Case Study †Motivation Essay

IntroductionIn this brief introduction, advice for crowd on how to make a motion his twelvemonth 5 instructors entrust be framed by explaining the constitution of aspiration, the dimension of the finishing and how it should be hang. Secondly, suggestions of the selection of Year 5 instructor will be given. Furthermore, unhomogeneous ways of recogniseing the address proceeding will be suggested bandage evaluating the usance of pile during the academic form and the application of finish setting. In addition, unintended consequences of the stopping point setting methods will be discussed and follow by a conclusion. Nature of intent, Dimension of the aspiration and how it should be set Refers to Locke (1990 and 1996), polish is an prey or aim for an satisfy is the definition of refinement and it is something consciously want. Goal faeces be explained by internal and external factors , goals atomic number 18 thoughts with desired end internally and object or co nditions sought externally while a job to be complete is as known as task (Locke 1990 and 1996). In this case, the goal of James is to boost his initiate fairish result in NAPLAN raise (i.e. the 5 reporting sector ) at that placefore it is above the national average while the task is to select an appropriate instructor that is subject to amend the results of the 5 reporting factors. Dimension of goals put forward be divided field and intensity and they be not easily separated (Locke 1990). Goal guinea pig means the actual object sought and psychological goal that an man-to-man break (Locke 1990 and 1996). Content differs in qualitatively and quantitatively and head of specificity (Locke 1990). A positive relationship between goal difficulties and performance is founded, the harder the goal is, the divulge the strainment (Locke 1996).The second factor is intensity. Intensity refers to the depth of the goal, such as s carry on and integration of the goal setting proces s and the importance of the goal, etc (Locke1990). Goals can be set according to S.M.A.R.T. which means that goals must be specific, measurable, assignable, earthy and time-related (Rouillard 2003). A specific goal should be details enough to take down what is to be striked and accomplished, too general statement is insufficient to motive workers (Rouillard 2003).A goal should be measurable which is quantifiable and provide a standard for relation while indicate whether the goal is reached (Rouillard 2003). Thirdly, an attainable goal should be able to achievable while challenging, a goal with extreme low and elevated prognosis is insufficient to do (Rouillard 2003). Realistic goal means it is practical, accomplishable and achievable (Rouillard 2003). Time-related means to frame the goal with a given period, an out-dated goal has no effect on motivation (Rouillard 2003). In this case, James can set a goal like improve 75% of social class 5 students results with a grade impr ovement in the factors of reading, writing, spelling, grammar and punctuation and numeracy deep down one semester (6 months). Access of candidatesIn this case, the aim is to improve the students results at that placefore teacher effectiveness is the main consideration. Teacher effectiveness is a measure of teachers ability to produce an academic growth in a given context and situation (Stronge and Hindman 2006 and Bailey 2006). Various sectors are needed for evaluation. (i) intimacy/ dogma certificationRichard has the highest degree compare to others and Richard is passionate roughly upgrading himself to a high level. Moreover, Richard is familiar with the updated education syllabus as he has completed his bachelor degree few years ago. No specific tuition about Janices educational background is mentioned it is assumed she has the lowest degree among candidates. Although Janice had attended some teacher training, she is not familiar and ready about the updated educational ch anges and practices which makes her less competitive. Ivar has deep familiarity about psychology and honor high degree of reputation and he is a high achieving student which shows Ivar has adequate intelligence level. Refers to Mandeville and Liu cited in Campbell et al (2012), students who are taught by higher levels of teacher certification have agitate around thinking skills and performance than the degrade level of knowledge. From the above evaluation, Richard and Ivar are more knowledgeable. (ii) temperRichard is young, enthusiastic, active, ambitious and competitive Janice is mature, sociable with good personal skills, passionate but less active than Richard and Ivar is logical and rational but not good at communication. Personality is not suggested as a standard for selection as there is no direct relationship between personality and achievement of pupils (Borich cited in Campbell et al 2012 ). More factors should be considered. (iii)ExperienceRichard has few years of inform year 2 and 3 but lack of perplex on teaching year 5 and 6 Janice has the most experience among 3 of them and she has 5 years experience on Year 5. Comparing to others, Ivar has the least experience in teaching. Teaching experience is a valuable approach path however there is no direct relationship between experience and student achievement and teaching experience is only a predictor of student outcomes occasionally (Anderson and Doresett cited in Campbell et al 2012). More factors should be c at oncern. (iv) self efficacyA belief in ones capabilities to train and execute the course of action required to produce given acquisition is called self efficacy (Bandura cited in Campbell et al 2012). Richard and Ivar are very self- convinced(p) about teaching year 5 while Janice is less confident about her skills. It is suggested that students that taught by higher self efficacy perform purify on standardized test and teachers with low self-efficacy have lower expectation of s tudents (Moore and Esselman cited in Campbell et al 2012) . To improve the grade of NAPLAN, advancement of languages and maths are necessary and a teacher with higher self-efficacy is critical as there is positive relationship between self efficacy and the performance of languages and maths of the students (Anderson et al cited in Campbell et al 2012). From the perspective of goal setting theory, an individual with high self efficacy is more unforced to set and call for a harder goal while commit to the goals with effort (Locke 1996). Richard and Ivar are the better choice. After accessing the above criteria, Richard and Ivar are the better choice since both of them are highly educated and with high self efficacy but Richard is the take up choice. Ivar is not specialist in education which shows concern of insufficient knowledge of educational practices while Richard has a better educational knowledge. Refers to Darling-Hammond cited in Campbell et al (2012) , the strongest fore caster of relative achievement compared to others is teachers certification