one regarding to personal qualities. Qualities such as trust, motivation, courage, creativity, fairness, commitment and flexibility are expected among teachers (Tickle, 1999) but also qualities that are more holistic like spirituality, transcendence and vocation (Peterson and Seligman, 2000). Others authors such as Ofman (2000) chose a different word to talk about personal qualities, but at the end it worked as a synonymous: core qualities. Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi analyze different types of personal characteristics and say it is important not to focus on the weakness and liabilities of a person but on the good ones: the best treatment is not just fixing what is broken; it is nurturing what is best (2000, p.7). Nurturing those best personal qualities through incentives is the trend these authors agree on. Aspinwall and Staudinger (2003) talk about characters strengths, as a mechanism to sustain the good qualities among teachers. Schools should focus on strengthens those characters rather than complaining about the weak ones. Stoddard (1991) creates a concept for this approach education for greatness, where the education provided to the teachers incentives the development of great human beings who will make a contribution to the human society. In addition, the author emphasizes there are three main characteristics that a human being should nurture to become a great human being: a strong sense of self-worth, deep feelings of love and respect for all people, and an insatiable hunger for truth and knowledge (p.221). The main concern is one Korthagen addresses and pays special attention: such qualities or strengths are rarely included in official lists of teacher competencies and assessments procedures (2004, p.93). They are harder to quantify and usually left behind. At the end, one of the most important questions headmasters and people from
24
1133372]
the administration ask themselves in order to define an accurate salary and bonus scheme for the teachers is the one Steiner asks without finding and answer: How to place the vocation on the payroll? (2005, p.19). 5. Having motivated teachers Jesus and Lens affirm a common teachers complaint is the difficulty of keeping students motivated to learn in the classroom: How much more difficult is it if the teachers themselves are not motivated? (2005, p.120). Motivation is a key factor among the expected competencies of a teacher, because as Bentea and Anghelache stress work motivation is a relevant construct, both theoretical and practical, due to its association and direct implications on performances at individual and organizational levels (2012, p.563). A motivated teaching staff will have better performances that will affect positively students outcomes. Almost fifty years ago, McClelland (1965) created a model of motivation that companies and institutions are still using these days. The author suggests the school should be able of offering to the teachers the chance of fulfilling three types of needs: achievement (getting high standards, great performance and mastering of skills); affiliation (feeling part of a community, a group, cooperation and friendship); and power (to be capable of influencing in the environment, be relevant to the community). If the teacher accomplishes these three needs, it will be a motivated teacher. Other authors such as Harris and Sass (2009) said motivation is not something the school should give, rather than the person should possess. They elaborated a category of three types of teachers: (1) people with innate vocation and talent, (2) teachers who are self motivated but do not possess the technical professional skills and (3) people who chose to teach because of different reasons but motivation was not one of them. For example, sometimes the teacher is willing and motivated to perform at her best, she prepares the lesson, she is enthusiastic, but despite all her efforts the students show disinterest and they do not achieve the expected learning results. As a consequence the
25
1133372]
teacher is not longer motivated and becomes inhibited and stressed as Esteve (1992) addresses. It is important to clarify some concepts and vocabulary to make a distinction between motivation and behaviour: the term behaviour [is used] to describe a set of actions or activities undertaken by an individual. Motivation is a psychological state that is one, but only one, of the factors that may determine behaviour (Le Grand, 2003, p.25). As we can see the behaviour of a teacher will be affected by her motivation, but also by her resources, skills, abilities, etc. Motivation will be always linked with behaviour, if the teacher exerts great effort, little effort or no effort at all, the results will be the same (low expectancy of success) (Jesus and Lens, 2005, p.126). Motivation will be the motor that will affect the performance of the teacher in the classroom and because of that it is very important to pay special attention to this variable when evaluating teachers and incentive them to raise their competencies. Coming back to the question made by Korthagen (2004) what are the essential qualities of a good teacher? A good teacher who has all the competencies needed for the job and appropriate beliefs not always will show good teaching and will not behave according the expectations (Zeichner and Gore, 1990) if motivation is not present. Guarino et al. (2006) in their research showed the desire of contributing with the development of young people and make a donation to the society as the principal motivation for teachers to enter into the education field. One of the risks of having a monetary incentive is that this first motivation comes to second place. Some authors (Fehr and Schmidt, 2004, Kreps, 1997) maintain that explicit monetary incentives may remove the intrinsic motivation a teacher should have. Kadzamira (2006) suggests a monetary incentive will have a positive effect on teachers motivation only if they feel they are being unpaid from the beginning. Underpaid teachers will have low motivation and moral, by using and incentive scheme that issue may disappear. But, if the teacher feels her salary is fine, a monetary reward will not affect her motivation, because the intrinsically motivated teacher undertakes and completes professional tasks for their inherent value, as an end in itself (Jesus and Lens, 2005, p.126).
26
1133372]
As a conclusion, Bentea and Anghelache state studies have shown that teachers are motivated more intrinsic than extrinsic (2012, p.564), professors know teaching is not a well paid job and decide to become teachers because of the satisfaction of teaching students. A paper presented by Le Grand confirms altruistic behaviour exists (2003, p.38). It is possible to find teachers who will not change their mindset because of a monetary incentive. They will have an intrinsic aim to be the best teacher, just because they believe in that. At the end, why is it so important for the administration of the school to look for motivated teachers? Does it make a difference? Beyond matters like happiness, satisfaction and self-esteem; many authors (Jesus and Conboy, 2001, Mowday et al., 1984, Porter and Steers, 1973) have discovered a motivated teacher will have lower levels of absenteeism and the attrition of the school will decrease. In addition, if they have intrinsic motivation, there is a greater chance of them staying in the teaching environment (Jesus, 1996, Nuttin, 1984) and develop a long term relation with the learning path of the students. To solve the problem of motivation in advance, Dixit (2002) suggests headmasters should pay more attention on intrinsic motivation when recruiting teaching staff, because that will lighten the issue regarding to incentives on later stages. 6. Final thoughts All those competencies that have been addressed during this dissertation should be present when a teacher is starting her professional journey; however, during the years many of the teachers forget some of those competencies that made them good teachers. Jovanova-Mitkovska and Hristovska emphasize the need for lifelong learning, lifelong education is present among all people in all professions, and particularly highlights the need for continuing professional development of teachers (2011, p.573). As Jesus and Lens point out (2005) if the teacher is seeking for continuous improvement in her career, it is easy to say that teacher is a motivated teacher, and as said above, a motivated teacher will encourage students to their best and quality education will be the main aim.
27
1133372]
As Santibaez (2010) explains incentives programs not only help schools to solve aligning the aims of the administration with the aims of the teacher. They also encourage teachers to work beyond and improve their competencies one step forward of what they are being asked to do. There is a study made by The National Board of Certification Pilot Project in Iowa (Dethlefs et al., 2001) where teachers who have an incentive scheme are more engaged to get a professional development than teachers who lack an incentive scheme. The same happened in Mexico with the incentive program called Carrera Magistral: the biggest achievement of the monetary incentives was teachers have improved their professional development (Ornelas, 2002). Now, it is time to see how incentives and competencies dialogue in the Chilean environment.
B. Educational Chilean background

1. The importance of the study The Chilean government has made great efforts in making education accessible to every child; but there is a lot to be done yet in the quality of education that is being taught. There is an urgent need to improve how teachers deliver the curricular content. There is a lack of competencies among Chilean teachers (Waissbluth, 2011). As an example, curriculums must be soon adapted to the information technologies, however teachers do not have the enough skills to use technology during their lessons. Chile is nowadays a country working its way to become a developed country. Just last year Chile entered the OCDE, and in order to turn into a developed country, the most important and urgent issue to improve is education. As Mizala and Romaguera (2004) explain, in most of developing countries, such as Chile, the issue regarding to access to education has been solved, however, problems remain in terms of educational quality and the distribution of quality education among the different population segments (p. 739). That is why; one of the tactical aims associated with the development of Chile is improving the competencies level of teachers. There is a need of establishing high standards, providing innovation to the delivery of content. As Jovanova-Mitkovska and
28
1133372]
Hristovska address in their paper regarding to Macedonia reality, an educational system should provide: quality; efficiency, mobility, recognition, competence (2011, p.574). One of the methods to improve the competencies level of teachers is through incentives. The aim of the research is to figure out if the Chilean environment is ready to align those two topics and boost the educational progress. 2. The Chilean system of education As Contreras and Rau (2009) explain, the school system in Chile is organized depending on their source of funding and administration. The schemes under which schools are classified in Chile are three: (1) Public schools: which are managed and funded by the Ministry of Education. (2) Private state-subsidized or schools: the government funds these types of schools, also called Municipal Schools, and the council of the Borough assumes the administration where the schools are located. (3) Private fee-paying schools: where a private school operator provides both funding and management. The Chilean system also incorporates a voucher system, which gives families absolute freedom to choose the school they deem more suitable for their children educational needs. Chilean families can choose from one of the three above options. Either a private state-subsidized or public school; additionally they can opt for a fee- paying private school paying the difference between the tuition fee and the voucher. 3. The Chilean system of incentives In Chile exists since 1990 The National Subsidized School Performance Evaluation System (SNED), in words of Contreras and Rau the program seeks to improve teacher performance (productivity) via a monetary incentive (bonus) (2009, p.2). That is the goal the Ministry of Education was looking for [SNEDs] principal objective is to support the improvement of the quality of education delivered by the publicly funded part of [Chiles] educational system, providing incentives and recognition to teachers in higher-achieving schools (MINEDUC, 2004, p.6). However, as Contreras and Rau (2009) address, this tournament cover 90% of the schools in Chile, leaving outside private schools that are not
29
1133372]
ruled by the government, hence, they are not forced to take the evaluation. This issue was gravitating when choosing a private school for the research, because no data is available and the study would help in creating that data. The incentive is given to each school, and teachers within the school, taking into account the last students results on the national standardized test called SIMCE. The main and only criteria is the academic results of the students (Mizala and Romaguera, 2002). Each school is part of a homogenous group (demographics, size, location, etc.) and they compete with each other to win the incentive every year. Every teacher of the winning school will get a bonus despite of her particular performance and if she helped to get those students scores. The aim of the government behind the incentive scheme is having more motivated teachers, improve quality of education, and hence an increase in participant schools mean test scores (Contreras and Rau, 2009, p.3). As it was discussed in the section related to incentives, it is important to implement the incentive in a way which is difficult to achieve but not impossible: In the case of Chile, nearly half of eligible schools have never won the award after eleven years of implementation (Contreras and Rau, 2009, p.24). Mizala and Romaguera (2003) consider this award has a positive effect for those schools who have a certain probability of winning the monetary incentive. Those schools will improve and make a considerable effort to change their practices, but half of the schools without a chance of winning will remain the same and the incentive scheme will not affect their outcomes. Another issue regarding to the implementation of these types of incentives is the ceiling effect. As Carnoy et al. explain, schools with high relative test scores in the first year and again, high relative test scores on the next year, will not be benefited with this structure: their relative gain score may be low because they are near the highest possible absolute score on both tests (2007, p.201). On the other hand, the school that got a low score on the first test has a lot more room to improve on the next one and a better chance to get the incentive The SNED is the most successful system implemented in Chile, mainly because evaluates the school and teachers within the school rather than the teacher itself. There is an important difference between the subjects of evaluation, which helps the culture of
30
1133372]
Chile regarding to evaluation. In Chile it is imperative to create an evaluation culture and a culture of professional responsibility (Colegio de Profesores and MINEDUC., 1999). Chilean teachers are not used to being evaluated and most of the time feel the evaluation is unfair or stressful. This is not an issue regarding only to Chile. In general, Latin-American teachers are not used to being evaluated and avoid any type of measurement. That trend is starting to change: although teachers initially rejected evaluations and incentives payments, more recent experiences have successfully put these issues on teachers agenda and led to growing acceptance (Mizala and Romaguera, 2004, p.750). Because of this Latin-American trend, the Ministry of Education (2003) decided to change this reality and created a set of standards for competent teaching. A system that is not part of the SNED structure but it provides a framework of what it is expected. This system of competent teaching has the aim of improving the quality of teaching, and by doing that, improving education results. It is designed to stimulate teachers to further their own improvement through learning about their strengths and weakness (Avalos and Assael, 2006, p.262). The good thing about this evaluation system, allocated in the Centre for In-Service training of the Ministry of Education (Centro de perfeccionamiento, experimentacin e investigacin pedaggica), it has a formative approach rests on teachers disposition to review and improve their practice, and so student results are not used as rating criteria (Avalos and Assael, 2006, p.264). The only matter is the system has not been able to solve what should be done with those teachers who get unsatisfactory results on the test scores. It is easier and it is more widespread to use the SNED scores, that is why this formative assessment does not have the tribune the SNED has (Mizala and Romaguera, 2002).
31
1133372]
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
A. Introduction
Goldrick (2002) establishes teacher evaluation is not only a tool to measure job performance but also to give positive feedback to teachers and improve their performance during the years, also aligning that performance with the aims of the school. However, a viable evaluation system must first gain the acceptance of classroom teachers (p.7). And to gain that acceptance it is important to have clarity in both: the content and form of what is being evaluated. In this research, content was addressed in the literature review: having an understanding of the main topics, definitions, etc. Form will be addressed in this chapter: what is going to be measured, why a qualitative method was chosen, how is going to be measured the information and opinions (creation of certain templates), when is going to take place the measurement and where. With that idea behind, this chapter begins with a succinct overview of the characteristics and advantages of using a qualitative method to answer the research question. Then, it moves to the type of qualitative method selected for the research: focus group. Later on it discusses the validity of the study and its implications. Also, it covers ethics procedures. After that, there is an important section where objective two of the dissertation is answered: the creation of the template that will help to absorb and digest the opinions and discussions of each focus group. Next, sampling and the amount of participants involved in the study will be tackled. And finally, it will be addressed how the data was collected and how it was managed.
B. Qualitative Research
The school chosen to perform the study does not have an incentive scheme based on competencies. Also, it does not even exist a base or template of expected competencies for the teaching staff. This study was the first approach of the school to actually create a proper incentive scheme based on competencies. Strauss and Corbin (1990) suggest in their research, an investigator should use a qualitative approach when
32
1133372]
there is limited knowledge of the field investigated and an exploratory method is the best tactic to fill that gap. That was the main reason a qualitative method was chosen to fulfill the purposes of this investigation. There was a need of having an exploratory perspective of the subject. In addition, the same authors of above (Strauss and Corbin, 1990) claim people use this type of research to acquire detailed information on a matter that with a quantitative research is hard and almost impossible to get. That was a second reason why there was an inclination to opt to a qualitative method over a quantitative for this study. Authors such as Tooley and Darby, emphasize one of the advantages of implementing a qualitative method is the information obtained will be intense, rich, and fine-grained (1998, p.42); one of the aims of the research, is to be able to get valuable insights. Strauss and Corbin (2007) in a later paper suggest qualitative methods are the best approach to understand everything related to social behavior and cultural perspectives. This happens because according to Hoepfl (1997) using a qualitative research gives depth to the investigation. Furthermore, as Bryman explains, a qualitative research is associated with participant observation and unstructured, in-depth interviewing (1988, p.1). Besides, collecting the opinions of the teachers and the administration of the school, one of the purposes was to observe how they interacted with each other and how it affected the opinion of the colleague in their own opinion. Sometimes the opinion of the colleague is so important that people may change their view. According to Le Grand, it was important to take into consideration when applying focus groups (the qualitative method chosen) the the halo effect: people responding in the way they think they ought to respond rather than revealing their true motivation (2003, p.34). At the end a qualitative method was chosen, following the advice of Cohen et al. (2000) arguing the selected method should match and facilitate the aims and objectives of the research. In this scenario, to answer the research question of this dissertation was very relevant to be able to deeply understand the views of the school and the teachers, and to have great insights of feelings and thoughts, because it was a sensitive issue for both parties. A focus group was the best way to give them space and time to simply
33
1133372]
transmit what they believed and felt, and to collect every single detail of the conversation.
C. Focus Group the chosen method

As said before in the literature review, those competencies the teachers think are valuable are the ones they will put into action and transform into behavior, because of that reason, four focus groups were performed to check if the list of competencies the administration of the school considered as the main set of knowledge, skills and attitudes were the same ones as the teachers, and no gap would be found between what was desirable and what was put into practice. As Clark (1986) and Pajares (1992) address it is very relevant for an organisation to know their teachers beliefs because it will determine their actions inside the classroom. As it was said before, four focus groups were conducted. The first one involved participants from the administration of the school (including the headmaster and coordinators), the second one was with nursery teachers, the third one with primary teachers and the last one with secondary teachers. The longer one was the first focus group because coordinators discussed which competencies should have each type of teacher of the school; it was divided in two sessions (two Mondays afternoons of June) lasting almost four hours in total. The rest of the focus groups were conducted in a two- hour slot, on Wednesdays afternoons during the month of July.
D. Validity of the research

As Pound et al. (1995) stress there is a common conviction that the most important aim of a research is to generalize its conclusions and findings, and replicate them in different environments. That is why most investigators opt for quantitative approaches and bigger samples over qualitative and small samples to conduct their researches. However, qualitative investigations will have different types of benefits as seen above, replicability will not be one of them. It is well known a qualitative research will lack of validity compared to a quantitative one. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2000) say that is true, however it is
34
1133372]
possible to overcome that problem if the study focuses on having a better scope of the data and emphases on having depth in the research. Both ideas were introduced in the study to gain validity and to increase the richness of the findings. Despite of the efforts made to gain validity, the results from this study are not valid or transferable to Chilean schools. This study is confined/bound to a specific segment of the population since a bespoke design was made to target specific research objectives concerning that group and not the whole population. Extending these results to the rest of the schools in Chile would be a methodological error. The findings are for the use of this particular school, they maybe useful as a background and literature for further investigations, but they do not represent the Chilean reality.
E. Ethics
At the beginning of the year, the dissertation topic was submitted to Kings College London Research Ethics Committee with the aim of getting the permission to conduct this postgraduate research project in a private school in Santiago, Chile. The author followed the code of conduct of AARE Code of ethics (Association for active educational researchers). The name of the school and of every teacher who participated in the study is private information; therefore they do not appear in any chapter and/or appendices of the dissertation. Each participant of the research completed the consent form two weeks in advance of the focus group. They were informed they had the right to withdraw from the study until the beginning of the focus group, since later it would be practically impossible to isolate the data.
F. Creation of the template

The first thing to do in order to fulfill the research was to create the set of competencies the administration of the school was expecting from the teaching staff. One of the challenges of the dissertation was to create a proper template to be filled by the participants of the focus groups and to be used as a frame to initiate the discussion regarding to teachers competencies. As it was addressed in the literature review, there
35
1133372]
are many lists of competencies as authors willing to investigate the matter. As an example, Cruickshank and Haefele (2001) analyzed plenty of historic tendencies and ended up creating a list of competencies ranging from communicative skills to mastering the subject. The idea of the template was to replicate the successful study made by Brockmann, Clarke and Winch (2010) in their research Bricklaying is more than Flemish bond. They came up with a template that helped them mapping the qualifications and skills needed and expected in the bricklaying industry. One of the aims was to: Develop a framework for the comparative assessment of bricklaying qualifications (p. 7). The first draft of the template for this study was created using the nomenclature and classifications of the Table 11 (p. 21) of the research: Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Knowledge It was relevant, for the purposes of the focus group and to guide the participants, to divide the competencies expected in the teaching staff between those competencies related to the job description and those inherent in the human being. The school was very keen on giving incentives in both areas, as they thought they worked together in helping the learning process of the students. Along with the Bricklaying Research, inputs were taken from the investigation made by Odden and Kelley (1997). In their work, competencies were divided in three main categories. The first category was having competencies inside the classroom: everything related to mastering the classroom, preparing lessons, knowledge of the subject, etc. The second one was related to competencies related to education but not to the subject itself, like evaluation, curriculum, innovation, creativity, etc. The last one was related to having competencies in leadership and administration skills. Personal Competence remained the same as the Bricklaying project. However, Occupational Competence was split in three categories to address the insights of the Know How Personal Competence Social Competence Self-Competence
36
1133372]
Odden and Kelleys work. The first category was systematic knowledge that answered specific knowledge for that position. The second one was procedural knowledge; it was related to practical, know/how knowledge that it is useful for a certain position. The last one was local knowledge, it was related to mastering competencies that would help the work of the teacher inside the classroom and outside, but they were not totally related to the position itself. Social Competence it was related to characteristics of the teachers within her environment and Self-Competence addressed characteristics of the personality of the teacher. At the end, both investigations were combined to create the template that would be filled by the participants of the focus group: Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Systematic Knowledge Procedural Knowledge Local Knowledge Personal Competence Social Competencies Self-Competence
G. Sample
The school has almost seven hundred students from Nursery school to Secondary school (from two years to eighteen years old). There are one hundred and sixty students in Nursery, two hundred and forty-five students in Primary and two hundred and ninety- three students in Secondary. Each year has two levels, and each class has in average twenty-five students. To fulfill the needs of these students, the school has eighty-two teachers: seventeen in Nursery, twenty-eight in Primary and thirty-seven in Secondary. It was practically impossible to interview every single teacher of the school, not because of willingness but because of agendas complications. Because of that, it was decided to do an open sampling, inviting every single teacher of the school to participate in the focus group scheduled for each level. Eight nursery teachers showed up for the Nursery Focus Group, twenty-four teachers for the Primary Focus Group and nineteen for the Secondary Group.
37
1133372]
In the focus group done to the administration staff, no sampling was done. The headmaster wanted to have full assistance and it was not difficult to achieve that because the focus group was performed during their Monday weekly meetings. Eight people participated: The headmaster, two psychologists, two inspectors, the nursery coordinator, the primary coordinator and the secondary coordinator.
H. Data Collection and Management

The focus group interviews had to sections. The first section lasted half an hour and the second part an hour and a half. First, the empty template was projected in a screen and the author of the study was in charge of writing down what the teachers started to say out loud, what they thought it should appear on each column, without giving any clue in advance. No explanation was given with the idea of not forcing answers. In the Appendices A and B there are the transcripts of this first section, in Spanish and English respectively. After this brainstorming, a second section of the focus group took place. It was an open conversation between the participants, guided by the investigator with open questions. Questions asked to the administration and to the teachers were not identical because they followed the pace of the discussion. In the Appendix C there is a list of the type of questions made to the participants of the study. The second part of the focus group was recorded for further analysis. Only the investigator had access to the recordings.
38
1133372]
CHAPTER 4: FOCUS GROUP

A. Introduction
This chapter provides the evidences and the conversation that took place during the focus groups. As said in the Introduction and in the Methodology, four focus groups were accomplished as a tool to get insights and valuable information from the community of the private school, with the final goal of answering the research question. In this chapter objective three and four of the dissertation will be answered. First, there will be an overview of the focus group performed to the administration of the school (headmaster, inspectors, psychologists and coordinators), with the aim of mapping the set of competencies that the administration is expecting on the teaching staff. Secondly, there will be a transcription of the opinions and information given by the teaching staff, with the objective of mapping the set of competencies the teaching staff of the school think they should possess and/or develop to achieve the parameters set by the administration. More information of the competencies is available in Appendix B (The set of competencies are arranged in alphabetical order). The Focus Groups took place during the months of June and July of 2012. The first one occurred in June, it was the administration one, but because they had to analyze each level (Nursery, Primary and Secondary), it was not possible to finish it in one session and it took two Mondays of June to carry out this first part of the qualitative research. It last almost four hours in total. In both sessions the headmaster always waited at the end to give her opinion of the matter with the objective of avoiding interference in the opinions of the rest of the participants. The second focus group was with the teachers of the Nursery level, and was performed the first Wednesday of July; forty seven percent of assistance was achieved. Among the reasons given by the teachers who did not attend that focus group were: maternity leave, sickness, class duties and meetings with parents. The third focus group took place the second Wednesday of July with the Primary teachers, reaching eighty-five percent of attendance, which was a major success for the research objectives. Only four teachers did not attend because they were in charge of
39
1133372]
students during the time slot of the focus group. Finally, the Secondary focus group was performed the last Wednesday of July, completing fifty-one percent of assistance. The main reason of missing the focus group was because some teachers were attending a seminar outside the school. One last point it is relevant to tackle was the difference between each focus group regarding where to label each competence. It was de noted that sometimes a competence was placed in one column and in other times was placed in a totally different one. As an example, for some teachers proficiency in a foreign language was considered a systematic knowledge and for others it was considered local knowledge.
B. Administration Focus Group