whence Richard will be a better choice based on the element of knowledge.Methods to issue goal achievementThe goal cannot be reached by one partys effort thereof Richard and students should be strengthenered. pecuniary rewards and non-financial rewards are suggested and James should integrate them as a complete reward process in order to work more effectively (Armstrong and Murlis 2007). (i) monetary rewardsMerit pay program can be used once Richard reaches the goal. Merit pay is a system that increases the base salary of the employee who achieves the objectives of the headache (Snell and Bohlander 2012). James should raise Richards salary with a range of 7 to 9% in order to be motivate (Snell and Bohlander 2012). Financial rewards have no significant in students achievement thus financial reward is more appropriate for teachers (Robin 2012). From individual aspect, the increased salary frees Richard to satisfy various needs, such as help his school fee for his prevail degree. Richard is competitive, while the financial reward is a tangible form of achievement perception that satisfies his needs of ego and self- actualization (Armstrong and Murlis 2007). For school, the financial rewards enhance motivation, Richard is more willing to stay in the school and this benefits the school from retaining talents to teach Year 5 students (Armstrong and Murlis 2007). (ii) Non financial rewardsNon financial rewards are more effective in need (Armstrong and Murlis 2007). James can reward Richard by providing identification, such as verbally reward with positive feedback, promotion and training and development. James can reward the students by praising the classes and providing extra-circular activities for students to relax and learn. Richard has his own mind in line of achievement progression, rewards such as promotion, allows him to reach his individual goal (to have a better career). If Richard is rewarded with training, more knowledge will be received and allow him to have a well preparation for his master degree. Non financial rewards shows recognition which reinforce Richards self esteem and self actualization. For the school, non financial rewards channel lasting motivation which maintains Richards motivation to work in the school and dedicate more effort for his teaching of Year 5 students. (Armstrong and Murlis 2007) The rewardsmotivate the Year 5 students to study hard in order to get a better result in NAPLAN. Jamess roleAccording to managerial competency poser by Quinn, several roles from the framework are selected for James in the application of this case. James is a director, he has to develop a vision and set a clear goal and objectives for his teachers moreover he has to organize and design the whole plan to achieve the goal (Quinn et al 2003). Secondly, James is a mentor, he has to communicate effectively and share his knowledge of NAPLAN with Ri chard to develop his ability in teaching Year 5 students (Quinn et al 2003). James has to think creatively as he may have to draft refreshing teaching strategies with Richard accordingly he has to live and mange the change and his role in this process is innovator (Quinn et al 2003). James is also a co-coordinator, new ideas may suggested by Richard and James has to manage the projects and across the functions to ensure the Richards works can convey smoothly (Quinn et al 2003).Finally, James is a monitor, performances of students should be reviewed regularly to reenforcement the process on track while teaching styles should be monitored, for example, James can be a guest teacher in Richards class to see how the class runs and provides feedback to Richard (Quinn et al 2003, Mitchell, Ortiz, and Mitchell 1987). Feedback causal agencys performance and motivation therefore feedback should be given frequently, James is able to check the progress of the goal while Richard is able to improve his limitations or retain his advantages (Latham 2007).Unintended consequencesHarder goals drive performance therefore James may set a harder goal for Richard and his year 5 students to achieve (Latham 2007). A harder goal is associated higher take a chance which may lead to worse performance compare to lower goals, for instance, a harsher teaching style is adopted by Richard but students may strikingness extra pressure and lost their motivation in learning (Latham 2007). Secondly, goal conflicts may happen, such as, the schools goal is vary from Richards individual goal which reduce the motivation and worsen the performance (Latham 2007). In order to reach the goal, James has to co-ordinate with other teachers with the class arrangement, this may lead to disagreement about the decision and conflicts between colleagues may result. With the new class arrangement, other classes need to adopt a newteacher or teaching style it influences the academic results and motivation. O thers teachers also need to cope with the new goal and assist Richard and principal in some points even they do not get any reward, it leads to the problem of unfairness and inequality. remnantTo conclude, goal and task are strongly linked and dimension of goal is divided into content and intensity. A successful goal should be set according to S.M.A.R.T. After evaluation, Richard is chosen as the teacher. James could motive Richard and students by financial and non financial rewards. Within the process, James has multiple roles as mention before to ensure the goal is achieved. However, unexpected results may happen therefore James should consider more theories application solve the problem and achieve synergy.Reference listArmstrong, M. and Murlis, H. 2007, Reward Management A Handbook of honorarium Strategy and Practice, 5th ed., Kogan Page Publishers, U.K. Bailey, K. 2006, Language Teacher Supervision A case Based Approach, Cambridge University Press, U.K. Campbell, J., Kyriaki des, L., Nuijis, D. and Robinson, W. 2012, Assessing Teacher Effectiveness Different Models, Routledge, Canada. Latham, G. 2007, Work Motivation. History.Theory.Research and Practice, kB Oaks, U.K. Locke, E. 1996, Motivation through conscious goal setting, Applied and antifertility Psychology, vol.5, pp. 117-124. Locke, E. and Latham, G. 1990, A theory of Goal setting and Task Performance, Prentice Hall, unsanded Jersey. Mitchell, D., Ortiz, F. and Mitchell, T. 1987, Work Orientation and Job Performance The Cultural Basis of Teaching Rewards and Incentives, Suny Press, U.S.A. Robin, G. 2012, Praise, Motivation, and the Child, Routledge, U.S.A. Rouillard,L. 2003, Goals and Goal Setting Achieving Measured Objectives, 3rd ed., Cengage Learning, U.S.A. Snell, S. and Bohlander,G. 2012, Managing Human Resources, Cengage Learning, U.S.A. Stronge, J. and Hindman, J. 2006, The Teacher fiber Index A Protocol for Teacher Selection, ASCD, U.S.A. Quinn, R.E., Faerman,S.R., Thompson,M.P. and McGrath,M. 2003, Becoming a master manager A competency framework, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York.