As said before, the administration Focus Group took place in two sessions. In the first session, participants filled the template (the second session was for discussion). It was one template for the three profiles (Nursery, Primary and Secondary), however it was addressed orally when a characteristic was meant for a specific group and when it was a transversal competence for every profile. After the session it was possible to create a template for each profile. Below, it is an aggregated summary of the competencies expected in each category. For further analysis and to appreciate disaggregated information see Appendix B.
1. Systematic knowledge: Management of educational programmes; adaptation of teaching and learning strategies; create set of structures and stimulate learning environment; professional teacher degree; scheduling of classes using learning methodologies; expertise in the area; schools regulation, management and processes, particularly the code of conduct; knowledge of Special Educational Needs (SEN); ability to make curricular adaptations for SEN students; use of innovative teaching skills.
40
1133372]
2. Procedural knowledge: Computer literacy; working knowledge of at least the Internet and MS PowerPoint; use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT); application of correct criteria to teach different cognitive level of students; use of social networks: E- mail, PowerPoint, interactive blackboard, educational software, etc.; group management; first aids; been capable of keeping order in the classroom. 3. Local knowledge: Basic mathematical knowledge; care, at all times, for safety and security of the pupils; cultural knowledge; good grammar and orthography; knowledge and training in emergency situations (fire, earthquakes, etc.); knowledge of the schools regulation, particularly its code of conduct; proficiency of a foreign language, particularly English; writing skills; emotional intelligence; psychological stability.
4. Social competencies: Conflict management; decision-making capabilities; educational leadership; emotional intelligence; empathy; good communicator; good management of teacher- parent relationships; solidarity; team work; commitment with the school and students; Interpersonal skills; motivation; tolerance; optimistic. 5. Self-Competence: Autonomous; creative; curious; flexible; joyful; reflexive; responsible; continuous improvement; punctual; self-governed; transcendent view of life; result oriented.
C. Nursery Focus Group

Following, there is a summary of the insights taken from the Nursery Focus Group. 1. Systematic knowledge: Teaching degree; basic knowledge of teaching contents; characteristics of child development for children aged 84 days to 6 years old; knowing of curricular basis; mathematics and language teaching methodologies; scheduling skills; proficiency in English as a foreign language; knowledge of age challenges for different subjects; knowledge in Special Educational Needs.
41
1133372]
2. Procedural knowledge: Being able to graduate the content; play a musical instrument; how to tell a fairy tale; first aids; scheduling the lessons; artistic skills; computer literacy; singing skills; use of smartboard; working level of information and communications technologies. 3. Local knowledge: Orthography; language; wide spectrum of vocabulary; interactive screen; biology (children ask about the human body); how to teach values (respect, tolerance, friendship, etc.); culture (national and international news); math and language skills. 4. Social competencies: Group dominium; empathy; charisma; conflict management; cooperation; leadership; solidarity; teamwork. 5. Self-Competence: No being ashamed; healthy; punctuality; assertiveness; communication skills; creativeness; motivational skills; patience; responsibility; structured; teaching calling.
D. Primary Focus Group

Following, there is a summary of the insights taken from the Primary Focus Group. 1. Systematic knowledge: Knowledge of the subject from Pre School until High School, specially math and language; knowledge of Inclusion; psychology; ability to make curricular adaptations for SEN students; knowledge of methodology, evaluation and curriculum; schools regulation, particularly the code of conduct; teaching up-to-date contents; cognitive skills; English proficiency; teaching degree. 2. Procedural knowledge: First Aids; knowledge of teaching methodologies; knowledge of international trends; ICT knowledge; how to prepare and teach a lesson; creation of pedagogic content (tests, guides, etc.); management of the pace and volume of a lesson.
42
1133372]
3. Local knowledge: Word and Power point; interactive screen; Cultural knowledge; Artistic skills; Good reader; Decision maker; Orthography and grammar; Knowledge of evaluation metrics 4. Social competencies: Mediator; learn how to deal with parents (mails, meetings); outgoing, personality to speak to public; Humble; good manners; observation and deduction capacities; charisma; commitment; cooperative; empathy; flexibility; leadership; motivation; sociability; solidarity; tolerance; teamwork; wide use of vocabulary. 5. Self-Competence: Healthy; being able to work under pressure; strict; teacher calling; open to differences; joyful; tough; capable of receiving criticism; commitment; creativity; fun; enthusiastic; balanced; inclusiveness; patience; punctual; perfectionist; responsibility; healthy; teaching calling.
E. Secondary Focus Group

Following, there is a summary of the insights taken from the Secondary Focus Group. 1. Systematic knowledge: Having a degree in pedagogy awarded by a competent institution plus a degree in a specific content (History, Art, Language, etc.); continuous improvement; discipline; integration and inclusion; knowledge of the lecture contents; methodology application; proficiency in English; proper use of language; psychology; technical knowledge; updated knowledge of curricular contents. 2. Procedural knowledge: First Aids; how to implement the rules of the school (discipline); able to explain the same idea in different ways; class scheduling tools; creation of evaluation instruments; good lecture time planning; good writing skills; integration of the evaluation in the learning process; interactive blackboard use; MS Office suite working knowledge; observe test and assignment correction times; punctuality.
43
1133372]
3. Local knowledge: Technology, orthography, English as a facilitator to prepare lessons; math (percentages, graphics, etc.) and language skills; common sense; computer literacy; create an environment of respect; discipline; good communication skills; good reading skills; good writing skills; group management; knowledge of administrative procedures; use of technologies that aid in the learning process; use of transversal strategies that are transferable to other subjects; values; wide use of vocabulary. 4. Social competencies: Talk in public (to parents); empathy; proactive; conflict management; entrepreneurial; face challenges; flexible; good communication skills; good listener skills; joyful; interpersonal skills; group management; leadership; loyal and helpful; open to critique; maintain close relationships with parents and students; optimistic; patience; respect; teamwork. 5. Self-Competence: Righteous; intrinsic motivation; acknowledge errors; assertiveness; aware of current affairs; caring; charismatic; efficient; kind; perseverance; proactive; punctual; respectful; responsible; structured; teaching calling; tolerant; transversal.
44
1133372]
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

A. Introduction
In this chapter it is addressed each topic or relevant matter of the discussion that
took place on every focus group. The information provided was taken from both sections of the focus group: filling the template and the open conversation. The chapter is not divided by focus groups, but by topic. Some themes were present on every focus group, some only in one. There is no particular order; the effort was to maintain the chronological order of every round table. Because of the chronological variable, the first topics are related to competencies and skills and the last ones to incentive schemes. It is important to clarify that the chapter does not start with the most important topics and finishes with the less important ones. The most essential aim of this chapter it is to be able to answer if the discussion and conversation that took place in the administration is aligned with the one that took place in the teaching staff. In addition, it is important to answer if it is possible to use an incentive scheme to raise competencies among teachers. That was the last question made to every group in the open session and the one that got more valuable insights.
B. Identifying the set of competencies for each group

In general terms, the set of competencies expected from the administration are the same the teaching staff consider any teacher must have. Even more, teachers were more strict and detailed when establishing competencies than the coordinators. The administration stayed in general terms and asked less from the teachers than what the teachers expected from themselves. Even more, teachers were emphatic when saying the school should not hire teachers who did not possess the detailed list. Also, they believed it was not fair to have differences among competencies if the salaries stayed more or less the same. One Primary teacher held: For example, I have a diploma and studied how to deal with students with special educational needs, I should get a better salary or at least a bonus. This school has inclusion and there are teachers here that are not prepared for
45
1133372]
that endeavour. A Secondary teacher went beyond emphasizing: the school should not hire teachers who are not prepared for an inclusion environment, or at least an induction programme should be done when starting the academic year. The administration was less severe when talking about competencies regarding to inclusion. They argued there was not enough depth on the job market to find prepared teachers it was almost utopic. They believed teachers could learn on the job if they had the willingness and the aptitudes to do so. Examples like the one mentioned above will be presented in this chapter to show the differences between the perceptions of the teaching staff and the administration regarding to competencies.
C. Knowledge of the subject

One of the first findings of this study was when teachers and administrators started filling the column Systematic Knowledge of the template. Unlike the research made by Rusu et al. (2012), during the focus group the topic knowledge of the subject was something taken from granted from most teachers. Just a few of them, after a couple of minutes of discussion, commented the importance of knowing the subject being taught as one of the most important competencies. For them it was more important having a degree accepted by the Ministry of Education of Chile, the formality of the degree over the knowledge itself. Teachers believed the knowledge of the subject was linked with the undergraduate degree of pedagogy. However, the administration did not put much emphasis on the degree but into the proficiency of the subject. The undergraduate degree came second. Teachers said school should not hire people without the title approved by the Ministry of Education, mainly because of union issues. One coordinator said titles (undergraduate and postgraduate) were not as important as the knowledge itself and the eager to learn. Rivkin et al. (1998) agree with this statement; in a study performed by the authors in Texas, showed there were no evidence that obtaining a master degree improved teaching quality and teaching skills. The main problem is that in many countries, including Chile, the teaching degree is divided in two types of knowledge: the subject itself (History, Math, Language) and how
46
1133372]
to teach that subject or what it is called pedagogy. They are in the same sack when arguing about having or not having a teaching degree. The first type of knowledge is easy to measure it is not hard to determine if the person has or lack that knowledge. However having proficiency in pedagogy is a little more difficult to evaluate. Some people argue: you must study pedagogy, is not a talent you are born with, like a Nursery Teacher said. Some believe knowing how to teach is inherent and even though a person studies and studies, if she/he does not have the teaching talent will not succeed as a teacher. Because of that, a teaching degree would not solve question whether the pedagogy knowledge is present or absent.
D. The importance of Inclusive education

The private school of the research is an inclusive school, understanding this type of teaching and learning as inclusive education is the attempt to educate persons with intellectual disabilities by integrating them as closely as possible into the normal structures of the educational system (Michailakis and Reich, 2009, p.24). Regular teachers, with the pedagogy undergraduate degree, are in charge of teaching the entire classroom of twenty-five students (among them one has a severe disability and four will need content adaptations from the teachers to follow the pace of the lesson). Because of this reality, this particular school requires teachers with knowledge in special educational needs in the staff. In the essay of Jovanova-Mitkovska and Hristovska, one of the competencies that is mandatory for an European Teacher is to have knowledge and skills to enhance the learning of those students who have problems/barriers to learning, including those who need support in certain curricula areas as well as those with emotional and behavioral problems (2011, p.576), something that it is clearly lacking in the Chilean Educational system. Teachers do not have that competence; they learn how to deal with students with special educational needs during day-to-day experiences. On every focus group it was impressive the opinion of the teachers regarding to the curriculum of the pedagogy degree which lack of training in inclusion. Only one Primary teacher said: I had in my university a module of SEN, but it was an optative
47
1133372]
module and I only took it because of scheduling. I did not know back then I was going to work in an inclusive school, so I did not pay much attention during the lessons. Teachers complained about the university system which did not prepare them well enough: They teach you all the time how to teach a regular student, a regular classroom, but the reality is different. If you are not flexible and capable of doing some adaptations you will suffer as a teacher, pointed out a Secondary teacher. The administration said the school has plenty of people and experts specialized in special educational needs (psychologists, therapists, special teachers, assistants, etc.), however the teacher in charge of the class is a teacher that arrives to the school without the competencies and has to learn during the academic year how to deal with these students. The headmaster held it was very hard, almost impossible, to find teachers with SEN competencies in the labor market. They opt to hire regular teachers and then train them inside the school: As long as the universities do not change their curriculum, it will be our job to prepare teachers for this endeavour. We send teachers to seminars, congress; we provide them with experts on the field. We try to do our best to fill the gap the university years left in our teachers, affirmed the headmaster. It was unanimous among teachers they would love to improve this competence and they do not need an incentive scheme to raise this competence, they only need the opportunity because they are already motivated. As an idea, they said the school should do an induction programme to every new hired teacher. In addition, they value the efforts made by the school when they get the chance to go to seminars and congress related to this field. There is an eagerness of improving this skill, and they would take any input they receive in order to feel they are better prepared for the day to day.
E. Literacy and numeracy skills

There was plenty discussion in this topic, because the administration of the school had recently applied (in May) a literacy test to every single teacher of the school. It was a test created by the Language Department of the school and teachers had to get over eight percent of achievement to approve the test, otherwise, they would have to re take the test in November. Forty-six percent of the teaching staff approved the test. Thirty-
48
1133372]
eight percent got sufficient but have to re take the test; and eight percent failed. This last group had to take language lessons after classes if they wanted to continue in the school for the next academic year. It was the first time the administration of the school made a clear statement regarding to this competence. They will expect excellent orthography, grammar and reading comprehension from the teaching staff. During the focus group, there were people who believe literacy was a must, especially teachers from the Primary group: we are teaching students how to read and write, it would be simple unacceptable if we did not have this competence, said a primary teacher. Another one went even beyond: The school should not give any type of incentive in this arena, a teacher who does not know how to read and write, should not be a teacher in the first place. In the Nursery Group, teachers said it was desirable to have literacy skills, but it was not the most important thing, because nursery students do not read and write yet. However, one nursery teacher made a point by saying: Our students do not write, but parents do, so every time you write a note for them, they are evaluating us. Grammar and orthography is about our image as teachers. In the Secondary Group they said it was required not only to have literacy skills but to have numeracy skills as well. Like Waterreus says to improve teacher quality England has recently introduced skills tests on literacy and numeracy in the final year of initial teacher training (2003, p.65). They argued the test was a great step, but the school should have done a numeracy test as well. Besides grammar, a secondary teacher should be able to do basic math, nevertheless the subject she is proficient at, claimed an Art Secondary teacher. By basic math they understood: calculating percentages, averages, sums, subtractions, multiplications and divisions.
F. Foreign language, having proficiency in English

In the essay of Jovanova-Mitkovska and Hristovska, the knowledge of at least one
foreign language (2011, p.576), it is a must between teachers. In the Chilean environment being proficient in a second language is a competence that is far away from mandatory. If the school wants to have bilingual teachers, an incentive scheme is a good
49
1133372]
solution to foster that objective. And this school wants to have teachers proficient at English, so it was one of the competencies that was very analyzed to see if it was possible to raise it through and incentive scheme. There were many differences between each group. One thing that is important to mention is that in every focus group of the teaching staff, English was a relevant competence; however in the administration focus group of Primary and Secondary teachers, the English competence did not appear. This difference has a simple explanation: both coordinators from Primary and Secondary lack of English skills, so it was harder for them to ask in their teachers a competence they did not possess. Quite contrary with the Nursery coordinator, she is proficient in English and did a lot of emphasis on improving the level of English among their nursery teachers. In addition, it was a discussion between using English as a tool to prepare classes and using English to actually interact with students. Because this school is not a bilingual one, the first approach was the one that got more followers. English language is totally linked with the access to technology. I dont use English in my math class, but I use it to search on the web for resources, said a Secondary Math Teacher. On the other hand, a Secondary History teacher said: It is easy for you, because science resources dont change much from one language to the other, a math exercise looks the same in any language. However, to transform a history exercise from English to Spanish it is a lot of work and time, time I dont have. As a conclusion, teachers are willing to improve their level of English, some gladly will do it for the seek of learning and are willing to spend Saturdays mornings in lessons, and others will need the carrot to make that extra effort. English, it is actually a competence that could be raised through an incentive scheme.
G. Technology: an important tool for the teacher

The word technology it is a wide word and it was hard to define during the focus groups. Some people said being proficient in technology was the capacity of using word, emails, power point and excel to prepare classes: You cant tell if the teacher doesnt know how to use excel, but you can tell if she doesnt know how to use word or power
50
1133372]
point, one stressed. Others said it was the capability of using technology in every lesson (Internet, YouTube, emails, interactive screen, cell phones, Microsoft office, etc.). The last group said it was the capacity of being innovative at all times and being one step ahead of students. What everybody agreed, technology was an important help to be more efficient and more creative. However, they felt they lack skills in this arena and the school did not offer sufficient space to improve. One Secondary Teacher said: They expect you manage excel, the interactive screen, but with they day to day activity there is no enough time to learn how to use this technology. Another professor debated saying: It is not about time, these days you must know how to use technology, and the school does not have the responsibility to give you that time, it is up to you. Almost half of the teachers in the Secondary focus group agreed with the statement proficiency in technology should be taken for granted, a good teacher should be able to use it and feel comfortable. The other half thought it was something desirable but not mandatory; and if the school wanted to have teachers competent in technology they should offer an incentive and a motivated class to go. In the university I had a computer class but the content I was taught it was much lower than what I already knew, said a Secondary Teacher. One coordinator in the Administration focus group said: We have been offering classes so they can learn how to use the interactive screen, but nobody shows up, unless we offer a reward it is going to be hard to attract teachers. Like English, Technology showed up to be a competence that could be raised through incentives.
H. Leadership of the teacher

Among the soft skills presented in the report, leadership was by far the most commented one. They said they must be leaders inside the class, but also they must be leaders with the parents. The main issue is you learn in your college years how to treat students not adults, said a Secondary teacher; and a Primary teacher added: Years ago a teachers word was the rule, now, parents demand things and question every decision you make. Leadership involved having competencies in communication skills, group
51
1133372]
management, teamwork, among others; and that is why the administration of the school made an emphasis on having confident teachers in the payroll.
I. Motivation and vocation, having teaching calling

One of the topics that it was strongly debated on each focus group was the importance of being motivated and having a strong vocation for teaching. It was a general consensus that a teacher should always have an intrinsic motivation to teach and that motivation should not depend or rely on salary and other objectives. The main motivation should be student-learning achievement. All of them believed teaching was not by far the best-paid job, and everybody agreed they knew that before getting to university. A male Primary Math professor said: I was eighteen and told my mom I wanted to be a Math teacher, and she said to me I will end up single because It was impossible to support a family with a teacher income. Another teacher replied: So, If you know that in advance, you must have vocation for teaching, otherwise, why bother? At the end, it was unanimous all of them were motivated and happy in their jobs. As Kadzamira (2006) says in his paper about teacher job satisfaction and motivation in Malawi, teachers from private schools tend to have a higher levels of motivation and satisfaction because of a better environment: smaller class sizes, close supervision by management and proprietors and, to some extent, the availability of resources which helps to reduces work-related stress arising from conditions of the work environment (p.2-3). A study called The Project on Incentives in Teaching (POINT) led by Vanderbilt Peabody College in Nashville was a three-year project where teachers were paid and rewarded if the test scores of students increased. Among the conclusions of the experience was, more than 80 percent of treatment group teachers agreed with the statement: I was already working as effectively as I could before the implementation of POINT, so the experiment will not affect my work (Springer et al., 2010, p.38). At the end it is impossible to face the day to day if you are not motivated, a teacher without motivation is not a teacher, concluded a Nursery motivated teacher.
52
1133372]
J. Definitions, the first step to establish an incentive scheme

Goldrick (2002) establishes to improve teacher evaluation of competencies it is mandatory to define first what do we understand by teacher quality. Klerman (2005) determines it has to be a clear and known definition of the outputs. That definition must be accepted for both parties (administration and school teachers). There are wide examples from the field of economics and business, where incentive schemes work because everything is well defined from the start: Lazear (2000) and the productivity of workers assembling car windshields and Paarsch and Shearer (2000) with the investigation of planting trees. The first thing a Secondary teacher asked when starting the focus group was: What did the administration say about quality? What they expect from us? It was interesting teachers wanted to know what the administration thought before answering what they believed. A Primary teacher added: We dont get to choose the definitions, that role belongs to our bosses. It was a common sense they do not take part of the process of creating those definitions of quality, but accepting the ones the school provides: I mean, if you dont like what the school believes, you can find a job in some place else, nobody is forcing you to stay, said emphatically a Nursery teacher. At the end, each group agreed they do not take part on delimiting the definitions, however they intrinsically accept them by staying in the school. The alignment of the definitions is one- way: the school announces what they are expecting of a teacher and the teacher accepts that definition. One of the best ways the administration of the school has to announce what they believe are the most valuable characteristics is through incentives schemes, as Goodman and Turner point out: Properly structured pay schemes align the interests of workers and employers, provide information about the most valued aspects of an employees job, and motivate workers to provide costly effort (2010, p.2). A complementary way the administration has to express what they expected from the teaching staff is though the evaluation process. As Goldrick expresses: evaluation is the process by which teachers are assessed professionally (2002, p.3). And as Avalos and Assael explain, the key for a good evaluation scheme is how well the evaluation criteria
53
1133372]
match the kind of evidence that is brought to bear on the process (2006, p.258). This last point is what the administration of the school has been working in the pass years. This school has been evaluating their teachers from more than fifteen years, always improving the methodology applied. Nowadays they have half-year evaluations, where the direct coordinator of the teacher evaluates the performance of the teacher. In addition a survey is conducted to the students who get the chance of expressing what they feel about the performance of teachers. A colleague evaluation is under consideration to complete the circle and create a 360 grades evaluation. During the focus groups, the system of evaluation the school has was discussed. The general opinion was they liked being evaluated, opposite of what had shown the literature review regarding to the reluctance of teachers to be bound to an evaluation process. One of the Secondary teachers said: I do like my half-term evaluation because I get the chance to improve for the next semester, and it is always nice to receive a good feedback when you are doing things right. However, a Nursery Teacher pointed out she did not like when she is being told what she is doing wrong but no feedback on how to improve her performance, it has to be a constructive evaluation, otherwise you loose motivation on your work, she addressed. In conclusion, teachers know and accept that definitions are provided by the administration of the school, through the evaluation process and though the vision and aim of the school. However, they say in order to accept those definitions and align their objectives with the objectives of the school, a constructive feedback must take place on each assessment. If the school is asking the teaching staff to change and/or to improve in any area it has to have a solid reason behind and it has to be addressed in a proper way. In addition, they said it was even better to get an incentive if the feedback was exceptionally positive. They are happy with the evaluation system, but they think it could improve much more if an incentive scheme is attached to the process. Although, not any incentive, they argued it has to be a proper system with clarity in every step of the way.
K. Clarity of the incentive

Many of the teachers on every focus group said they rather lack of an incentive
54
1133372]
program if the scheme is not accurate and well implemented. They will enjoy of participating in an incentive scheme if the objectives, the indicators and the terms are well defined. One Primary teacher said: In this school there is a great atmosphere among teachers, I am scared of getting into a race if the incentive is not well organized. Santibaez (2010) agrees on this topic, if it is correctly implemented it will actually help the productivity of the entire school: In theory, if the incentive program is well designed, it will tend to discourage teachers who are not as productive from remaining in the system and will tend to encourage more productive teachers to do so (2010, p.483). This point made by Santibaez was source of debate in the Secondary focus group. Some teachers argued incentives should work only as a source of rewarding great performances and other teachers agreed with Santibaez saying evaluation and incentives should work as a way of rewarding and also as a parameter to filter those teachers who lack the required competencies. Another issue it is important to state is the one made by Mizala and Romaguera (2002), teachers must feel the system is fair: the school is comparing teachers and performances that are comparable from each other and not creating advantages to a certain cluster of teachers. This was one of the main apprehensiveness of some teachers. A Nursery Teacher commented: It has to be an incentive to everybody, and not a bonus that you know in advance you will not get it, and your colleague will get it for sure. A Primary teacher added: If the school is going to reward the level of English of a teacher, it should be the effort or the improvement made during a period and not the absolute level of the foreign language. Otherwise, the same teacher will get that bonus over a over. Concluding, a Secondary teacher said: In general terms I can tell you, if you put me money at the end of the road I will do my best to get it, but if I know from the start I will not get it, I will not make an effort to participate. This affirmation is almost intuitive; people tend to work better if they know they will be rewarded at the end of the day. However, many incentive programs in education often fail to reach their intended goals. Most authors attribute these failures to both design and implementation factors (Santibaez, 2010, p.484). Implementation will be the challenge this private school will face, if they decide to implement an incentive scheme after this study.
55
1133372]
L. Type of incentive
As Morduchowicz (2002), Brandt (1990) and Malen et al. (1988) summarize, there are four types of incentive programs: merit pay, promotions, payment for teachers performance and group incentives. This school chose payment for competencies because it was the one that suit best according to their needs. However, it was undisputed among teachers that the best incentive was first public recognition within the school. After the recognition they preferred monetary incentives (could be cash, trips, notebooks, iPads, etc.) rather than career development. They enjoy being teachers and they knew that being promoted within the school meant having more administrative work and less on the fieldwork. As Malen, Murphy and Hart (1988) emphasize, in many cases best teachers abandon teaching and start in administrative work. They were very good at teaching, but not always good at administrating. As Waterreus claims good managers may not always be good teachers or vice versa (2003, p.21). In a small school, such as the one used for the purpose of this research, the hierarchy is very flat with no enough room to offer career development within the school. There are eighty-two teachers (divided in nursery, primary and secondary departments) and one coordinator for each department. Each coordinator reports to the headmaster. Because of this horizontal organization chart it is so important to create a set of incentives that does not rely on promotions.
M. Years of experience v/s performance

In the United States, at the beginning of the twentieth century, merit pay and not years of experience pay was the popular method (Murnane and Cohen, 1986). However it did not last much and decayed. Since 2000, merit pay is back on track and gaining followers (Ballou, 2001). In this research, just one of the total of teachers interviewed said bonus should be based on seniority and years of experience rather than performance and competencies. Many authors (Hanushek, 1996, Lavy, 2007, Murnane and Cohen, 1986) have argued that paying based on tenure does not incite superior performance among teachers.
56
1133372]
In Chile, the salary structure of public schools is determined by years of experience. The salary it is calculated without taking into account the performance of the teacher and the quality of her lessons (Mizala and Romaguera, 2002). Something that Liang (1999) said it was a common denominator in Latin-American countries, is there is a lack of differentiation in the salary of teachers with better curriculum, performance and competencies. The only indicator for salaries increases is the loyalty of that teacher to the school (years of employment) rather than how that teacher is performing. Teachers are generally paid accordingly to levels of education and years of experience, usually regardless of student learning results (Carnoy et al., 2007, p.190), or even less accordingly to their own competencies. Glewwe et al. agree with the above authors: Teachers salaries depend primarily on education and experience. There is little opportunity for performance-based promotion or increases to salary (2003, p.8). Coming back to the POINT project mentioned above, POINT participants were generally supportive of the idea that more effective teachers should be paid more than less effective teachers (Springer et al., 2010, p.37). In this private school that was actually the evidence, most of them agreed with this affirmation. And the administration agreed with the idea of paying performance and not seniority. Creating and incentive scheme takes for granted that affirmation.
57
1133372]
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION
In this final chapter objective six (develop a set of competencies for this particular school using the data collected in the focus groups) and objective seven (answer the research question, analyzing if it is possible to apply an incentive scheme to raise some of the competencies settled in objective six) will be answered. The first one will be addressed in the section A through a list of the most important competencies found during the study. The second objective will be tackled in section B.
A. Expected set of competencies

Based on the bearing results, it is possible to conclude that among the three categories of teachers and the insights provided by the Administration, there are central key competencies that appeared on each focus group. In addition, participants said some competencies were more relevant than others and that hierarchy should be addressed. Below, there is a list that was created keeping the grading obtained from the conversations with the teachers. It is a general list for every teacher of the school, not a customized one for each category of teachers. Because of that, there will be some of them that may change hierarchy regarding to the group involved. For example, Artistic competencies, such as playing an instrument, ability to draw and to sing will be at the bottom for a Secondary Teacher but will be almost first place for a Nursery Teacher. In general terms, the list of competencies graded and obtained from the study contains thirty statements that are expected in the entire teaching staff of the school. They are the following ones: 1. Having a teaching degree (Systematic Knowledge) 2. Having updated knowledge in the field (Systematic Knowledge) 3. Ability to communicate written and orally in Spanish (Local Knowledge) 4. Having critical thinking (Systematic Knowledge) 5. Being a Leader and being able to work in teams (Social Competence) 6. Empathy, charisma and solidarity (Social Competence)
58
1133372]
7. Knowledge in psychology and the ability to implement that knowledge inside the classroom (Systematic and Procedural Knowledge) 8. Knowledge of Special Educational Needs and ability to make curricular adaptations for SEN students (Systematic and Procedural Knowledge) 9. Flexibility and imagination to implement the curriculum inside the lesson, using innovative teaching skills (Procedural Knowledge) 10. Computer literacy: knowledge of basic technology such as Internet, MS PowerPoint, E-mail, interactive smartboard, MS word, MS excel and the ability to use them during the lesson and for planning purposes (Local Knowledge) 11. Systematic knowledge of the proper field: Arts, Music, Mathematics, etc. (Systematic Knowledge) 12. Proficiency in English, being able to use the foreign language to prepare lessons and search for resources, and basic communicative skills (Local Knowledge) 13. First Aids knowledge and what to do in case of emergency: Fire, earthquake, etc. (Procedural knowledge) 14. Numeracy skills, being able to do basic math: averages, percentages, etc. (Local Knowledge) 15. Management of educational programmes provided by the Ministry of Education (Systematic Knowledge) 16. Scheduling of classes using learning methodologies and (Procedural Knowledge) 17. Keeping the pace and volume of the lesson according to what was planned (Procedural Knowledge) 18. Knowledge of the schools regulation, particularly its code of conduct and being able to implement it accordingly (Systematic and Procedural Knowledge) 19. Being able to positive interact with students, colleagues and parents (Social Competence) 20. Being capable of managing conflict and working as mediator (Social Competence) 21. Knowledge of characteristics of child development for children aged 84 days to 18 years old (Systematic Knowledge)
59
1133372]
22. Being capable of creating of pedagogic content such as: tests, guides, power points etc. (Procedural Knowledge) 23. Knowledge of evaluation metrics and instruments (Local Knowledge) 24. Artistic competencies, such as playing an instrument, ability to draw and to sing (Local Knowledge) 25. Knowledge of basic biology, how the human body works (Local Knowledge) 26. Capability of using a wide spectrum of vocabulary (Local Knowledge) 27. Observation and deduction capacities (Social Competence) 28. Eager of continuous improvement (Local Knowledge) 29. Capacity of explaining the same idea in different ways (Procedural Knowledge) 30. Knowledge of administrative procedures (Local Knowledge) It was a common opinion that it was difficult to make a hierarchy of the competencies and skills obtained from the column Self-Competence. The Headmaster said: The competencies of that column are characteristics you always expect from every teacher, the other columns show competencies you can work and improve during the academic year. The Self-competencies are the mattress holding the rest of the columns. Because of that, in the list does not appear characteristics from the last column. As an example, a Secondary Teacher said during the focus group: Teaching calling is not something you can work on, either you have it or you dont, it is impossible to train it. Teaching calling is a characteristic from the Self-Competence column. It is a very important issue and every teacher should possess that call, that intrinsic motivation as it was addressed in the Chapter 5; however it does not appear in the list created above. There are two main reasons why they do not appear in the list. The first one is the reason the headmaster said: they are intrinsic characteristics of the person. The second reason is linked with the first one: because you expect them they are hard to measure and it is difficult to create a concrete indicator for them. However, it is important to take them into account when evaluating teachers. Because of this matter a list of self-competencies was created and it will work as this mattress that will secure the list created above.
60
1133372]
List of Self-Competencies Autonomous, aware of current affairs, balanced, being able to work under pressure, capable of receiving criticism, caring, committed, creative, curious, charismatic, efficient, enthusiastic, entrepreneurial, flexible, funny, good listener, healthy, inclusive, joyful, kind, loyal, no being ashamed, open to differences, patient, perfectionist, perseverant, proactive, punctual, reflexive, respectful, responsible, result oriented, righteous, self-governed, strict, structured, tolerant, transversal, tough, with transcendental view of life, with communication skills, with motivational skills, with teaching calling. This list of thirty competencies plus the box of self-competencies will be very helpful for the administration of the school. It will be the guide to evaluate teachers performance and it will help them to determine who deserves an incentive and how does not. This list is not something strict and static, it will change and move during the years and environments. And as it was said before, it will change the hierarchy depending on whom you are evaluating. It is a practical tool to use, however it is important to never forget that: teaching with love, that is the best competence a teacher could have, as the Principal said at the end of the study.
B. Raising competencies through incentives

As a final conclusion, and answering the research question: Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers, it is important to conclude that the broad answer is Yes. It is possible to raise competencies through an incentive scheme. However, it is relevant to make a distinction: not every competence can and should be raised through incentives. It will perfectly work for some characteristics, it will not work for others and it could be even harmful to some. The teaching staff said an incentive scheme could raise competencies in topics where the results, the outcomes are easy and objective to measure, such us: English, First
61
1133372]
Aids, Inclusion and Technology. It is not hard for the school to set parameters and indicators in these areas and reward those teachers who accomplish the task. However in soft competencies such as: leadership, work under pressure, responsibility; they say it was really hard to measure and it could harm the harmony and the great environment the school actually has. For example, how do you measure and create an incentive for: Being able to follow the lesson and finish the class despite the incidentals as a Primary teacher said. It is much harder than creating an incentive for learning First Aids. In other competencies, particularly those involving inherent talents and inherent skills such as ability to draw they said an incentive scheme would not work because either you are good at drawing or you are not. An incentive will not change that characteristic of the teacher, however it will not be harmful for the environment: colleagues that are good at drawing, singing and dancing will always win that incentive. I will never get it because I am really bad at it! said a Primary Teacher. On the other hand, the same teacher said: but I am very punctual, so I will always win the punctuality incentive, if the school decides to create that incentive. Incentives for competencies people know in advance who is going to win it is wasted money, there will be no effort from those who lack that competence to improve because they will know in advance someone else is going to get the reward. Incentives work when everybody is racing and there is uncertainty of the outcome. If the winner is known in advance, people will tend to discourage themselves from participating as it was tackled in Chapter five, section K. Summarizing, the school should take a first step and start using incentives for those competencies teachers and administration agree on. It could start with: 1. Technology: Giving an incentive to those teachers who actually use the interactive screen in their classes, communicate via email with students and parents, use power points in their lessons, use YouTube videos and any other Internet tool to make classes more interesting, etc. 2. Inclusion: Giving an incentive to those teachers who prepare and assist to Inclusion workshops, who show curricular adaptations in their
62
1133372]
lessons, who create special material for students with Special Educational Needs, show interest on learning about disability. 3. 4. First Aids: Giving an incentive to those teachers who prepare themselves in First Aids, showing expertise in dealing with emergency situations. English: Giving an incentive to those teachers who show improvement, in an academic year, in their level of English. It is important to clarify that the incentive will be given not due to proficiency in the language but to people who show real improvement no matter if it is basic, middle or advanced level. 5. Literacy and numeracy: Giving an incentive to those teachers who show improvement, in an academic year, in their literacy and numeracy skills. It is relevant to point out that the incentive will be given once the teacher has passed the minimum level required by the school (see Chapter 5, section E for further details). These five points are a good start for the school. The administration could implement an incentive scheme that should work in these five areas and later on expand to other competencies shown during this study. It is important to remember, as a final conclusion, the most important thing of creating a system of incentives and competencies in a school, as Goldrick points out is to be able of capturing the impact of teaching on student learning (Goldrick, 2002, p.8). Teaching staff and the administration should never forget student learning is the goal of every step the school takes. Word count: 18,976
CHAPTER 7: APPENDICES

A. Templates in Spanish
1. Nursery sheet filled by Administration
Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Conocimiento Sistmico Adecuar estrategias de enseanza para el aprendizaje Conocedora del apego infantil Conocer las etapas de desarrollo de los alumnos Conocimiento del desarrollo de autonoma Conocimientos en formacin de hbitos Conocimientos sobre procesos educativos Evaluar los aprendizajes Conocimiento de Procedimientos Conocedora del control del esfnter Conocimiento Transversal Competencias personales Competencias sociales Propia competencia
Buena redaccin Conocer el reglamento del colegio Conocimiento de la importancia del lenguaje Manejo bsico de matemticas Manejo del idioma ingls de manera oral Saber de cultura Saber de primeros auxilios Saber procedimientos de emergencia (incendio, terremoto)
Asertividad
Acogedora
Manejo de programas de computacin
Buen manejo con los padres, seguridad y cercana
Adaptabilidad
Que sepan bailiar
Buena relacin con los pares Capacidad para tomar decisiones Compromiso tico-social
Alegre
Que sepan cantar
Autocontrol
Que sepan dibujar Que sepan usar material reciclado Tocar un instrumento musical
Autnoma
Emptica Habilidad para manejar las propias emociones
Creativa
Curiosa
Manejar los programas de educacin parvularia
Uso de las tics
Iniciativa e innovacin
Flexible
64
1133372]
Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Competencias personales
Mejorar las estrategias de acuerdo a los resultados
Uso de herramientas tecnolgicas: power point e internet
Saber velar por la seguridad del menor
Liderazgo pedaggico
Iniciativa
Organizar un ambiente estructurado y estimulador del aprendizaje
Tener buena ortografa
Lograr comunicacin efectiva
Ordenada
Planificar la clase y metodologas de aprendizaje
Participar en actividades extra curriculares
Poseer seguridad personal
Ttulo de Educacin de Prvulos
Responsabilidad
Reflexiva
Utilizacin de un segundo idioma, idealmente ingls
Retener alumnos a lo largo del ao acadmico
Responsable
Solidaria Trabajar el manejo de conflictos
Trabajar en equipo, en especial con la asistente
65
1133372]
2. Nursery sheet filled by Nursery Teachers

NURSERY TEACHER / EDUCADOR DE PRVULOS Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Conocimiento Sistemtico Conocimiento de procedimientos Conocimientos artsticos Manejo de computacin o tecnologas a nivel usuario Manejo de estategias de articulacin para los niveles superiores Conocimiento Transversal Conocimientos generales de cultura Conocimiento filosfico y mitolgico Ortografa y redaccin Competencias personales Competencias sociales Propia competencia
Adecuada respuesta ante situacin problemtica
Alegre
Acogedora
Avances y recursos en matemticas y lenguaje
Carismtica
Capacidad de escuchar
Bases curriculares Caracteristicas del desarrollo de nios de 84 das a 6 aos Caractersticas del rango de edad Conocimiento bsico de lo que se va enseando Conocimiento de metodologias Desarrollo emocional Desarrollo sicologico
Cooperadora
Clara
Saber cantar Saber de S.O.S Saber tocar instrumentos
Lenguaje Matemticas
Cordialidad Dominio de grupo Emptica
Creativa Didctica Motivadora Ordenada Organizada Paciencia Preocuparse de la presentacin personal Puntualidad Resolucin efectiva Respeto
Uso de smartbooard Resolucin de conflictos Solidaridad Trabajo en equipo
Ingls Intervencin con el nio Manejo de evaluacin Manejo de la materia de acuerdo a la edad Necesidades educativas especiales NEE Planificacin de clases Ttulo profesional Vocacin por ensear
Vocabulario adecuado
Responsable Vocacin
66
1133372]
3. Primary sheet filled by Administration

PRIMARY TEACHER / PROFESORA DE EDUCACIN BSICA Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Conocimiento Sistemtico Conocimiento de Procedimientos Aplicar criterios adecuados en metodologas, segn niveles de trabajo Conocimiento Transversal Competencias personales Competencias sociales Propia competencia
Conocer el reglamento del colegio
Cordial
Adecuada expresin de ideas
Conocer las caractersticas propias de la edad del alumno Conocer los protocolos administrativos del colegio Conocimiento de necesidades educativas especiales
Manejo de grupos Redaccin y ortografa Respetar los protocolos escolares Ser puntual en sus compromisos pedaggicos con profesores, alumnos y apoderados Tener manejo de TIC Uso de redes sociales: mail, twitter, chat, muro, foro, power point, pizarra interactiva, programas computacionales
De buen manejo comunicacional Emocionalmente estable Flexible, que se adapte al medio
Compromiso con el colegio y alumnos Empata
autonoma Buscar permanente capacitacin en reas para fortalecer Lograr aprendizajes
Motivacin
proactivo
Conocimiento experto del sub-sector Manejo de metodologas, curriculo y evaluacin
Respetuoso Sano y estable (psicolgicamente)
Sano en sus relaciones Tolerancia
puntual responsable
Ttulo de Profesor de Enseanza Bsica
Tolerancia a la frustracin
Trabajo en equipo
67
1133372]
4. Primary sheet filled by Primary Teachers
PRIMARY TEACHER / PROFESOR DE ENSEANZA BSICA Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Conocimiento Sistemtico Conocer estrategias de refuerzo positivo Conocimiento de cada especialidad (ciencia, religin, idioma, etc) Conocimiento de contenidos de todas las reas ms all de lo que se ensea Conocimiento de las caractersticas sicolgicas y isicas propias de la edad del nio Conocimiento de metodologas (nuevas y actualizadas) Conocimiento de sicologa infantil Conocimientos de matemtica (clculo) Conocimiento de procedimientos Conocer metodologas de enseanza Conocer y aplicar tcnicas conductuales Conocimiento Transversal Conocimiento de escalas para calificar Conocimientos de medio ambiente/ ecologa Competencias personales Competencias sociales Acogedora Propia competencia Acogedora a las diferencias
Buenos modales
Alegre
Conocimiento de investigaciones y tendencias internacionales
Conocimientos de sicologa
Capacidad de observacin y deduccin
Autocrtica
Conocimiento de tecnologas Entender el "cmo" aprende el alumno (comprensin de los procesos cognitivos) Manejo metodolgico de cada asignatura Saber aplicar la metodologa Saber aterrizar el currculum a la sala de clases por medio de pruebas, guas y actividades Saber cmo evaluar (desde el proceso de "fabricar una prueba, hasta la eleccin de "qu" evaluar)
Ortografa, gramtica, redaccin
Carisma
Autoexigente
Poseer valores
Comprometida
Bsqueda de ideas a tecnologas novedosas
Primeros auxilios
Conocimientos de cultura general Cooperadora
Capacidad de recibir crticas
Saber ingls, instrucciones bsicas
Compromiso con el lugar de trabajo
Conocimientos de moral y tica
Saber tomar de decisiones
Emptico
Constante
Conocimientos de NEE
Ser buena lectora
Expresin oral
Creativo
68

PRIMARY TEACHER / PROFESOR DE ENSEANZA BSICA
1133372]
Dominio de planes y programas
Habilidades cognitivas Manejo acabado de contenidos propios de la asignatura Manejo de contenidos Manejo de expresin oral Manejo de habilidades y competencias Poseer buena redaccin Poseer comprensin lectora Poseer dominio de los contenidos Poseer dominio de los planes y programas del MINEDUC Poseer habilidades de indagacin cientfica Poseer EFL/Idioma Materno Saber crear una estructura de una clase Saber ensear y trasmitir con entusiasmo Tener buena ortografa Tener conocimiento del nivel de pensamientos de los alumnos Ttulo de professor
Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Competencias personales tecnologa necesaria Saber hacer adaptaciones para elaborar una curriculares para alumnos prueba, un power Flexible Divertida con NEE point, el uso de la pizarra interactiva Saber hacer mediacin en Tecnologa, Generar un buen ambiente, NEE como de los nios con un Entusiasta conocimiento de office no hablar mal de otro alto potencial Saber hacer pruebas Saber moverse en la sala Saber planificar Saber planificar diferentes mtodos de evaluacin Ser capaz de crear material pedaggico Tener conocimiento y dominio de una planificacin Tener un tono de voz adecuado Tener criterios Tener desarrollado el lado artstico Tener vagaje cultural Uso de internet, youtube, mail Integral Liderazgo Motivador Equilibrada Flexibilidad Inclusivo
Respetuoso Saber hablar en pblico Seguiridad personal Ser capaz de ayudar al compaero de trabajo Sociabilidad
Motivacin Ordenado Paciencia Perfeccionista
Puntual
Solidaria
Responsabilid ad Rigurosidad Salud fsica y mental Sistemtico Tener una vida espiritual Tolerancia a la frustracin Vocacin
Tolerancia
Trabajo en equipo Uso apropiado del vocabulario
69
1133372]
5. Secondary sheet filled by Administration

Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Conocimiento Sistemtico Conocer caractersticas propias de la edad del alumno Conocimiento de Procedimientos Aplicar criterios adecuados en metodologas, segn niveles de trabajo Cuidar del silencio en la instruccin Manejo de grupos (jefaturas) Redaccin y ortografa Revisar cuadernos Tener manejo de TIC Uso de redes sociales: mail, twitter, chat, muro, foro, power point, pizarra interactiva, programas computacionales Conocimiento Transversal Buen manejo con los padres Competencias personales Competencias sociales Propia competencia Alegre Buscar permanente capacitacin en reas para fortalecer Hacer respetar el cargo Manejo cultural amplio Puntual Visin trascendete de la vida
Adecuada expresin de ideas
Conocer los protocolos administrativos del colegio Conocimiento experto del sub-sector Saber hacer adaptaciones curriculares alumnos NEE Tener vigencia en los contenidos Uso de recursos novedosos
Cordial
Compromiso con el colegio y alumnos
Emocionalmente estable Flexible, que se adapte al medio Reflexivo Sano y estable (psicolgicamente)
emptico Optimista Saber poner lmites Tolerancia
Tolerancia a la frustracin
70
1133372]
6. Secondary sheet filled by Secondary Teachers

SECONDARY TEACHER / PROFESOR DE ENSEANZA MEDIA Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Conocimiento Sistemtico Conocimiento de procedimientos Herramientas Crear instrumentos de evaluacin Competencias personales Propia competencia
Conocimiento Transversal
Competencias sociales
Computacion y otras tecnologas Conocimientos primeros auxilios actualizados permanentemente
Habilidades transversales Computacin a nivel de usuario Conocer distintos procedimientos que se deben seguir de acuerdo a distintas situaciones, en especial de emergencia o gestin. Conocer y hacer cumplir el reglamento del establecimiento Conocimientos de computacin Conocimientos de ingls Conocimientos de sicologa del adolescente Control disciplina
Aceptar desafos dispuestos
Actualizado, saber de actualidad
Cumplir con plazos en correccin de pruebas
Animador
Afectuoso
Conocimientos tcnicos
Cursos de especializacin
Cercano a los alumnos y apoderados Empata con colegas, apoderados y alumnos Flexibilidad Liderazgo
Asertivo
Dominio de contenidos propios de la asignatura Estar al da en contenido curriculares Lenguaje Metodologa pedaggica Perfeccionamiento constante en la especialidad
Elaboracin de pautas o rbricas Elaboracin de proyectos Integrar la evaluacin en el proceso de enseanza- aprendizaje Manejar power point, word, excel.
Comprometi do Desplante escnico Eficiente
Optimista
Multifactico
Manejo de carta gantt
Desplante
Paciencia
Ordenado
Postgrados en distintos mbitos
Manejo de la aplicacin de la planificacin en clase
Dominar tecnologas que contribuyan al proceso de enseanza
Proactivo
Perseverante
Realizar una prueba de conocimiento especfico del rea
Pautas de conductas
Entregar estrategias transversales al alumno, que lo ayuden no solo en una asignatura sino que en otras ms
Resolucin de conflictos
Proactivo
71
1133372]
SECONDARY TEACHER / PROFESOR DE ENSEANZA MEDIA Estructura de los requerimientos Competencias ocupacionales Saber de integracin / inclusion Saber disciplinario Planificacin Impostacin de la voz, diccin, volumen Competencias personales Respeto Puntual
Puntualidad en todos los procedimientos de clases y pruebas
Manejo grupo
Saber escuchar a todos
Reconocer errores
Saber ingles Sistemas operativos de computacin
Responsabilidad con el quehacer diario Saber estructurar una clase de manera optimista en cuanto a tiempo y contenidos
Ortografa, escribir bien y claro Saber hablar correctamente, vocabulario amplio
Saber relacionarse con todos los estamentos del colegio Ser abierto a la crtica
Respetuoso
Responsable Ser un ente motivacional, alegre, energtico, carismtico, dispuesto al dilogo
Tener comprensin lectora
Saber ocupar pizarra interactiva
Sentido comn
Ser buen compaero, leal y solidario
Tener mente abierta para actualizar estrategias de enseanza, tipos de lectura, entre otros Ttulo de profesor reconocido por el MINEDUC
Saber organizar tiempos de trabajo propio
Ser autocrtico y autodidctico, de modo que si no maneja algn contenido sea capaz de estudiar y prepararse para la clase
Ser un buen comunicador
Tener motivacin por ensear
Ser capaz de explicar lo mismo de distintas maneras
Ser justo con los alumnos, respetarlos y hacerse respetar Tener buena comprensin lectora Tener valores
Tener dominio de grupo
Tener una preocupacin desde lo vital del estudiante Tolerante Transversal Vocacin
Tener buena redacccin
Trabajo en equipo
72
1133372]
B. Templates in English
7. Nursery sheet filled by Administration
Structure of requirements Occupational Competences Systematic Knowledge Adaptation of teaching and learning strategies Create set of structures and stimulate learning environment Procedural Knowledge Ability to draw Local Knowledge Awareness of the importance of language courses Basic mathematical knowledge Personal Competences Social Competence Able to decrease student attrition rate Self- Competence Autonomous, self-governed Aware of personal health and safety management Change management and adaptation skills Creative
Application of recycling techniques Computer literacy. Working knowledge of at least the internet and MS PowerPoint Know how to dance
Assertiveness
Development of self- governance Evaluation of the learning process results Improvement and adaptation of learning strategies according to learning results Knowledge of the educational processes and cycles Knowledge of the student learning stages and process
Care, at all times, for safety and security of the pupils Cultural knowledge
Conflict management
Decision-making capabilities
Know how to sing
First-aid knowledge
Educational leadership
Curious
Play a musical instrument
Good grammar and orthography Knowledge and training in emergency situations (Fire. Earthquakes, etc.) Knowledge of the schools regulation, particularly its code of conduct Proficiency of a foreign language, particularly English Writing skills
Emotional intelligence
Flexible
Sphincter control techniques
Empathic
Initiative
Management of educational programmes Nursery school teacher degree Scheduling of classes using learning methodologies
Use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Working level of software
Entrepreneurial and innovative
Joyful
Global citizenship Good communicator Good management of teacher- parent relationships
Nurturing Reflexive Responsible Self-control Structured
Interpersonal relations Involvement in extra-curricular activities such as sports, music and special workshops Responsibility Solidarity Team work, especially with administrative clerks
73
1133372]
8. Nursery sheet filled by Nursery Teachers

SECONDARY TEACHER Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Procedural Systematic Knowledge Knowledge Able to explain a same idea in different Continuous improvement ways Discipline Class Scheduling tools Personal Competence Local Knowledge Social Competence Self- Competence Acknowledge errors Assertiveness Aware of current affairs
Common sense Computer literacy Create an environment of respect
Conflict management Empathy
Integration and inclusion Knowledge of the lecture contents
Conduct guidelines Creation of evaluation instruments Gantt Chart working knowledge Good lecture time- planning Good writing skills Integration of the evaluation in the learning process Interactive blackboard use MS Office suite working knowledge Observe test and assignment correction times Scheduling Project creation Punctuality Responsible
Entrepreneurial
Methodology application Open minded Postgraduate education
Discipline Good communication skills Good reading skills Good writing skills
Face challenges
Caring
Flexible Good communications skills Good listening skills
Charismatic Efficient Kind Motivational skills Perseverance Proactive
Proficiency in English Proper use of Language Reading skills Take a specific standardized test Teacher degree awarded by a competent institution Technical knowledge Up-to-date first aid skills Updated knowledge of curricular contents
Group management Introspection capacity Just Knowledge of administrative procedures Observe the schools regulations Proficiency in English Self-critic Teen psychology Use of technologies that aid in the learning process Use of transversal strategies that are transferable to other subjects Values Wide use of vocabulary
Group management Interpersonal skills Joyful
Leadership Loyal and helpful Maintain close relationships with parents and students Open to critique Optimist
Punctual Respectful Responsible Structured Teaching calling
Specialization courses
Patience
Tolerant
Time management
Respect Team work
Transversal
74
1133372]
9. Primary sheet filled by Administration

PRIMARY TEACHER Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Systematic Knowledge Procedural Knowledge Application of correct criteria to teach different cognitive level of students Local Knowledge Personal Competence Social Competence Self- Competence
Expertise in the area Knowledge of methodology, evaluation and curricular content Primary school teacher degree Schools management processes and protocols Schools regulation, particularly the code of conduct Special Educational Needs (SEN)
Emotional intelligence
Commitment with the school and students
First Aids Group management Observe schools regulations Orthography and grammar Punctuality in schools activities Use of social networks: E-mail, PowerPoint, interactive blackboard, educational software, etc. Working level of information and communication technologies
Emotional stability Flexible Good communicational skills Psychological stability Respectful
Empathic Good communication skills
Continuous improvement Deliver effective lectures Punctual
Interpersonal skills
Responsible
Motivation Team work
Self-governed
Students characteristics according to their age
Tolerance
75
1133372]
10. Primary sheet filled by Primary Teachers

PRIMARY TEACHER Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Procedural Systematic Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge of Knowing strategies of teaching positive feedback methodologies Cognitive skills English Proficiency Knowledge of scientific method Knowledge of evaluation and curriculum knowledge of every area of content (History, Art, Math, etc.) Knowledge of new methodologies Knowledge of psychological characteristics of students Knowledge of the signature Knowledge of the content provided by the Ministry of Education Math skills Moral and ethics Oral expression Reading skills Special Educational Needs Teaching degree Writing skills Knowledge of the code of conduct Knowledge of international trends Personal Competence Local Knowledge Knowledge of evaluation metrics Environment knowledge Psychology Orthography, grammar and reading skills How to transmit values Social Competence Self-Competence Open to differences Joyful Autocratic
Humble Good manners Observation and deduction capacity
ICT knowledge How to implement each methodology How to implement and modify the curriculum to each class Evaluation processes SEN adaptations How to prepare and teach a lesson
Charisma Commitment
Tough Searching for improvement
First Aids Proficiency in English Decision maker Good reader Proper use of power point, smart board, office, internet Artistic skills Cultural knowledge
Cooperative Empathy Oral expression Flexibility
Capable of receiving criticism Commitment Constant Creativity
Scheduling Creation of pedagogic content: tests, guides Pace and volume of a lesson
Fun Create a learning workplace All rounded Leadership Motivation Respectful Public speaking skills Health and Safety Cooperative Sociability Solidarity Tolerance Team work Vocabulary Enthusiastic Balanced Flexibility Inclusiveness Motivation Order Patient Perfectionist Punctual Responsibility Teaching calling Health Systematic Spiritual life Frustration management
76
1133372]
11. Secondary sheet filled by Administration

SECONDARY TEACHER Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Systematic Knowledge Ability to make curricular adaptations for SEN students Expertise in his/her area Schools regulation, particularly the code of conduct Students characteristics according to their age Teaching of up-to-date contents Procedural Knowledge Application of correct criteria to teach different cognitive level students Clear and standardized evaluation criteria Internet use Maintain silence during lectures Orthography and grammar Return of assignments and evaluations in the time Working level of information and communication technologies Local Knowledge Emotional intelligence Personal Competence Social Competence Commitment with the school and students Self- Competence Continuous improvement
Empathy Good communicational skills Psychological stability Respectful
Good communication skills Maintain good relationship with parents Optimistic Team work
Joyful
Nurturing Punctual Result oriented Transcendent view of life
Structured
Understanding of teen issues
77
1133372]
12. Secondary sheet filled by Secondary Teachers

SECONDARY TEACHER Structure of requirements Occupational Competence Systematic Knowledge Procedural Knowledge Able to explain a same idea in different ways Class Scheduling tools Local Knowledge Personal Competence Social Competence Self- Competence Acknowledge errors Assertiveness Aware of current affairs
Continuous improvement Discipline
Common sense Computer literacy Create an environment of respect
Conflict management Empathy
Integration and inclusion Knowledge of the lecture contents
Conduct guidelines Creation of evaluation instruments Gantt Chart working knowledge Good lecture time- planning Good writing skills Integration of the evaluation in the learning process Interactive blackboard use MS Office suite working knowledge Observe test and assignment correction times Scheduling Project creation Punctuality Responsible
Entrepreneurial
Methodology application Open minded Postgraduate education
Discipline Good communication skills Good reading skills Good writing skills
Face challenges
Caring
Flexible Good communications skills Good listening skills
Charismatic Efficient Kind Motivational skills Perseverance Proactive
Proficiency in English Proper use of Language Reading skills Take a specific standardized test Teacher degree awarded by a competent institution Technical knowledge Up-to-date first aid skills Updated knowledge of curricular contents
Group management Introspection capacity Just Knowledge of administrative procedures Observe the schools regulations Proficiency in English Self-critic Teen psychology Use of technologies that aid in the learning process Use of transversal strategies that are transferable to other subjects Values Wide use of vocabulary
Group management Interpersonal skills Joyful
Leadership Loyal and helpful Maintain close relationships with parents and students Open to critique Optimist
Punctual Respectful Responsible Structured Teaching calling
Specialization courses
Patience
Tolerant
Time management
Respect Team work
Transversal
78
1133372]
C. Questions made during the focus groups

1. What do you understand by a teacher quality? 2. Do you think it is necessary to have a teacher degree to teach in a school? 3. Is it enough with the degree? 4. Which set of systematic knowledge it is expected in the job interview and which to be learnt during the academic year? 5. This school has an inclusion programme. Teachers are expected to know in advance how to deal with students with Special Educational Needs or to learn inside the school? 6. How many of you had, during your university years, a module of SEN? 7. Where would you catalogue practices such as: what to do in case of an emergency? 8. What do you understand by having competencies in technology? 9. What do you understand by having competencies in mathematics, Spanish? 10. What about grammar and orthography? 11. Is it expected in this school to be proficient in a foreign language? 12. What do you understand by proficient? 13. How many of you had training, during university, dealing with parents, adults? 14. Do you think soft skills, such as: leadership, work under pressure, teamwork, are trainable or you just born with them? 15. Which type of competencies do you think you may improve by having an incentive scheme? 16. Which type of competencies do you think you will never improve, even though an important incentive is being offered? 17. Do you believe motivation is something intrinsic in the teacher profession or something it could be develop? 18. Is it possible to raise competencies through an incentive scheme?
REFERENCES
AFT 2000. Teacher Salary Survey, Washington: American Federation of Teachers. ARUMUGASAMY, G. 2012. A study on motivation and job satisfaction of higher school teachers. Indian Journal of Education and Information Management, 1:3, 104-114. ASCH, B. J. 2005. The economic complexities of incentive reforms. In: KLITGAARD, R. & LIGHT, P. C. (eds.) High-Performance Government: Structure, Leadership, Incentives. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, MG-256-PRGS. ASPINWALL, L. G. & STAUDINGER, U. M. 2003. A psychology of human strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions for a positive psychology Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. AVALOS, B. & ASSAEL, J. 2006. Moving from resistance to agreement: The case of the Chilean teacher performance evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 45:4-5, 254-266. BALLOU, D. 2001. Pay for performance in public and private schools. Economics of Education Review, 20, 51-61. BALLOU, D. & PODGURSKY, M. 1997. Teacher Pay and Teacher Quality, Kalamazoo, Michigan: W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. BARNETT, R. 1994. The limits of competence: Knowledge, Higher Education and Society, Buckingham: Open University Press. BARR, A., WORCESTER, D., ABELL, A., BEECHER, C., JENSON, L., PERONTO, A., RINGNESS, T. & SCHMIDT, J. 1961. Wisconsin studies of the measurement and predictability of teahcer effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Education, 30:1156. BECKER, B. J., KENNEDY, M. M. & HUNDERSMARCK, S. 2003. Hypothesis about 'quality': a decade of debates, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. BEECHER, D. 1953. The teaching evaluation record, Buffalo, NY: Educators Publishing Company. BENTEA, C. C. & ANGHELACHE, V. 2012. Teachers' motivation and satisfaction for professional activity. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33 563-567. BRANDT, R. M. 1990. Incentive Pay and Career Ladders for TodaysTeachers: A Study of Current Programs and Practices., Albany: State University of New York.
80
1133372]
BREWER, D. J. 1996. Career paths and quit decisions: Evidence from teaching. Journal of Labor Economics, 14:2, 313-339. BROCKMANN, M., CLARKE, L. & WINCH, C. 2010. Bricklaying is more than Flemish bond. Bricklaying qualifications in Europe. BRYMAN, A. 1988. Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London, UK: Unwin Hyman Ltd. CAPRARA, G. V. & CERVONE, D. 2003. A conception of personality for a psychology of human strengths: Personality as an agentic, self-regulating system. In: ASPINWALL, L. G. & STAUDINGER, U. M. (eds.) A psychology of human strengths Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CARNOY, M., BRODZIAK, I., MOLINA, A. & SOCAS, M. 2007. The Limitations of Teacher Pay Incentive Programs Based on Inter-Cohort Comparisons: The Case of Chile's SNED. Education Finance and Policy, 2:3, 189-227. CLARK, C. M. 1986. Ten years of conceptual development in research on teacher thinking. In: BEN-PERETZ, M., BROMME, R. & HALKES, R. (eds.) Advances of research on teacher thinking. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. COHEN, L., MANION, L. & MORRISON, K. 2000. Research Methods in Education Fifth Edition, London, UK:: Routledge Falmer. COLEGIO DE PROFESORES & MINEDUC. 1999. Criterios Fundantes de un Sistema de Evaluacin de los Profesionales de la Educacin, Reporte. Santiago: Ministerio de Educacin. CONTRERAS, D. & RAU, T. 2009. Tournaments, gift exchanges, and the effect of monetary incentives for teachers: the case of Chile. Working Papers. CORNETT, L. M. & GAINES, G. F. 2002. Quality Teaching: Can Incentive Policies Make a Difference?, Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board. CRUICKSHANK, D. R. & HAEFELE, D. 2001. Good teachers, plural. Educational Leadership, 58:5, 26-30. DARLING-HAMMOND, L. & LOEWENBERG, D. 1998. Teaching for High Standards: What Policymakers Need to Know and Be Able to Do, Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. DETHLEFS, T. M., TRENT, V., BOODY, R. M., LUTZ, G. M., ROBINSON, V. & WAACK, W. 2001. Impact study of the national board certification pilot project in Iowa, Report. Des Moines: Iowa State Department of Education.
81
1133372]
DIXIT, A. 2002. Incentives and Organizations in the Public Sector: An Interpretative Review. Journal of Human Resources, 37:4, 696-727. DODL, N., ELFNER, E., BECKER, J., HALSTEAD, J., JUNG, H., NELSON, P., PURITON, S. & WEGELE, P. 1972. Florida catalog of teacher competencies, Tallahassee: Florida State University. EBERTS, R., HOLLENBECK, K. & STONE, J. 2002. Teacher performance incentives and student outcomes. Journal of Human Resources, 37:4, 913-927. EISENHARDT, K. M. 1989. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of management review, 57-74. ESTEVE, J. 1992. O mal-estar docente, Lisbon: Escher. FEHR, E. & SCHMIDT, K. 2004. Fairness and incentives in a multi-task principalagent model. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106:3, 453-474. FERGUSON, R. & LADD, H. 1996. How and Why Money Matters: An Analysis of Alabama Schools In: LADD, H. (ed.) Holding Schools Accountable: PerformanceBased Reform in Education. Washington, D. C. : Brookings Institution FIGLIO, D. N. 1997. Teacher salaries and teacher quality. Economics Letters, 55:2, 267271. FIGLIO, D. N. & KENNY, L. W. 2007. Individual teacher incentives and student performance. Journal of Public Economics, 91:5, 901-914. FIGLIO, D. N. & WINICKI, J. 2005. Food for thought: The effects of school accountability plans on school nutrition. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 381-394. GLEWWE, P., ILIAS, N. & KREMER, M. 2003. Teacher incentives. Working Paper No. 9671. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. GOLDRICK, L. 2002. Improving Teacher Evaluation To Improve Teaching Quality, Washington: National Governors' Association, Center for Best Practices. GONZLEZ, P. 1998. Financiamiento de la Educacin en Chile. Paris: PREAL-UNESCO Financiamiento de la Educacin en Amrica Latina. GONZLEZ, P. 2001. Estructura institucional, recursos, y gestin en el sistema escolar Chileno, Santiago: Ministerio de Educacin. GOODMAN, S. & TURNER, L. 2010. Teacher incentive pay and educational outcomes: Evidence from the New York City bonus program. Working Paper at Columbia University.
82
1133372]
GRITZ, R. & THEOBALD, N. 1996. The effects of school district spending priorities on length of stay in teaching. Journal of Human Resources, 31:3, 477-512. GUARINO, C., SANTIBAEZ, L. & DALEY, G. A. 2006. Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Education Research 76:2, 173-208. HAMACHEK, D. 1999. Effective teachers: What they do, how they do it, and the importance of self-knowledge. In: LIPKA, R. P. & BRINTHAUPT, T. M. (eds.) The role of self in teacher development. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. HAMILTON, L. 2005. Lessons from performance measurement in education In: KLITGAARD, R. & LIGHT, P. C. (eds.) High-Performance Government: Structure, Leadership, Incentives. Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. HANNAWAY, J. 1992. Higher Order Thinking, Job Design, and Incentives: An Analysis and Proposal. American Education Research Journal, 29:1, 3-21. HANUSHEK, E., RIVKIN, S. & KAIN, J. 1999. Do higher salaries buy better teachers?, NBER Working Paper 7082: Cambridge. HANUSHEK, E. A. 1996. Outcomes, costs, and incentives in schools. In: HANUSHEK, E. A. & JORGENSON, D. W. (eds.) Improving Americas Schools: The Role of Incentives. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. HARBISON, R. W. & HANUSHEK, E. A. 1992. Educational Performance of the Poor: Lessons from Rural Northeast Brazil, NY: Oxford University Press. HARRIS, D. & SASS, T. 2009. What makes for a good teacher and who can tell?, CALDER Working Paper from: http://www.caldercenter.org/upload/CALDERWorking-Paper-30_FINAL.pdf. HOEPFL, M. 1997. Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9:1, 47-63. HOLMSTROM, B. & MILGROM, P. 1991. Multi-Task Principal-Agent Analysis: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 7:0, 24-52. HYLAND, T. 1994. Competence, education and NVQs: Dissenting perspectives, London: Cassell. JESUS, S. 1996. A motivao para a profisso docente, Aveiro, Portugal: Estante Editora. JESUS, S. N. & CONBOY, J. 2001. A stress management course to prevent teacher distress. International Journal of Educational Management, 3, 131-137.
83
1133372]
JESUS, S. N. & LENS, W. 2005. An integrated model for the study of teacher motivation. Applied Psychology, 54:1, 119-134. JOVANOVA-MITKOVSKA, S. & HRISTOVSKA, D. 2011. Contemporary teacher and core competences for lifelong learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28 573-578. KADZAMIRA, E. C. 2006. Teacher motivation and incentives in Malawi, Malawi: Centre for Educational Research and Training-University of Malawi. KIRBY, S., BERENDS, M. & NAFTEL, S. 1999. Supply and demand of minority teachers in Texas: Problems and prospects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21:1, 47-66. KLERMAN, J. A. 2005. Measuring performance. In: KLITGAARD, R. & LIGHT, P. C. (eds.) High-Performance Government: Structure, Leadership, Incentives. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. KORETZ, D. 2002. Limitations in the use of achievement tests as measures of educators productivity. Journal of Human Resources, 37:4, 752-777. KORTHAGEN, F. A. J. 2004. In search of the essence of a good teacher: Towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and teacher education, 20:1, 7797. KORTHAGEN, F. A. J., KESSELS, J., KOSTER, B., LAGERWERF, B. & WUBBELS, T. 2001. Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. KREPS, D. M. 1997. Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives. The American Economic Review, 87:2, 359-364. LAVY, V. 2002. Evaluating the effect of teachers group performance incentives on pupil achievement. Journal of Political Economy, 110, 1286-1317. LAVY, V. 2007. Using performance based pay to improve the quality of teachers. Future of Children 17:1, 87-109. LAZEAR, E. P. 2000. Performance pay and productivity. American Economic Review, 90:5, 1346-1361. LAZEAR, E. P. 2003. Teacher incentives. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 10:2, 179214. LE GRAND, J. 2003. Knights and Knaves in the Public Sector: What Do We Mean and What Do We Know? In: LE GRAND, J. (ed.) Motivation, agency, and public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
84
1133372]
LIANG, X. 1999. Teacher Pay in 12 Latin American Countries: How does Teacher Pay Compare to Other Professions, What Determines Teacher Pay, and Who are the Teachers? Mimeo, Conference on Teachers in Latin America. New Perspectives on their Development and Performance, San Jos, Costa Rica. LOCKHEED, M. E. & VERSPOOR, A. M. 1991. Improving Primary Education in Developing Countries, NY: Oxford University Press. MALEN, B., MURPHY, M. & HART, A. 1988. Restructuring teacher compensation systems: An analysis of three alternatives strategies. In: ALEXANDER, K. & MONK, D. (eds.) Attracting and Compensating Americas Teachers. Massachusetts: Ballinger Publishing Company Cambridge. MCCLELLAND, D. C. 1965. Achievement Motivation Can Be Developed. Harvard Business Review, 43, 68-88. MICHAILAKIS, D. & REICH, W. 2009. Dilemmas of inclusive education. ALTER European Journal of Disability Research / Revue Europenne de Recherche sur le Handicap, 3:1, 24-44. MINEDUC 2003. Marco para la Buena Enseanza. Santiago: Ministerio de Educacin. MINEDUC 2004. Hacia la excelencia acadmica: SNED 20042005. Santiago: Ministerio de Educacin. MIZALA, A. & ROMAGUERA, P. 2002. Evaluacin del desempeo e incentivos en la educacin chilena. Cuadernos de economa, 39:118, 353-394. MIZALA, A. & ROMAGUERA, P. 2003. Regulacin, incentivos y remuneraciones de los profesores en Chile. In: COX, C. (ed.) Polticas educacionales en el cambio de siglo: La reforma del sistema escolar de Chile. Santiago: Editorial Universitaria. MIZALA, A. & ROMAGUERA, P. 2004. School and teacher performance incentives: The Latin American experience. International Journal of Educational Development, 24:6, 739-754. MORDUCHOWICZ, A. 2002. Carreras, incentivos y estructuras salariales docentes, Documento Nv 23 PREAL, 135: Buenos Aires, Argentina. MOWDAY, R., KOBERG, C. & MCARTHUR, A. 1984. The psychology of the withdrawal process: A cross-validation of Mobleys intermediate linkages model of turnover in two samples. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 79-94. MURALIDHARAN, K. & SUNDARARAMAN, V. 2006. Teacher incentives in developing countries: Experimental evidence from India. Unpublished manuscript.
85
1133372]
MURNANE, R. J. & COHEN, D. K. 1986. Merit pay and the evaluation problem: Why most merit pay plans fail and a few survive. Harvard Educational Review, 56:1, 117. NUTTIN, J. 1984. Motivation, planning, and action: A relational theory of behavior dynamics, New Jersey: Leuven University Press & Erlbaum. ODDEN, A. & KELLEY, C. 1997. Paying Teachers for What They Know and Do. New and Smart Compensation Strategies to Improve Schools, California: Cowen Press. OECD 2004. Reviews of national policies for education: Chile, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OFMAN, D. 2000. Core qualities: a gateway to human resources, Schiedam: Scriptum. ORNELAS, C. 2002. Incentivos a los maestros: la paradoja mexicana. In: ORNELAS, C. (ed.) Valores, calidad y educacin. Mxico: Santillana/Aula XXI. PAARSCH, H. J. & SHEARER, B. 2000. Piece rates, fixed wages, and incentive effects: Statistical evidence from payroll records. International Economic Review, 41:1, 5992. PAJARES, M. F. 1992. Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62:3, 307-332. PETERSON, C. & SELIGMAN, M. E. P. 2000. Values in action (VIA): Classification of strenghts, Philadelphia: Values In Action Institute. PODGURSKY, M., MONROE, R. & WATSON, D. 2004. The academic quality of public school teachers: An analysis of entry and exit behavior. Economics of Education Review, 23, 507-518. PORTER, L. & STEERS, R. 1973. Organizational work and personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 151-176. POUND, P., BURY, M., GOMPERTZ, P. & EBRAHIM, S. 1995. Stroke patients' views on their admission to hospital. BMJ, 311:6996, 1-22. PRENDERGAST, C. 1999. The Provision of Incentives in Firms. Journal of Economic Literature 37, 7-63. RIVKIN, S., HANUSHEK, E. & KAIN, J. 1998. Teachers, schools and academic achievement, NBER Working Paper 6691: Cambridge. ROGERS, B. 2006. Classroom behaviour. A Practical Guide to Effective Teaching, Behaviour Management and Colleague Support (2nd ed), London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
86
1133372]
ROSS, S. A. 1973. The economic theory of agency: The principal's problem. The American Economic Review, 63:2, 134-139. RUSU, C., OITU, L. & PANAITE, O. 2012. The ideal teacher. Theoretical and investigative approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 1017-1021. SANDERS, W. L., WRIGHT, S. P. & HORN, S. P. 1997. Teacher and classroom context effects on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of personnel evaluation in education, 11:1, 57-67. SANTIBAEZ, L. 2010. Teacher Incentives, Mexico City, Mexico: Fundacin IDEA. SELIGMAN, M. E. P. & CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M. 2000. Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55:1, 5-14. SPRINGER, M. G., HAMILTON, L., MCCAFFREY, D. F., BALLOU, D., LE, V. N., PEPPER, M., LOCKWOOD, J. & STECHER, B. M. 2010. Teacher Pay for Performance: Experimental Evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University. STEINER, G. 2005. Lessons of the Masters (The Charles Eliot Norton lectures: 20112002), Cambridge: Harvard University Press. STOCKARD, J. & LEHMAN, M. B. 2004. Influences on the satisfaction and retention of 1st-year teachers: The importance of effective school management. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40:5, 742-771. STODDARD, L. 1991. The three dimensions of human greatness: Aframework for redesigning education. In: MILLER , R. (ed.) New directions in education Brandon, Vermont: Holistic Education Press. STOOF, A., MARTENS, R. L. & VAN MERRINBOER, J. J. G. 2000. What is competence? A constructivist approach as a way out of confusion, Paper presented at the Onderwijsresearchdagen [The conference of the Ducth Educational Research Association]: Leiden. STRAUSS, A. & CORBIN, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. STRAUSS, A. & CORBIN, J. 2007. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, California: Sage Publications, Incorporated. TICKLE, L. 1999. Teacher self-appraisal and appraisal of self. In: LIPKA, R. P. & BRINTHAUPT, T. M. (eds.) The role of self in teacher development. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
87
1133372]
TOOLEY, J. D., D. 1998. Educational Research a critique: a survey of published educational research, London: Office for Standards in Education. USDE 2007. Standards and assessments peer review guidance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. VEGAS, E. 2005. Incentives to improve teaching: Lessons from Latin America, Washington, D.C.: World Bank Publications. VEGAS, E. & UMANSKY, I. 2005. Improving teaching and learning through effective incentives. Lessons from Latin America. In: VEGAS, E. (ed.) Incentives to Improve Teaching: Lessons from Latin America. Washington, DC: The World Bank. WAISSBLUTH, M. 2011. La educasin en Chile est vien, Santiago: Educacin 2020. WATERREUS, J. M. 2003. Lessons in teacher pay: Studies on incentives and the labor market for teachers, Amsterdam: Thela Thesis. WILLINGHAM, D. T. 2009. Why don't students like school? A cognitive scientist answer questions about how the mind works and what it means for your classroom, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ZEICHNER, K. M. & GORE, J. M. 1990. Teacher socialization. In: HOUSTON, W. R. (ed.) Handbook of research on teacher education New York: Macmillan.

Can An Incentive Scheme Raise Competences Among Teachers?

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Can An Incentive Scheme Raise Competences Among Teachers?

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

STUDENT

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers?

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID: ABSTRACT

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

B. The Goal of the Study

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

C. Research Question and objectives

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

D. Overview of the Methodology

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

E. Overview of the Dissertation map

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

B. Educational Chilean background

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

C. Focus Group the chosen method

D. Validity of the research

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

F. Creation of the template

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

H. Data Collection and Management

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

CHAPTER 4: FOCUS GROUP

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

B. Administration Focus Group

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

C. Nursery Focus Group

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

D. Primary Focus Group

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

E. Secondary Focus Group

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID:

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

B. Identifying the set of competencies for each group

Can an incentive scheme raise competencies among teachers? [ID: