INFORMATION TO USERS
This reproduction was made from a copy o f a docum ent sent to us for microfilming.
While the m ost advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce
this docum ent, the quality o f the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the
quality o f the m aterial subm itted.
The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help clarify markings or
notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1.T he sign or “ target” for pages apparently lacking from the docum ent
photographed is “ Missing Page(s)” . If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) o r section, they are spliced into the film along w ith adjacent pages. This
may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure com plete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated w ith a round black m ark, it is an
indication o f eith er blurred copy because o f m ovem ent during exposure,
duplicate copy, or copyrighted m aterials th a t should n o t have been filmed. For
blurred pages, a good image o f the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If
copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing th e pages in
the adjacent frame.
3. When a m ap, drawing o r chart, etc., is p art o f the m aterial being photographed,
a definite m ethod o f “ sectioning” the m aterial has been followed. It is
custom ary to begin filming at the upper left hand com er o f a large sheet and to
continue from left to right in equal sections w ith small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again—beginning below th e first row and continuing on
until com plete.
4. F or illustrations th at cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic
means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted
into y o u r xerographic copy. These p rints are available upon request from the
Dissertations C ustom er Services D epartm ent.
5. Some pages in any docum ent may have indistinct print. In all cases the best
available copy has been filmed.

University
Microfilms
International
300 N. Z eeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

8303759

Calvert, George Morrow

A STUDY O F THE MOTIVATION OF SCHOOL TEACHERS IN PENAL
INSTITUTIONS

Michigan State University

University
Microfilms
International

Ph.D.

300 N. Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, MI 48106

1982

A STUDY OF THE MOTIVATION OF SCHOOL TEACHERS
IN PENAL INSTITUTIONS
By
George M. C a l v e r t

A DISSERTATION
Submitted t o
Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y
in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the require m ents
f o r the deg re e o f
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College o f Education
Department o f Educational A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and Curriculum
1982

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF THE MOTIVATION OF SCHOOL TEACHERS
IN PENAL INSTITUTIONS
By
George M. C a l v e r t

Background
Teachers in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s work in a r a t h e r unusual
situation:

t h e i r s t u d e n t s may be v o l a t i l e in n a t u r e , t h e i r r o l e in th e

i n s t i t u t i o n i s s u b o r d i n a t e t o t h e s e c u r i t y a s p e c t o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n and
t h e i r c u r ric u lu m has been r i g i d l y s t a n d a r d i z e d t o accommodate th e demands
o f th e penal system.

De spite t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , th e Michigan Depart­

ment o f C o r r e c t i o n s has been a b le t o m ain t a in adequate s t a f f i n g to meet
th e e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f th e system.

The purpose o f t h i s s tu d y i s to

i n v e s t i g a t e the r e a s o n s , both per so nal and p r o f e s s i o n a l , t h a t te a c h e r s
m a in ta in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s with th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c tio n s and
a l s o the f a c t o r s which may i n f l u e n c e them to e x e r t e f f o r t beyond the
minimum r e q u i s i t e to m a in ta in t h i s p o s i t i o n .
Methodology
All n i n e t y - f i v e t e a c h e r s employed in th e academic s ch oo ls o f
Michigan p r i s o n s were q u e r ie d conce rn in g th e e f f e c t o f p o s s i b l e motiva­
t i o n a l f a c t o r s upon t h e i r employment.

N i n e t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t o f the

t e a c h e r s , o u t s i d e o f Marquette Branch P r i s o n , responded t o th e q u e s t i o n ­
naire.

Responses were analyzed us in g means, s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s , c r o ss

George M. C a lv e rt

ta b s and chi squared t a b l e s .
Findings
Teachers do not f e e l they hold t h e i r p o s i t i o n s simply because they
have no o t h e r o p t i o n but r a t h e r because they choose to tea ch i n p r i s o n s .
They f e e l they a r e an e l i t e group and they p la c e g r e a t value on th e
practical b en efits of th e ir position.

They choose to a s s o c i a t e them­

s e l v e s with p u b l i c e d u c a t io n r a t h e r than with t h e c r im in al j u s t i c e system.
T h e ir primary goal on th e jo b i s te a c h i n g t h e i r s u b j e c t a r e a with
goals o f t e a c h in g f o r s t u d e n t change, improving th e e d u catio n system,
c o n t r o l l i n g t h e i r c la s sr o o m s, e x h i b i t i n g t h e i r s k i l l s and o b t a i n i n g r e c ­
ognition fo r t h e i r e f f o r t s .

L i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e between t e a c h e r s was a s ­

s o c i a t e d w it h v a r i a t i o n s i n s e c u r i t y o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n s , age group o f
s t u d e n t s o r demographics o f t h e t e a c h e r s .

Teachers who were p e r m it t e d

t o develop t h e i r own cou rse s d i f f e r e d from th o s e who te a c h s ta n d a r d i z e d
cou rse s in t h a t th e former p la c e g r e a t e r emphasis on t e a c h in g f o r s t u ­
dent change.

All groups o f t e a c h e r s f e e l they can o b t a i n success in

t h e i r jo b s and would a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n agai n given th e o p p o r t u n i t y to
s t a r t over .

To my w i f e , Jo y , and my dau g h ter s J e n n i f e r and
Amanda, who helped me keep l i f e in p e r s p e c t i v e
while I was pur su in g t h i s e d u c a t i o n a l endeavor.
While they may n o t have e x p e d ite d th e pro cess
they did make i t a l o t more e n j o y a b l e .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to e x p r e ss my a p p r e c i a t i o n t o my Committee Chairman, Dr.
P h i l i p Cusick, who was always a v a i l a b l e t o lend a s s i s t a n c e when I needed
d i r e c t i o n and to my committee members Dr. Samuel Moore and Dr. Charles
Blackman.
I would l i k e to thank th e t e a c h e r s in t h e Michigan Department o f
C o r r e c t i o n s who c o o p e r a te d f u l l y in t h i s endeavor.

I would a l s o l i k e

to thank Mr. James Yarborough, with th e Program Bureau o f th e Department
o f C o r r e c t i o n s who made ac c e s s t o t h e p r i s o n s more c o n v en ien t and Mrs.
B e tty Uphaus, who a dv is e d and a s s i s t e d me in t h e t e c h n i c a l a s p e c t s o f
t h i s paper.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................... v i i
LIST OF F I G U R E S ......................................................................................................

x

Chapter
I.

INTRODUCTION

.........................................................................................

1

Purpose .................................................................................................
2
2
Conceptual Framework.......................................................................
Review o f L i t e r a t u r e ...................................................................
5
E x p lo r a to r y Ques tions ...................................................................
9
D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e S y s t e m ............................................................... 11
Education w i t h i n th e System .....................................................
13
The T e a c h e r s ..............................................................................................14
The S t u d e n t s ..........................................................................................18
M e th o d o l o g y .............................................................................................. 19
S e l e c t i o n o f th e Study G r o u p ...................................................... 22
S i g n i f i c a n c e .................................................................................... 22
Summary.......................................................................................................23
II.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE....................................................................25
P ris on Education ...........................................................................
37
S u n m a r y .......................................................................................................42

III.

METHODOLOGY
I s o l a t i o n o f P o s s i b l e M o tiv a tio n a l F a c t o r s .................. 45
Design o f t h e In str u m e n t .......................................................... 46
S u c c e s s .................................................................................................. 50
S a t i s f a c t i o n ................................................................................ 50
P i l o t S t u d y ..........................................................................................50
A n a l y s i s .................................................................................................. 50
S e l e c t i o n o f th e Study G r o u p ...................................................... 51

IV.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS.................................................................................56
P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s ................................................................... 58
Pro duction F a c to r s ....................................................................... 61
P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s Considered by the Sex o f th e
T e a c h e r .................................................................................................. 63
iv

C hapter

Page

P r o d u cti o n by Sex o f t h e T e a c h e r ............................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n by S u b j e c t Area o f t h e Teacher . . . .
Mathematics Teachers ..................................................................
English Teachers ...........................................................................
Reading Teachers ...........................................................................
L. R. C. T e a c h e r s ......................................................................
Other Teachers ...............................................................................
P r o d u c tio n F a c t o r s c o n s id e re d by S u b j e c t Area o f th e
T e a c h e r ............................................................................................
Mathematics Teachers ..................................................................
Englis h Teachers ...........................................................................
Reading Teachers ...........................................................................
L. R. C. T e a c h e r s ......................................................................
Other T e a c h e r s ...............................................................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c t o r s Considered by Experience o f
th e T e a c h e r ....................................................................................
Teachers with Less Than Twelve and More Than Four
Years Experience in P ris on Educ ation .................................
Teachers with Less Than Five Years Experience in
P r is o n Education .......................................................................
Teachers wit h no P u b l i c School Teaching Ex pe rience .
P roducti on F a c to r s Considered by Expe rience o f th e
T e a c h e r .........................................................................................
Teachers with from Five t o Eleven Years o f
Ex perien ce in P r is o n Education ........................................
Teachers w i th Less Than Five Years Experience in
P r is o n Education .......................................................................
P r is o n Teachers with no P u b l ic School Teaching
E x p e r i e n c e ....................................................................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s Considered by S e c u r i t y o f th e
I n s t i t u t i o n ................................................................................
P r o d u cti o n F a c to r s Considered by S e c u r i t y o f t h e
I n s t i t u t i o n ................................................................................
Female i n s t i t u t i o n s ....................................................................
P a r t i c i p a t i o n Factors Considered by Age o f th e
S t u d e n t .........................................................................................
S a t i s f a c t i o n as i t R e l a t e s to P a r t i c i p a t i o n and
P r oduction F a c to r s ................................................. . . . .
P a r ti c i p a t i o n Factors
...........................................................
P r o d u ctio n F a c to r s .......................................................................
The R e l a t i o n s h i p between Success and S a t i s f a c t i o n .
S u m m a r y .............................................................................................
Mathematics Teachers ..........................................................
English Teachers ...................................................................
Reading Teachers ...................................................................
L. R. C. T e a c h e r s ..............................................................
Other Teachers .......................................................................
Teachers w ith over Eleven Years Experience in P r is o n
E d u c a t i o n ....................................................................................
v

65
65
68
68
68
69
69
70
70
70
70
70
72
72
73
73
75
76
76
76
78
78
80
82
82
86
87
89
89
91
94
95
95
95
95
95

Chapter

Page

Teachers w i th Between Five and Eleven Years
Experience in P r is o n Education ........................................
Teachers w i th Less than Five Years Experience in
P r is o n Education .......................................................................
Teachers with no P u b li c School Teaching Experience .
Maximum, Medium and Minimum S e c u r i t y ...............................
Female I n s t i t u t i o n s ..................................................................
V.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

............................................

96
96
96
97
97
99

99
P u r p o s e .............................................................................................
B a c k g r o u n d .........................................................................................
99
M e t h o d o l o g y ......................................................................................... 100
The Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ............................................................................ 102
The P o p u l a t i o n .....................................................................................102
103
F i n d i n g s ...............................................................................
D i s c u s s i o n ..............................................................................................105
P ro ductio n M o tiv ato r s .............................................................. 107
Recommendations f o r F u r th e r Study .................................... 114
APPENDICES
A

115

B

Q u e s t io n n a ir e

C

Chi Square T a b l e s ............................................................................ 122

BIBLIOGRAPHY

................................................................................

..........................................................................................................

vi

116

137

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table
3:1

Demographics o f Teachers i n Michigan Penal I n s t i t u t i o n s

54

4:1

P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s by Order o f Descending Means . . .

59

4 :2

Pro du ction F a c t o r by Order o f Descending Means ..................

62

4 :3

P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s o f Teachers Considered by Sex o f
th e Teacher .............................................................................................

64

Produc tion F a c t o r s o f Teachers Considered by Sex o f th e
Teacher .....................................................................................................

66

P a r t i c i p a t i o n Factors o f Teachers Considered by S u b je c t
Area Taught .............................................................................................

67

Pro duction F a c t o r s o f Teachers Considered by S u b je c t
Area Taught .............................................................................................

71

P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s Considered by Experience o f th e
Teacher .....................................................................................................

74

P r oduc tion F a c to r s Considered by th e Experience o f th e
Teacher .....................................................................................................

77

P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s Considered by S e c u r i t y o f th e
I n s t i t u t i o n .............................................................................................

79

P rodu ction Factors Considered by S e c u r i t y o f th e
I n s t i t u t i o n .............................................................................................

81

P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s o f Teachers Considered by Age o f
T h e ir S tu d en ts ........................................................................................

83

4:12

P rodu cti on F a c to r s o f Te achers Considered by Age o f
T h e ir S tu den ts ........................................................................................

83

4:13

P r oduc tion F a c to r s o f Teachers Considered by Whether the
Teachers Feel They Can Obtain Success i n T h e ir Cu rren t
P o s i t i o n .....................................................................................................

85

S a t i s f a c t i o n - All Teachers

86

4:4
4:5
4 :6
4 :7
4:8
4:9
4:10
4:11

4:14

.........................................................

Tab le

4:15
4:16
4:17
C:1
C:2
C:3

Page

P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c t o r s f o r Teachers Considered by
Whether They Would Accept th e P o s i t i o n Again ......................

88

Pr odu ction F acto r s o f Teachers Considered by Whether
They Would Accept th e P o s i t i o n Again ........................................

90

R e l a t i o n s h i p Between Success and S a t i s f a c t i o n
..............
90
2
Table o f X Considered by Sex o f t h e Teacher;
P r od uction F a c to r .................................................................................. 122
2
X
Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s Considered by Sex of
t h e T e a c h e r ..................................................................................................122
2

C:4

X
Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s f o r Mathematics
T e a c h e r s ...........................................................................................................123
2
X
Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n Factors f o r English Teachers
. 123

C:5

X

C:6

X

C:7

X

C:8

2
X
Table o f P rod uction Factors f o r Mathematics
T e a c h e r s ...........................................................................................................125

C:9

X

C:10

o
o

2

2

Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n

Factors f o r Reading Teachers

. 124

Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n

Factors f o r L.R.C. Teachers

. 124

Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s f o r Other Te achers .

. 125

Table o f Prod uction F a c to r s f o r En glis h Teachers

. . 126

X2

Table o f P rodu ction F a c to r s f o r Reading Teachers

. . 126

C:11

X2

Table o f P rodu ction Facto rs f o r L.R.C. Teachers .

. . 127

C:12

X2

Table o f P r oduc tion F a c to r s f o r Other Teachers

C:13

X Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s f o r Te achers with
Over Eleven Years Experience ..........................................................

C:14
C:15
C:16
C:17

. . .

127

2

128

2

X Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s f o r Teachers wit h
Between Five and Eleven Years Experience ............................... 128
2
X Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F acto r s f o r Teachers with
Under Five Years E x p e r i e n c e ............................................................... 129
2

X
Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F acto r s f o r Teachers with no
P u b li c School Experience ...................................................................

129

2

X Table o f Pro duction F a c to r s f o r Teachers with o v e r
Eleven Years Experience ...................................................................
vi i i

130

Table
C:18
C:19
C:20
C:21
C:22
C:23
C:24
C:25

Page
2

X Table o f P roductio n F a c to r s f o r Teachers with
Between Five and Eleven Years Expe rience ...............................
2
X Table o f P rod ucti on F a c to r s f o r Teachers with Under
Five Years Experience .......................................................................

130
131

O

X
Table o f P ro ducti on F a c to r s f o r Teachers with no
P u b l i c School Experience ...................................................................

131

X2 Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c t o r Considered by S e c u r i t y
o f the I n s t i t u t i o n ..................................................................................... 132
2
X
Table o f Pro duction F a c to r s Considered by S e x u r i t y
o f th e I n s t i t u t i o n ..................................................................................... 132
P
X Ta ble o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s f o r Teachers o f
Female S tu d en ts .................................................................................... 133
X Table o f P r o d u cti o n F a c t o r s f o r Teachers o f Female
S t u d e n t s ........................................................................................................... 133
2
X Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F acto r s Considered by Age o f
th e S t u d e n t .................................................................................................. 134
p

C:26

X Table o f P roducti on F a c t o r s Considered by Age o f th e
S t u d e n t ........................................................................................................... 134

C:27

X2 Ta ble o f P roducti on Considered

C:28

X2 Table o f P a r t i c i p a t i o n F a c to r s Considered by Teacher
S a t i s f a c t i o n .............................................................................................

135

X2 Ta ble o f Pro ducti on F a c t o r s Considered by Teacher
S a t i s f a c t i o n .............................................................................................

136

C:29

ix

by F e e lin g Succ es sfu l

135

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

Page

A:1

115

x

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION
O f f i c i a l l y , i n d i v i d u a l s ar e c o nfined to penal i n s t i t u t i o n s in
Michigan f o r v i o l a t i n g one o r s e v e r a l o f t h e laws o f th e S t a t e .

In

r e a l i t y , t h e r e a r e two r ea so ns f o r c o n f i n i n g an i n d i v i d u a l in a c o r r e c ­
t i o n a l f a c i l i t y ; e i t h e r he has committed an o f f e n s e and s o c i e t y wishes
to punish him, o r he has committed an o f f e n s e and s o c i e t y i s a f r a i d o f
him.

In e i t h e r c a s e , he has been found g u i l t y o f committing an a c t

which s o c i e t y w i l l not t o l e r a t e .

Some i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e co nfined in

Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s have simply made a m istak e and a r e c o n t e n t
t o pay th e consequences wh ile they a w a it t h e i r r e t u r n t o s o c i e t y , where
they hope t o spend th e r e s t o f t h e i r l i v e s as normal, p r o d u c t i v e c i t i ­
zens.

Others a r e b i t t e r toward s o c i e t y and t h e i r p o s i t i o n in s o c i e t y ;

t h i s b i t t e r n e s s may become a m o t iv a ti o n a l f o r c e permeating t h e i r a c t i o n s .
D is c u ss io n s conce rn ing penal i n s t i t u t i o n s and c o r r e c t i o n s systems
tend to focus on t h e r e h a b i l i t a t i v e e f f o r t s o f th o s e sy st em s; however,
the primary f u n c t i o n o f c o r r e c t i o n s i s n o t t h e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f o f ­
f e n d e r s , but r a t h e r th e punishment o f c r i m i n a l s .

P r is o n s were not e s ­

t a b l i s h e d t o " r e h a b i l i t a t e " i n d i v i d u a l s b u t to punish "wrongdoers" o r
p r o t e c t s o c i e t y from them f o r a time.

R e h a b i l i t a t i o n o r t r e a t m e n t , by

the n a t u r e o f t h e c o r r e c t i o n s system, i s r e l e g a t e d t o a secondary func­
t i o n o f a penal i n s t i t u t i o n .

Treatment i s not only t o l e r a t e d b u t en­

couraged, as long as i t i s kept in p e r s p e c t i v e w i th t h e primary custody
e f f o r t s of th a t i n s t i t u t i o n .

2

Since te a c h i n g in th e academic school o f a penal i n s t i t u t i o n i s
a t r e a t m e n t f u n c t i o n o f t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n , t e a c h e r s who work in th ose
academic s c h o o ls s e r v e a secondary f u n c t i o n w i t h i n t h e Department o f
Corrections.

By p o l i c y , t e a c h i n g i s only a secondary f u n c t io n o f i n d i ­

v i d u a l s who a r e employed as t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e Department o f Correc­
t i o n s ; th e primary f u n c t i o n o f each employee i s c u s to d y .

T e a c h e rs ,

along w i th o t h e r t r e a t m e n t p e r s o n n e l , a r e f ir m l y e n tr e n c h e d on th e
bottom o f t h e i r c o r r e c t i o n i n s t i t u t i o n ' s h i e r a r c h y .
In o r d e r t o pr ov ide e d u c a t i o n a l s e r v i c e s t o inmates i n Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s , th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s has h i r e d c e r t i f i e d
t e a c h e r s t o work i n t h e academic s ch oo ls o f t h e v a r i o u s penal i n s t i t u ­
t i o n s thro ugh out Michigan.

Despite the type o f s t u d e n t s t h e Department

o f C o r r e c t i o n s m a i n t a i n s , t h e b i t t e r n a t u r e o f some o f t h e s e i n d i v i d ­
u a l s and th e secondary s t a t u s o f th e te a c h i n g p o s i t i o n w i t h i n th e
c o r r e c t i o n s h i e r a r c h y , t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s has been
s u c c e s s f u l in a t t r a c t i n g and m a in t a in in g t e a c h e r s to f u l f i l l the
s t a f f i n g needs o f th e v a r io u s i n s t i t u t i o n a l academic s c h o o ls .
Purpose
The purpose o f t h i s study i s t o i n v e s t i g a t e th e r e a s o n s , both
per so nal and p r o f e s s i o n a l , t h a t t e a c h e r s m a in ta in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s with
t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s , and a l s o th e f a c t o r s which may
i n f l u e n c e them to e x e r t e f f o r t beyond t h e minimum r e q u i s i t e t o main­
ta in th is position.
Conceptual framework
This r e s e a r c h i s based upon t h e premise t h a t t h e r e i s a d u a l i t y
in employ m en t-related m o t i v a t i o n ; th e f i r s t s e t o f f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g

3

m o ti v a tio n in t h e work f o r c e i s “p a r t i c i p a t i o n " f a c t o r s , which d e t e r ­
mine th e amount o f freedom an i n d i v i d u a l i s w i l l i n g t o r e l i n q u i s h t o
an o r g a n i z a t i o n .

" Pro du ction" f a c t o r s a f f e c t t h e amount o f e f f o r t an

i n d i v i d u a l i s w i l l i n g to expend beyond t h e minimum r e q u i s i t e t o f u l f i l l
h i s c o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g a t i o n s (March and S i m o n ) J
In o r d e r f o r an o r g a n i z a t i o n to m ain ta in a s t a b l e w orkfo rce , the
p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o ti v a to rs must be s u f f i c i e n t t o b a l a n c e th e freedom the
employee r e l i n q u i s h e s in o r d e r t o m a i n t a in h i s employment.

This b a l ­

ance i s d e s c r i b e d by March and Simon:
The in d u c e m e n t s - c o n t r i b u ti o n s b a la n c e has two major
components: the p e r c e i v e d d e s i r a b i l i t y o f l e a v in g
th e o r g a n i z a t i o n and t h e u t i l i t y o f a l t e r n a t i v e s
foregone i n o r d e r to s t a y in t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . 2
While a low t u r n o v e r r a t e among t e a c h e r s in th e academic scho ols
o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s would seem to i n d i c a t e a p o s i t i v e b a l ­
ance between p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s and freedom r e l i n q u i s h e d by th e
t e a c h e r s ; t h i s low tu r n o v e r r a t e may a l s o i n d i c a t e t h a t th e t e a c h e r s
p e r c e i v e t h e i r a l t e r n a t i v e s as being l i m i t e d t o remaining in t h e i r
c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n o r l e a v in g the te a c h i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l t o g e t h e r .

Thus,

d e f a u l t becomes a m o t iv a ti o n to p a r t i c i p a t e in th e o r g a n i z a t i o n .
P o r t e r and Lawler (1968)** e s t a b l i s h e d t h e f o llo w in g c r i t e r i o n
f o r a reward t o become a m o t i v a t o r to produce:

An i n d i v i d u a l must

p e r c e i v e h i s e f f o r t s as le a d in g t o accomplishment which w i l l l e a d to

^James March and H e r b e rt Simon, O r g a n i z a t i o n s , (New York:
Wiley and Sons I n c . ) , p. 83.

John

2Ibid.
^Layman P o r t e r and Edward Lawler I I I , Managerial A t t i t u d e s and
Performance, (New York: Richard D. Irwin I n c . , 1968), p. 165.

4

the obtainment o f the reward.

The reward must r e l a t e to both accom­

plish m en t and s a t i s f a c t i o n b e f o r e i t can be a c o n t i n u i n g m o t i v a t o r to
produce.

In i t s b a s i c form th e P o r t e r and Lawler Model looks l i k e th e

fo llow ing:

E f f o r t + A b i l i t y = Accomplishment ------

Reward --------

Satisfaction

For t h e purpose of t h i s s t u d y , reward and s u c c e ss w i l l be used
i n t e r c h a n g e a b ly to mean whatever th e i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r p e r c e i v e s as
worth working f o r o r t r y i n g t o ach iev e on h i s j o b .

This d e f i n i t i o n i s

in agreement with F r e d e ric k Herzberg, who a s s o c i a t e s worker s a t i s f a c ­
t i o n and "a f e e l i n g t h a t you have a c h i e v e d . "
From th e P o r t e r - L a w l e r Model we can e x t r a p o l a t e t h e f oll ow ing
conclusions:4
Because o f t h e e x p e r ie n c e s o f an i n d i v i d u a l th ro u g h o u t h i s c a ­
r e e r , a p o t e n t i a l reward may s e r v e as a p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r a t one s ta g e
o f h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l development and l o s e i t s m o t i v a t i o n a l p o t e n t i a l a t
a n o t h e r s t a g e , i f th e reward i s no lo nger p e r c e iv e d by th e i n d i v i d u a l
as r e l a t i n g t o e f f o r t o r s a t i s f a c t i o n .
A reward may be a pr o d u ctio n f a c t o r t o one group o f employees
and not to a n o t h e r group i f the e f f o r t r e q u i s i t e f o r accomplishment
v a r i e s among t h e groups o r i f p e r c e p t i o n o f t h a t e f f o r t v a r i e s .

The

s t r e n g t h o f any reward as a m o t i v a t o r i s dependent upon th e p e r c e p t i o n
o f the i n d i v i d u a l .
In o r d e r t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e p o s s i b l e p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s a f f e c t ­
ing t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n i n Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s , i t i s n e c e s s a r y

4 I b i d . , 165.

5

t o n o t only determine what th e t e a c h e r s p e r c e i v e as being s a t i s f y i n g
b u t a l s o t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between e f f o r t and
reward; and reward and s a t i s f a c t i o n .

The i n v e s t i g a t i o n must c o n s id e r

th e e x p e r ie n c e o f th e t e a c h e r and th e type o f i n s t i t u t i o n in which he
i s employed.
Review o f th e l i t e r a t u r e
L i t e r a t u r e w i l l be reviewed from two a r e a s f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h :
th e f i r s t a r e a w i l l be l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t i n g t o gener al m o t i v a t i o n a l
t h e o r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t p e r t a i n s to t h e two f a c t o r s o f m o t i v a t i o n .
The second a r e a d e a l s with m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s as they r e l a t e s p e c i f i ­
c a l l y to th e t e a c h i n g p r o f e s s i o n .
Much c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h co ncerning employee m o t i v a t i o n r e v o lv e s
C

around H e r z b e r g 's "M otivation Hygiene Theory" (1966).

The b a s i s o f

t h i s t h e o r y i s t h a t hygiene f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e t o d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n by
t h e i r a b s e n c e , but do n o t r e l a t e t o s a t i s f a c t i o n when they a r e p r e s e n t
in t h e p l a c e o f employment.

Co nve rsely, m o t i v a t i o n f a c t o r s w i l l con­

t r i b u t e t o s a t i s f a c t i o n when p r e s e n t , b u t do n o t a f f e c t d i s s a t i s f a c ­
t i o n when a b s e n t from t h e p la c e o f employment.

The o p p o s i t e o f s a t i s ­

f a c t i o n i s not d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n but r a t h e r , n o n - s a t i s f a c t i o n ; l i k e w i s e ,
t h e o p p o s i t e o f d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i s not s a t i s f a c t i o n , but r a t h e r , not
dissatisfaction.
Much o f t h e c r i t i c i s m o f H e r z b e r g 's th e o r y c e n t e r s around h i s
methodology.

C r i t i c s contend t h a t th e th e o r y i s methodbound; r e p l i ­

c a t i o n i s p o s s i b l e only when t h e s t o r y tech n iq u e used by Herzb-. rg i s

^F. Herzberg, Work and the Nature o f Man, (New York:
P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1966), pp. 71-91.

World

6

follo we d.

When any o t h e r survey method i s employed f o r th e s t u d y , th e

r e s u l t s o b ta in e d a r e a t v a r i a n c e w ith H e r z b e r g 's and tend t o somewhat
n eg ate h i s f i n d i n g s (Soliman, 1 9 8 0 ) . 6
Chang a s s o c i a t e d H e r z b e r g 's hygiene f a c t o r s t o lower l e v e l needs
d e s c r i b e d in "Maslow's H ier ar ch y o f Needs" and m o t i v a t i o n f a c t o r s with
7

Maslow's h i g h e r le v e l needs (1977).

These h i g h e r l e v e l needs o f
Q

Maslow have a l s o been a s s o c i a t e d with i n t r i n s i c rewards (Slocum, 1977).
While d isagreem en t w ith H e r z b e r g 's th e o r y i s e v i d e n t th ro ugho ut
m o t iv a t io n a l l i t e r a t u r e , one f a c t remains c l e a r :

m o ti v a tio n to p a r t i c ­

i p a t e and m o t i v a t i o n t o produce a r e two d i s t i n c t e n t i t i e s , dependent
upon th e i n d i v i d u a l ; how he p e r c e i v e s h i s su rro undings and h i m s e l f ;
his needs development and h i s locus o f c o n t r o l .
With t h i s m ulti p i e x i t y o f f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g th e m o ti v a tio n o f an
i n d i v i d u a l , one f a c t o r seems i n n a t e in mankind; t h a t being a f f i l i a t i o n
g
(Chang).
A f f i l i a t i o n i s p o s i t i v e l y a s s o c i a t e d w it h p r e s t i g e o f th e
group, the e x t e n t t o which group g o a l s a r e shared by th e members, th e
frequ en cy o f i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h i n t h e group and s a t i s f a c t i o n o f i n d i v i d ­
ual needs by t h e group.

A n e g a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p has been found between

a f f i l i a t i o n and com p e t iti o n w i t h i n th e group (March and S i m o n ) . ^

^H. M. Soliman, "Motivation-Hygiene Theory o f Job A t t i t u d e , "
J o u rn al o f Applied Psychology, 54, pp. 452-61.

Ohio:

7Kae H. Chang, M o tiv a tio n a l Th eorie s and P r a c t i c e s , (Columbus,
Grid I n c . , 1977), p. 80.
O

J . W. Slocum, "Motivation in Managerial L e v e l s , " Jou rn al o f
Applied Psyc hology, 1971, 55, pp. 312-16.
^Chang, p. 80.
^ M arc h and Simon, p. 163.

7

Motivation as i t r e l a t e s s p e c i f i c a l l y to members o f th e teach in g
p r o f e s s i o n was th e s u b j e c t o f a s tu d y conducted by Masling and S t e r n
(1966).^

The study involved i n t e r v i e w i n g a s e l e c t group o f t e a c h e r s

i n th e Syr ac use , New York p u b l i c s c h o o ls t o i d e n t i f y "unconscious"
m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e school system.
The f a c t o r s were reduced t o a q u e s t i o n n a i r e which was a d m in is te r e d to
th e general te a c h i n g p o p u l a t i o n w i t h i n a l l Syracuse p u b l i c s c h o o ls .
The te n f a c t o r s which were i d e n t i f i e d and d e f i n e d a r e l i s t e d below.
1.

" P r a c t i c a l " : Teachers a r e m o tivated by in str u m e n ta l
values suc.i as s a l a r y , h o u r s , v a c a t i o n tim e, e t c .

2.

" S t a t u s - s t r i v i n g " : Teachers a r e m otiv a te d by th e
p r e s t i g e a s s o c i a t e d with t h e p o s i t i o n .

3.

" N u r tu r a n t " : Teachers a r e m ot iv a te d by a d e s i r e f o r
student a ffe c tio n .

4.

" N o n d ire c tiv e " : Teachers a r e m o tivated by a d e s i r e to
t each s t u d e n t s t o be indep en den t.

5.

"C ritical":
Teachers a r e m ot ivated by a d e s i r e to
reform and improve t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n .

6.

" P r e - a d u l t f i x a t i o n " : Te achers a r e m ot ivated by a d e s i r e
t o a s s o c i a t e with young peo ple.

7.

" O rderl y" : Teachers a r e m o ti v ated by a d e s i r e t o c odify
and r e g u l a t e b e h a v io r .

8.

"Dependent": Teachers a r e m o tiv a te d by a d e s i r e to
p l a c e t h e i r r e l i a n c e on o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s such as a
school a d m i n i s t r a t o r .

9.

" E x h i b i t i o n i s t " : Teachers a r e m o tiv a te d by a d e s i r e
fo r a tte n tio n . A d e sire to e x h ib it t h e i r s k i l l s .

10.

11

"Dominant": Teachers a r e m o tivate d by a d e s i r e t o
demonstrate t h e i r s u p e r i o r i t y and a u t h o r i t y .

Joseph Masling and George S t e r n , The Pedagogical S i g n i f i c a n c e
o f Unconscious F acto r s in Career M o ti vati on f o r T e a c h e r s , Comparative
Research P r o j e c t , 1966.

8

Dan L o r t i e

12

r e p o r t e d on a study conducted in t h e e a r l y 1970's

which used a s i m i l a r approach it. methodology f o r s tu d y in g t e a c h e r mo­
t i v a t i o n t o t h a t used by Masling and S t e r n .

"The Five Town Study"

used an i n t e r v i e w t e c h n iq u e u t i l i z i n g open ended q u e s t i o n s t o o b t a i n
i n f o r m a tio n concerning m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g p u b l i c school
teachers.

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e developed from t h i s study was used i n th e

"Dade County F l o r i d a Study."

13

From t h e s e s t u d i e s L o r t i e developed

t h e f o ll o w in g s e t o f f a c t o r s which he di v id e d i n t o t h r e e p a r t s :
" E x t r i n s i c rewards" a r e r e l a t e d to p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s , "psychic
rewards" a r e r e l a t e d t o pr o d u ctio n f a c t o r s and f i n a l l y he r e f e r r e d to
" a n c i l l a r y rewards" which he f e l t r e l a t e d t o n e i t h e r p r o d u c tio n nor
p articipation factors.
E x t r i n s i c Rewards:
a.
b.
c.

Salary
Respect from o t h e r s
Chance t o i n f l u e n c e

Psychic Rewards:
a.
b.
c.
d.

Chance t o s t u d y , read and p la n f o r c l a s s
D i s c i p l i n e and classroom management
Knowing I have reached s t u d e n t s and th ey have l e a r n e d
Chance to a s s o c i a t e with o t h e r t e a c h e r s

A n c i l l a r y Rewards:
a.
b.
c.
d.

S e c u r i t y o f income
Time ( e s p . summer) f o r t r a v e l e t c .
Freedom from co m p etitio n and r i v a l r y
A p p r o p ria te n e s s f o r people l i k e me

L o r t i e a l s o found t h a t t e a c h e r s v a r i e d in m o t i v a t i o n a l e f f e c t s o f r e ­
wards because o f d i f f e r e n c e s in sex and e x p e r i e n c e .
12

Dan C. L o r t i e , S c h o o l te a c h e r :
( U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago P r e s s , 1975).
13I b i d . , p. 123.

A Sociological Study,

9

In summary, as March and Simon s u g g e s t , t h e r e a r e two types o f
f a c t o r s which a f f e c t o n e ' s w i l l i n g n e s s t o p r o d u c t iv e l y p a r t i c i p a t e in
an o r g a n i z a t i o n ; they dichotomized them i n t o p roductio n f a c t o r s and
participation factors.

The former keep an i n d i v i d u a l merely a f f i l i a t e d

with th e o r g a n i z a t i o n and th e l a t t e r compel t h a t i n d i v i d u a l t o produce
beyond t h e minimum r e q u i s i t e t o m ain ta in h i s a f f i l i a t i o n .

This d i c h o t ­

omy i s c l a r i f i e d by P o r t e r and Lawler, who s u g g e s t th e d e f i n i t i o n o f
p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s does not l i e w i th th e o r g a n i z a t i o n p e r s e , but
r a t h e r with t h e i n d i v i d u a l , who develops h i s own be h av ior ac co rding
t o h i s p e r c e p t i o n o f e f f o r t and reward and th e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
th e two.

In o t h e r words, w h il e we recognize th e e x t e n t o f t h e f a c t o r s

which a f f e c t m o t i v a t i o n , in o r d e r t o unde rstan d be h a v io r in an o r g a n i ­
z a t i o n we have t o u n derstand th e as sessment of th e f a c t o r s as they
a f f e c t individual behavior.
The i n t e r e s t i s in u n d e rstanding th e b e h a v io r o f t e a c h e r s who
work in a very unusual e d u c a t io n a l environment, p r i s o n s , where, as we
see i t , t h e t r a d i t i o n a l t e a c h i n g rewards a r e not a v a i l a b l e and where
e d u c a t io n i s s u b s e r v i e n t t o c u s to d y .

The purpose i s to i n v e s t i g a t e

the r e a s o n s , both per so nal and p r o f e s s i o n a l , t h a t t e a c h e r s m ain t a i n
t h e i r p o s i t i o n s w i th t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and a l s o
the f a c t o r s which may i n f l u e n c e them to e x e r t e f f o r t beyond t h e m i n i ­
mum r e q u i s i t e t o m a in ta in t h i s p o s i t i o n .
E x p lo r a to r y q u e s t i o n s
In o r d e r t o complete t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , i t w i l l be n eces sar y
to answer th e f o ll o w in g q u e s t i o n s :

10

I.

What a r e th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t e a c h e r s
in th e academic s c h o o ls o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
a.

Do t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s m a in ta in
t h e i r employment because they f e e l they have no o t h e r
op t io n ?

b.

How do th e t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s
view the p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n ?

c.

Do t e a c h e r s in academic schools o f Michigan penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s enjoy t h e i r a f f i l i a t i o n with th e c r im in al
j u s t i c e system?
1.
2.
3.

II.

III.

IV.

Do th ey a s s o c i a t e t h e i r p o s i t i o n wit h th e "Macho"
image?
Do th ey c o n s i d e r themselves an e l i t e group?
Do th ey a s s o c i a t e more p r e s t i g e t o cr im i n a l
j u s t i c e p o s i t i o n s than to p o s i t i o n s in p u b l i c
educati on?

What a r e th e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g academic school
t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
a.

Do they a s s o c i a t e success with c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g by
t h e i r students?

b.

Do they a s s o c i a t e s u c c e s s with s t u d e n t change?

c.

Do they d e s i r e t o dem on st rat e t h e i r pedagogical
skills?

d.

Do th ey d e s i r e to e x e r t c o n t r o l over o t h e r s ?

e.

Do they seek advancement t o a h i g h e r p o s i t i o n w i t h i n
the c o r r e c tio n 's hierarchy?

f.

Do they seek r e c o g n i t i o n from o t h e r s w i t h i n t h e p r is o n ?

g.

Do they seek t o improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system w i t h i n
t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n a n d / o r w i t h i n th e Department o f
C o r r e c tio n s ?

Do t e a c h e r s i n academic s ch ools o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u ­
t i o n s p e r c e i v e t h e i r p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s as v i a b l e in
th e ir current s itu a tio n .
How do th e f o llo w i n g r e l a t e t o both p a r t i c i p a t i o n and
p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n ­
stitu tio n s:

11

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
V.

Sex of t h e t e a c h e r
Experience o f th e t e a c h e r
S u b je c t a r e a t a u g h t
Age o f th e s t u d e n t
Sex o f t h e s t u d e n t
S e c u r i t y lev el o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n
S a t i s f a c t i o n o f th e t e a c h e r with h i s p o s i t i o n

Would t h e t e a c h e r s i n t h e academic s ch ools o f Michigan penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n a g ain i f given a n o t h e r
chance t o s t a r t over?

D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e system
The Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s m a in ta in s t h i r t e e n p r i s o n s ,
t h r e e r e c e p t i o n c e n t e r s and ele v en minimum s e c u r i t y camps. In a g g r eg ate
they employ o v e r f i v e - t h o u s a n d s t a f f and house o v e r twelve thousand
convic ted f e l o n s .

The inmate p o p u l a t i o n o f Michigan p r i s o n s , while

h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d by urban m i n o r i t i e s , does r e f l e c t t h e demographics
o f t h e s t a t e , i n t h a t t h e r e a r e inmates from a l l a r e a s , a l l r a c e s , most
socio-economic backgrounds and both s e x e s , however, not in p r o p o r t i o n
to t h e s o c i e t y as a whole.

While t h e av erage age o f an inmate i s

t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s , ages range from t e e n a g e r t o s e p t i g e n e r i a n .

They

a r e s e r v i n g time f o r crimes ranging from w r i t i n g bad checks o r br ea king
and e n t e r i n g t o rape and murder w ith s e n te n c e s ranging from a few
months t o m u l t i p l e l i v e s ; th e av er ag e s e n te n c e i s under f i v e y e a r s .
Some r e s i d e n t s e n t e r p r i s o n not knowing how t o read o r w r i t e while
o t h e r s a r e c o l l e g e g r a d u a te s who have h e ld r e s p o n s i b l e p o s i t i o n s in
t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e communities.
The Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s a tte m p ts t o s e g r e g a t e i n d i v i d u a l s
i n c a r c e r a t e d in p r i s o n by t h e i r s e x , a g e, amount o f s e c u r i t y r e q u i r e d
f o r th e i n d i v i d u a l and, when p o s s i b l e , by t h e programming o r t r e a t m e n t
needed.

The various i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e d e s ig ne d and s t a f f e d f o r a

12

p a r t i c u l a r type o f c l i e n t e l e ; one p r is o n i s used s t r i c t l y f o r female
inmates w ith o u t r e g a r d f o r s e c u r i t y level and age; a l l o t h e r p r is o n s
and camps a r e f o r male o f f e n d e r s o n ly .

The male i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e d i ­

vided i n t o t h r e e groups ac co rding to th e s e c u r i t y needed by t h e i n d i ­
vidual:

t h e f i r s t group a r e minimum s e c u r i t y p r is o n s which m ai n ta i n

inmates with low a s s a u l t i v e r i s k s who a r e n o t c o n s id e re d a t h r e a t to
a t t e m p t t o es ca pe from p r i i o n ( a l l camps a r e c l a s s i f i e d minimum s e c u ­
rity ).

The second group, medium s e c u r i t y p r i s o n s , m a in ta in i n d i v i d u ­

a l s with a h i g h e r a s s a u l t i v e r i s k who a r e co n s id e red more l i k e l y to
a t t e m p t an es cape than do minimum s e c u r i t y i n s t i t u t i o n s .

The l a s t

group o f i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e maximum s e c u r i t y i n s t i t u t i o n s ; with th e e x ­
c e p t i o n o f a few t e c h n i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s c l o s e custody and maximum s ec u­
r i t y i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e t h e same, i n t h i s paper th ey w i l l be c o n s id e re d
t o g e t h e r in th e c a t e g o r y o f maximum s e c u r i t y .

These i n s t i t u t i o n s house

t h e most a s s a u l t i v e a n d / o r th e most l i k e l y t o es ca pe o f a l l r e s i d e n t s
in Michigan p r i s o n s .

When an i n d i v i d u a l in a minimum o r medium secu­

r i t y i n s t i t u t i o n commits a major misconduct he may be placed i n t o a
h ig h e r s e c u r i t y p r i s o n as a consequence.

Some i n s t i t u t i o n s house

r e s i d e n t s under t h e age o f t w e n t y - f i v e , o t h e r s house th o s e o v e r twentyf i v e y e a r s and s t i l l o t h e r s m a i n t a in only th o s e between twenty-one and
t h i r t y y e a r s o f age.

This s e g r e g a t i o n o f r e s i d e n t s i s des igned to

f a c i l i t a t e both c o n t r o l and t r e a t m e n t e f f o r t s .

While t h e id ea o f

s e g r e g a t i o n i s prog ram matically s o l i d , th e h a b i t u a l over-crowding o f
the system p r e v e n ts f u l l implementation.

Inmates must be p laced where

t h e r e i s room f o r them, r e g a r d l e s s o f o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , t h i s p a t ­
t e r n o f place men t, where t h e r e i s room, may u p s e t th e p a t t e r n s o f t h e

13

various i n s t i t u t i o n s .
Education w i t h i n th e System
While th e s e c u r i t y of r e s i d e n t s i s t h e primary f u n c t io n o f a l l
c o r r e c t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o r t r e a t m e n t e f f o r t s a r e en­
couraged and even f o s t e r e d as long as th e y do not i n t e r f e r e with t h e
primary c u s t o d i a l f u n c t i o n s .

P a r t o f t h e t r e a t m e n t program i n a l l

i n s t i t u t i o n s and in many o f t h e camps i s an e d u c a tio n program which
emphasizes b a s i c r e a d i n g , G. E. 0. p r e p a r a t i o n and v o c a ti o n a l t r a i n i n g .
The secondary n a t u r e o f e d u c a tio n w i t h i n t h e Michigan Department
o f C o r r e c t i o n s a f f e c t s both th e s t r u c t u r e and f u n c t i o n o f th e ed uca­
t i o n a l program w i t h i n Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .

Custody r e s t r i c ­

t i o n s determ ine who w i l l a t t e n d c l a s s e s , when c l a s s e s w i l l be held
and when a s t u d e n t w i l l be p u l l e d o u t o f c l a s s e s e i t h e r t o a t t e n d
o t h e r f u n c t i o n s , t o be d i s c i p l i n e d , t o go to c o u r t , o r t o be t r a n s ­
ferred to another i n s t i t u t i o n .

All o f t h e s e a c t i o n s can t r a n s p i r e

with no p r i o r warning t o e i t h e r th e s t u d e n t o r th e t e a c h e r .

The edu­

c a t i o n program and t h e t e a c h e r s o p e r a t i o n w i t h i n t h a t program a r e
fo rc e d to a d a p t t o th e mandates o f c u s to d y .

They must make accommo­

d a t i o n s f o r th e s t u d e n t who i s gone f o r a day, a week, o r even s e v e r a l
months.

The t r a n s i t o r y s t u d e n t o r t h e i n t e r m i t t e n t s t u d e n t i s not th e

e x c e p t i o n , as i n p u b l i c s c h o o l , b u t th e r u l e ; few s t u d e n t s a r e a b l e to
complete t h e i r e d u c a t i o n with no i n t e r r u p t i o n s .

Because o f t h e s e con­

s t a n t i n t e r r u p t i o n s in programming, t h e Michigan Department o f Cor­
r e c t i o n s has been compelled t o develop a s t a n d a r d i z e d , open-ended
c u r ri c u lu m f o r a l l s c h o o ls th ro u g h o u t th e c o r r e c t i o n a l network.

The

system adopted by t h e academic s ch oo ls i s a competency-based system

14

u t i l i z i n g s ta n d a r d i z e d modules and r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l s f o r each course
t a u g h t in any o f the s c h o o ls .
The u l t i m a t e goal of th e high school program i s a G. E. D. c e r ­
t i f i c a t e and a v o c a tio n a l t r a d e .

The G. E. 0. was implemented in l i e u

o f t h e high school diploma because th e av erage s e n te n c e being served
in p r is o n i s app ro ximately t h r e e y e a r s , too s h o r t a time p eriod f o r
completion o f a high school program.
The t e a c h e r s
The Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s employs app rox imate ly
n i n e t y - f i v e f u l l - t i m e academic school t e a c h e r s i n t h e var io u s i n s t i t u ­
t i o n s and camps th ro ughout t h e S t a t e .

(A demographic breakdown o f t h e

te a c h i n g s t a f f w i l l be s u p p li e d i n c h a p t e r 3 under S e l e c t i o n o f a
Study Group).

While t h e academic achievement o f t e a c h e r s in the t o t a l

system was u n a v a i l a b l e , th e t e a c h e r s employed a t t h e S t a t e P r is o n o f
Southern Michigan, the l a r g e s t i n s t i t u t i o n in Michigan, w i l l be used
as an example, ( i t i s f e l t t h a t th e t e a c h e r s a t th e S t a t e P r is o n do
not vary measurably from th e norm w i t h i n t h e s y ste m ).

Over t w o - t h i r d s

o f t h e t e a c h e r s have a t l e a s t a m a s te r o f a r t s d e g r e e , with s e v e ra l
having a masters degree p lus t h i r t y a d d i t i o n a l h o u r s.

As i n o t h e r

school systems o f Michigan, a d d i t i o n a l remuneratio n i s a l l o t t e d to
t e a c h e r s who a c h ie v e a m as ter s degree and s t i l l more f o r a masters
plus t h i r t y hou rs.

All t e a c h e r s employed i n t h e academic s c h o o ls a r e

c e r t i f i e d to t each in th e S t a t e .
T e achers , l i k e a l l o t h e r employees working on th e grounds o f a
Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n a r e r e q u i r e d to fo ll ow c e r t a i n a d m i n i s t r a ­
t i v e p r o c e d u r e s , many o f which a r e p e c u l i a r to penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .

15

When th ey a c c e p t t h e t r p o s i t i o n t e a c h e r s a r e o r i e n t e d t o th e p o l i c y
t h a t in t h e e v e n t they become hosta ges wh ile i n t h e i r work s t a t i o n s ,
they w i l l n o t be ransomed by th e c i v i l i a n a u t h o r i t i e s nor w i l l th e
Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t io n s a c q u i e s c e t o any demands o f t h e
r e s i d e n t s in exchange f o r th e employee's s a f e t y .

Teachers a r e r e q u i r e d

t o acco u n t f o r t h e i r time on th e job by "punching" a time c lo ck when
th e y e n t e r t h e i n s t i t u t i o n and when they lea ve th e i n s t i t u t i o n .

They

a r e n o t p e r m i t t e d t o p la c e any personal phone c a l l s from i n s t i t u t i o n a l
phones i n s i d e th e i n s t i t u t i o n ; o f t e n c a l l s from o u t s i d e the i n s t i t u ­
t i o n t o a t e a c h e r i n s i d e a r e re fu s e d by t h e o p e r a t o r i f she deems the
c a l l t o be personal in n a t u r e .

All c a l l s made from i n s t i t u t i o n a l

phones by employees a r e s u b j e c t t o m onitoring by th e o p e r a t o r .

Any

person e n t e r i n g a medium o r maximum s e c u r i t y i n s t i t u t i o n i s s u b j e c t
to be s e a r c h e d , both t h e i r person and a n y th in g they may be c a r r y i n g .
Reading m a t e r i a l s such as newspapers, magazines and books which a r e
not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o t h e i r s u b j e c t m a t t e r a r e n o t p e r m i t t e d to be
c a r r i e d through th e g a t e i n t o th e p r i s o n .

A comparison o f th e p o s i ­

t i o n o f t e a c h e r s in p u b l i c schools may s erv e t o e x p l a i n th e v a r i a n c e
o f th e s t a t u s o f p r i s o n school t e a c h e r s and t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s in a
p u b l i c school system (See Appendix A : l ) . As can be s e e n , t h e Co rrec ­
t i o n s School t e a c h e r i s on t h e p e r i p h e r y o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c h a r t
no t i n th e c e n t e r as a r e p u b l i c school t e a c h e r s .
In g e n e r a l , custody personnel in t h e v a r i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s view
t e a c h e r s as nai ve i n d i v i d u a l s to be t o l e r a t e d r a t h e r than as p r o f e s ­
s i o n a l co-workers t o be a id e d .
t h i s point:

The f o llo w in g i n c i d e n t s i l l u s t r a t e

16

A t e a c h e r allowed h i s inmate a id e t o borrow a t h r e e hole punch
t o take to h i s c e l l and p r e p a r e some papers needed f o r th e a i d e ' s
c o l l e g e notebook.

An o f f i c e r o bviously f e l t t h a t th e a i d e was s t e a l i n g

t h e punch and wrote a d i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t on him.

When t h e t e a c h e r

went to th e l i e u t e n a n t t o e x p l a i n t h e s i t u a t i o n , t h e t e a c h e r was i n ­
formed t h a t " i t i s people l i k e you who a r e nai ve enough t o b e l i e v e an
inmate can be t r u s t e d with s t a t e p r o p e r t y in t h e i r c e l l s , who cause
inmates to g e t i n t o t r o u b l e . "

The t e a c h e r was led t o b e l i e v e t h a t he

could blame h i m s e l f f o r t h e d i f f i c u l t y t h e inmate was having.

The

d i s c i p l i n a r y r e p o r t was l a t e r dism is sed becaus e, in r e a l i t y , no regu­
l a t i o n had been broken; however, t h e l i e u t e n a n t had l e t t h e t e a c h e r
know t h a t he was co n s id e red n a iv e .
The school a d m i n i s t r a t o r s in one o f th e p r is o n s ch ools had p u r ­
chased a number o f r e f e r e n c e books to be used as a r e s o u r c e l i b r a r y
f o r th e t e a c h e r s in t h e academic and v o catio n al s ch ools o f t h a t p a r ­
ticular institution.

There was some q u e s t i o n , a t th e tim e, on th e p a r t

o f th e p r i s o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n concerning th e n e c e s s i t y o f such a r e ­
so urc e l i b r a r y .

Responding t o q u e s t i o n s o f one o f th e i n v e s t i g a t o r s

in th e m a t t e r , one t e a c h e r s t a t e d , "We a r e p r o f e s s i o n a l s and must keep
up with th e l a t e s t i n n o v a ti o n s in our p r o f e s s i o n .
provide r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l s f o r t h e i r t e a c h e r s . "

Most p u b l i c schoo ls
The i n v e s t i g a t o r

responded, "You a r e n o t p r o f e s s i o n a l s , i f you were p r o f e s s i o n a l s you
would not be working h e r e . "
A r e s e a r c h e r was v i s i t i n g one of t h e Michigan p r i s o n s t o d i s ­
t r i b u t e a questionnaire to the teachers of t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n .

Before

going to th e school the r e s e a r c h e r r e p o r t e d t o t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f

17

t h e i n s t i t u t i o n to inform him o f h i s i n t e n t i o n s and t o r e c e i v e a formal
s a n c t i o n upon h i s v i s i t .

A f t e r meeting with the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t th e

r e s e a r c h e r was t o l d t o co n ti n u e w ith h i s p r o j e c t ; whereupon th e
s u p e r i n t e n d e n t c a l l e d t h e p r i n c i p a l o f t h e school and t o l d him t h a t
someone from c e n t r a l o f f i c e was on h i s way to t h e school so he should
in s u r e t h a t h i s t e a c h e r s were n o t cooking t h e i r b r e a k f a s t in th e
t e a c h e r s ' lounge.

While t h i s a t t i t u d e toward t e a c h e r s i s not o f t e n

d i s p l a y e d in such an audacious manner i t i s i n d i c a t i v e o f what t e a c h e r s
view as an un d er ly in g f e e l i n g among th e h i e r a r c h i e s o f many c o r r e c ­
tional f a c i l i t i e s .
These an ec dotes may n o t prove t h a t th e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o r c u s t o ­
d i a l personnel do not a c c e p t t e a c h e r s as f e l lo w p r o f e s s i o n a l s , but
th e y seem to convey t o t e a c h e r s a f e e l i n g t h a t th ey a r e not f u l l y
ac ce pted i n t o t h e mainstream o f t h e c o r r e c t i o n a l community.

The

r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e i r secondary p o s i t i o n i s conveyed to t e a c h e r s through
t h e i r students.

Unlike t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s in p u b l i c s c h o o l s , who a r e

r ec ogn ized by t h e s t u d e n t s th ro u g h o u t t h e s c h o o l s , t e a c h e r s in i n s t i ­
t u t i o n a l s c h o o ls a r e n o t even known by t h e i r own s t u d e n t s .

I t i s not

uncommon f o r a t e a c h e r t o ask a s t u d e n t who h i s mathematics i n s t r u c t o r
i s and have him r e p l y th e t e a c h e r i n room f i f t e e n o r some o t h e r number,
r a t h e r than by t h e name o f t h e t e a c h e r .

This anonymity i s not c o nfin ed

to any one school w i t h i n th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

A t e a c h e r in

one school may ask a s t u d e n t who h i s t e a c h e r was in h i s prev io us
school w i t h i n t h e system and t h e s t u d e n t w i l l i n e v i t a b l y n o t remember
o r did n o t know.

This i s i n c o n t r a s t to th e c u s t o d i a l o f f i c i a l s who

a r e well known t o th e r e s i d e n t s .

18

The s t u d e n t s
While a few o f t h e s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n a l s chools may
have been s t u d e n t s a t t h e time o f t h e i r i n c a r c e r a t i o n , th us t h e i r edu­
c a t i o n was i n t e r r u p t e d only because th ey were s e n t t o p r i s o n , most were
school dr opouts b e f o r e t h e i r i n c a r c e r a t i o n .

Some l a c k only a few

c r e d i t hours f o r completion o f t h e i r high school diploma wh ile o t h e r s
have ne v e r advanced p a s t th e f i r s t grade l e v e l .

Some were involved in

s p e c i a l e d u c a t io n programs o f t h e i r l o c a l s c h o o ls w h ile o t h e r s were
involved in advanced academic t r a i n i n g in high s c h o o l.

The former may

spend t h e i r e n t i r e se n te n c e t r y i n g t o l e a r n t o rea d wh ile th e l a t t e r
may spend only a minimum amount o f time in th e p r i s o n s c h o o ls b e fore
a c q u i r i n g a G. E. D. and p r o g r e s s i n g i n t o a j u n i o r c o l l e g e program.
One t h i n g a l l s t u d e n t s have in common i s t h a t the y have a l l r e ­
l i n q u i s h e d some de gr ee o f freedom o f movement t o be c o nfined f o r a
time in an i n s t i t u t i o n .
myriad ways.

This l o s s o f freedom m a n i f e s t s i t s e l f in

Many a r e s e e i n g t h e i r f a m i l i e s d i s i n t e g r a t e and a r e

thwar ted in t h e i r e f f o r t s to p r e s e r v e t h e i r homes, o t h e r s a r e t r y i n g
t o gain t h e i r freedom from p r is o n through th e c o u r t s and must depend
upon th e e f f o r t s o f o t h e r s who, i n r e a l i t y , a r e n o t concerned per so n­
a l l y abou t t h e w e lf a re o f t h e inmate.

They dream o f freedom and o f

r e t u r n i n g t o a cormunity which may be s eeking ways t o keep them from
returning.

Amid a l l t h i s chaos in an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e a t e a c h e r is

expected t o m oti v a te t h e s t u d e n t to l e a r n such e s o t e r i c n e c e s s i t i e s
as:

s e n te n c e s t r u c t u r e , p h o n ic s, o r sq uare r o o t s , us in g a s t a n d a r d ­

i z e d module system o f i n s t r u c t i o n .
Because o f th e v o l a t i l e n a t u r e o f some o f th e s t u d e n t s , a
t e a c h e r must be c a u t i o u s and t a c t f u l in h i s d e a l i n g with each

19

individual.

He must be a b le to d i s c e r n whether th e s t u d e n t i s s t a r i n g

o u t t h e window in an e f f o r t t o s o lv e a d e e p - s e a t e d person al problem o r
because he has f i n i s h e d an assignment and does not have t h e s e l f c o n f id en ce t o ask t h e t e a c h e r f o r a s s i s t a n c e .

A t e a c h e r must w r i t e

r e p o r t s on s t u d e n t s ; r e p o r t s which may a f f e c t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f th e
student receiving a parole.

In w r i t i n g t h e s e r e p o r t s he must be mind­

ful o f h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o be h ones t and s t r a i g h t ­
forw ar d, while keeping in mind t h a t th e s t u d e n t may be an extr emely
v o l a t i l e i n d i v i d u a l who w i l l see the r e p o r t and w i l l remain in th e
school i f p a r o l e i s d e n ie d .
Teachers in i n s t i t u t i o n a l s chools work an e i g h t hour day and a
twelve month y e a r .

They a r e n o t expected t o t a k e work home with them

in t h e evening nor a r e th ey expected t o spend t h e i r evening p r e p a r i n g
l e s s o n s f o r th e f o ll o w in g day.

They r e c e i v e t h e same s i c k l e a v e and

b e n e f i t s as do o t h e r c i v i l s e r v i c e employees and t h e i r v a c a t i o n time
i s based upon l o n g e v i t y .

Remuneration f o r t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n school

i s comparable w ith t h e i r p u b l i c school c o u n t e r p a r t s in Michigan, p a r ­
t i c u l a r l y when t h e d i f f e r e n c e in t h e school y e a r i s tak en i n t o con­
sideration.
Methodology
The p o s s i b l e p r o d u c tio n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s which were
i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o th e e x p l o r a t o r y q u e s t i o n s were gleaned from t h r e e
sources:

F i r s t , a review of t h e l i t e r a t u r e on m o t i v a t i o n , in p a r t i c u ­

l a r th e s t u d i e s o f Masling and S t e r n , and th o s e r e p o r t e d by L o r t i e
conc er ning t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n .

The second sourc e was informal i n t e r ­

views with t e a c h e r s working in t h e academic s ch ools o f a l l t h r e e

20

d i v i s i o n s o f t h e S t a t e P r is o n o f Southern Michigan (minimum, medium,
and c l o s e c u s t o d y ) .

The t h i r d so urce was informal c o n v e r s a t i o n s and

o b s e r v a t i o n s o f th e t e a c h e r s who work a t th e S t a t e P r is o n o f Southern
Michigan.

These o b s e r v a t i o n s , conducted by t h e r e s e a r c h e r , covered a

span o f t h r e e y e a r s and includ ed a l l t h r e e d i v i s i o n s o f t h e p r i s o n ,
with a c t i v i t i e s obs erved ranging from s o c i a l g a t h e r i n g s , lunch h ours,
s t a f f m e e tin g s , " b u l l s e s s i o n s , " and classr oom t e a c h i n g .
A f t e r t h e p o s s i b l e p r o d u c tio n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s were
i d e n t i f i e d , a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was developed t o de term in e how each o f
t h e s e p o s s i b l e f a c t o r s i s p e r c e i v e d by th e t e a c h e r s i n v olv ed.

The

o r i g i n a l i n s t r u m e n t developed to measure p o s s i b l e p r o d u c tio n and p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s was a r a t h e r comprehensive q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t i n g
o f one-hundred and twenty s ta t e m e n t s to be r a t e d a c c o r d in g t o th e
degree o f a g r e e m e n t /d is a g r e e m e n t, by th e t e a c h e r , u s in g a L i k e r t ty pe
scale.

This q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n t a in e d numerous r e p e t i t i o n s as a check

on r e l i a b i l i t y .

I t became o b v io u s , a f t e r checking with some members

o f th e academic school s t a f f , t h a t t h i s i n s t r u m e n t needed to be modi­
f i e d and s h o r t e n e d .

With th e a i d o f t h e s e s t a f f members redundancy

in th e q u e s t i o n s was e l i m i n a t e d and a new i n s t r u m e n t developed.

This

q u e s t i o n n a i r e was shown t o a c o n s u l t a n t from t h e O f f i c e o f Research
C o n s u l t a t i o n in th e M. S. II. C olleg e o f E d u c atio n , where more sug­
g e s t i o n s le d to f u r t h e r m o d i f i c a t i o n s in form at.

Additio nal im­

provements were forthcoming from d i s c u s s i o n s with my c o n m itte e c h a i r ­
man, committee members, f e l lo w p r i s o n school employees, t h e D i r e c t o r
o f Education f o r th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and a r e s e a r c h
a n a l y s t from th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s Program Bureau.

21

The f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t s o f f our p a r t s , th e f i r s t being
a personal i n f o r m a t io n s e c t i o n which w i l l be used to o b t a i n informa­
t i o n needed to answer q u e s t i o n number f o u r .

The second, t h i r d and

f o u r t h p a r t s c o n s i s t o f twenty s t a t e m e n t s r e g a r d in g te a c h i n g in
p r is o n s c h o o l s , each o f t h e s e s ta t e m e n t s i s followed by from one to
seven s u b - s t a te m e n t s which a r e t o be r a t e d by t h e t e a c h e r s using a
L i k e r t type s c a l e to i n d i c a t e degree o f ag ree m en t/disa gree m en t with
th e s u b - s t a te m e n t.

The f i r s t ni ne o f t h e s e s ta t e m e n t s deal with p a r ­

t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s , th e nex t ten with p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s and the l a s t
q u e s ti o n d e a l s with whether t h e t e a c h e r would a c c e p t h i s c u r r e n t p o s i ­
t i o n i f he were given th e o p p o r t u n i t y t o begin a g a in .

This q u e s ti o n

i s used t o determine degree o f s a t i s f a c t i o n o r d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n th e
t e a c h e r has in h i s p o s i t i o n .
Because o f th e d e n s i t y o f t e a c h e r s c l u s t e r e d in th e p r i s o n s in
J ackson , Michigan and I o n i a , Michigan a r e a s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r w i l l p e r ­
s o n a l l y a d m i n i s t e r t h e in str u m e n t to a l l academic school t e a c h e r s in
th e s e a r e a s .

Teachers s c a t t e r e d th ro u g h o u t t h e remainder o f the S t a t e

w ill r e c e i v e t h e i r q u e s t i o n n a i r e from t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e i r p a r ­
t i c u l a r s c h o o l.

These q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l be accompanied by a cover

l e t t e r e x p l a i n i n g th e r e s e a r c h and g u a r a n t e e i n g th e c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y
o f i n d i v i d u a l re spons es to t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

A s e l f - a d d r e s s e d stamped

envelope w i l l a l s o accompany t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e so t h a t each in str u m e n t
can be s e n t d i r e c t l y t o t h e r e s e a r c h e r , avoiding p o s s i b l e compromise
o f th e r e s u l t s by i n t e r m e d i a r y i n d i v i d u a l s .

Follow-up w i l l be via

l e t t e r to th e i n s t i t u t i o n and personal phone c a l l s to t e a c h e r s in i n ­
s t i t u t i o n s where respons e i s p a r t i c u l a r l y slow.

I f additional

22

follow-up i s deemed n e c e s s a r y , a personal v i s i t by th e r e s e a r c h e r w il l
be performed.

This method should g u a r a n te e a r e t u r n o f a t l e a s t 80%

of a ll teachers.
S e l e c t i o n o f th e stu d y group
The study group i s composed o f a l l t e a c h e r s who ar e c e r t i f i e d
t o t e a c h in Michigan and a r e c u r r e n t l y te a c h i n g in a classroom o f an
academic school o f any o f th e penal i n s t i t u t i o n s o p e r a te d by t h e
Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

C e r t i f i e d t e a c h e r s who s e r v e as

t e a c h e r ' s a i d e s , v o c a ti o n a l t e a c h e r s , school c o u n s e l o r s , o r adm inis­
t r a t o r s a r e n o t incl uded in t h i s s t u d y .
While a l l t e a c h e r s a r e c l a s s i f i e d employees o f Michigan C iv il
S e r v ic e and r e c e i v e the same amount o f compensation in accordance with
t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e and e d u c a t i o n , th e c o n d i t i o n s under which th ey p e r ­
form t h e i r d u t i e s vary g r e a t l y among f a c i l i t i e s .

I n s t i t u t i o n s vary in

t h e i r p h y s ic a l a p p e a r a n c e , th e type o f s t u d e n t they house ( t h e age o f
the s t u d e n t , sex o f th e s t u d e n t , v o l a t i l e n a t u r e o f th e s t u d e n t , e t c . ) .
This v a r i a n c e may a f f e c t t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f su c c e ss in r e a c h i n g a s t u ­
d e n t , thus t h e m o t i v a ti o n a l e f f e c t o f v a r io u s p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s .

The

r e l a t i o n s h i p among t h e d i v e r s e t e a c h i n g s e t t i n g s and th e m o t i v a t i o n a l
e f f e c t o f p r o d u c t io n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s w i l l be c o n s id e re d
in t h i s s tu d y .
Significance
While numerous f a c t o r s e n t e r i n t o th e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f an a c a ­
demic program, i n c l u d i n g t h e program i t s e l f , t h e f a c i l i t i e s , t h e s t u ­
d e n t s , t h e community, e t c . ; one o f t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t o r s

23

to an e f f e c t i v e program i s the q u a l i t y and m o t i v a t i o n o f the i n d i v i d ­
ual t e a c h e r .

I t i s im p e r a ti v e to t hose invo lv ed in e d u c a tio n a l p r o ­

g r a m i n g in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s to determine t h e f a c t o r s which a t t r a c t
q u a l i f i e d t e a c h e r s t o l e s s th an d e s i r a b l e s u rr o u n d in g s and what makes
them e x e r t e f f o r t once the y a r e r e c r u i t e d .

A highly ta le n te d teacher

may l o s e h i s e f f e c t i v e n e s s i f he i s not m o ti v ated t o perform beyond
minimum s t a n d a r d s .
Summary
The i n t e r e s t is i n i n v e s t i g a t i n g th e m o t i v a t i o n o f t e a c h e r s
working in a very unusual e d u c a t i o n a l env ironment, Michigan penal i n ­
s t i t u t i o n s , where they s e r v e a secondary f u n c t i o n , being s u b o r d i n a t e
to th e custody needs o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s .

To accomplish t h i s study

i t i s n e c e s s a r y to i s o l a t e th e f a c t o r s which may cause t h e t e a c h e r to
r e l i n q u i s h a de gre e o f freedom t o t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and to
e x e r t th e e f f o r t r e q u i s i t e to m a in ta in t h i s a s s o c i a t i o n with t h e d e p a r t ­
ment ( p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s ) .

These p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s a r e d i s t i n c t

from a second group o f m o t i v a t o r s ( p r o d u c t i o n f a c t o r s ) which e f f e c t th e
e f f o r t an i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r i s w i l l i n g t o e x e r t beyond t h e minimum
r e q u i s i t e t o m ain ta in h i s p o s i t i o n .

In o r d e r f o r a p o s s i b l e produc­

t i o n f a c t o r t o a c t u a l l y be a p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r t h e f a c t o r must r e ­
q u i r e e f f o r t on t h e p a r t o f th e i n d i v i d u a l t o a c h i e v e ; i t must be con­
s i d e r e d a c h i e v a b l e , and i t must be d e s i r a b l e .

Once t h i s group o f

p o t e n t i a l p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r s i s i s o l a t e d th e t a s k w i l l be t o de­
ter min e i f th ey meet th e c r i t e r i o n o f a p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r .

Both

p a r t i c i p a t i o n and p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s w i l l be ex p l o r e d
us in g a survey t o i n c lu d e a l l t e a c h e r s in academic classrooms w i t h i n

24

t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

CHAPTER I I
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

L i t e r a t u r e was reviewed in t h r e e a r e a s :

th e f i r s t d e a l s with

l i t e r a t u r e as i t a p p l i e s t o m o t i v a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t r e l a t e s to
th e two f a c t o r th e o r y

o f m o t i v a t i o n . The second a r e a d e a l s

e r a t u r e as i t a p p l i e s

to the teaching

with l i t ­

p r o f e s s i o n in p a r t i c u l a r .

The

t h i r d concerns p r i s o n e d u c a ti o n and p o s s i b l e rewards o f p r i s o n t e a c h e r s .
The two f a c t o r th e o r y o f m o t i v a t i o n s u g g ested by March and Simon
a s s e r t s t h a t th e f a c t o r s
t a i n a f f i l i a t i o n w ith

which compel
an o r g a n i z a t i o n

an i n d i v i d u a l t o seek and main­
a r e d i s t i n c t from th e i n f l u e n c e s

which caus e an i n d i v i d u a l t o e x e r t e f f o r t beyond th e minimum r e q u i s i t e
t o m ain ta in t h a t a f f i l i a t i o n . ^

The a f f i l i a t i o n m o t i v a t o r s were

l a b e l e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s and were d e s c r i b e d in terms o f a balanc e
between inducements and c o n t r i b u t i o n s :
I n c r e a s e s in t h e b alan ce o f inducement u t i l i t i e s
over c o n t r i b u t i o n u t i l i t i e s d e c r e a s e t h e p r o p e n s i t y
o f an i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a n t t o le a v e th e o r g a n i z a ­
t i o n , whereas d e c r e a s e s i n t h e b al an ce have the
opposite e f f e c t . 2
M otivation t o e x e r t e f f o r t o r as March and Simon l a b e l i t "m o ti v a tio n
to produce" i s l e s s c o n c r e t e than p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s and in volv es
such id e a s as employee p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e s i t u a t i o n :

^March and Simon, p. 93.
2 I b i d . , p. 93.

25

26

. . . we may conclude t h a t high s a t i s f a c t i o n , per
s e , i s n o t a p a r t i c u l a r l y good p r e d i c t o r o f high
p r o d u c t i o n , nor does i t f a c i l i t a t e p r o d u c tio n i n a
causal s e n s e . M otiva tion to produce stems from a
p r e s e n t o r a n t i c i p a t e d s t a t e o f d i s c o n t e n t and p e r ­
c e p t i o n o f a d i r e c t co nn ecti on between i n d i v i d u a l
p r o d u c tio n and a new s t a t e o f s a t i s f a c t i o n . 3
Katz a m p l i f i e d t h i s two f a c t o r id ea by d e s c r i b i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n
between t h e f a c t o r s and the varying e f f e c t each may
vidual and on th e o r g a n i z a t i o n . 4

The

have on th e i n d i ­

f i r s t f a c t o r s were l a b e l e d

“system rewards" which corre spond t o p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s ; t h e s e r e ­
wards a c c r u e t o i n d i v i d u a l s simply because th ey a r e members o f t h e o r ­
g a n i z a t i o n and i n c l u d e such f a c t o r s as f r i n g e b e n e f i t s , c o s t o f l i v i n g
wage i n c r e a s e s , jo b s e c u r i t y and p l e a s a n t working c o n d i t i o n s .

Rewards

a d m i n i s t e r e d f o r i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t and performance a r e t h e second s e t
o f f a c t o r s ; t h e s e correspond to p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s and i n c l u d e such
items as p i e c e r a t e i n c e n t i v e s , promotion f o r o u t s t a n d i n g work and
special recognition fo r d i f f e r e n t i a l co n trib u tio n to organizational
functioning.

Katz d e s c r i b e d t h e l i m i t i n g g u i d e l i n e s f o r each of t h e s e

two f a c t o r s i n t h e f ollow ing manner:
Though th e e f f e c t s o f system rewards a r e t o main­
t a i n t h e l e v e l o f p r o d u c t i v i t y not much above th e
minimum r e q u i r e d t o s t a y in th e system t h e r e s t i l l
may be l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e s between systems with r e ­
s p e c t t o t h e q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y o f p r o d u c tio n as
a f u n c t i o n o f system rewards. An o r g a n i z a t i o n with
s u b s t a n t i a l l y b e t t e r wage r a t e s and f r i n g e b e n e f i t s
than i t s c o m p e t ito rs may be a b l e t o s e t h i g h e r
l e v e l s o f performance as a minimal r eq u irem en t f o r
i t s workers than t h e o t h e r firm s and s t i l l hold i t s

"*Ibid., p. 51.
4Daniel Katz, " M otivati onal Basis o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Beh avio r,"
O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior Readings and C a s e s , Ed. Theodore T. H e r b e r t ,
(New"York: MacMillan P u b l is h in g C o . ) , p. 131. ( R e p r in te d from
Behavior S c ie n c e , Vol. 9, 1964).

27

employees, in o t h e r words, system rewards can be
r e l a t e d to th e d i f f e r e n t i a l p r o d u c t i v i t y o f o r g a n i ­
z a t i o n s as a whole, though th e y a r e not e f f e c t i v e
in maximizing th e p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e
m a j o r i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n th e o r g a n i z a t i o n . . . .
The m ediating v a r i a b l e in acco unting f o r o r g a n i z a ­
t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s based upon system rewards i s th e
r e l a t i v e a t t r a c t i v e n e s s o f t h e system f o r t h e i n d i ­
vid u a l compared to o t h e r a v a i l a b l e systems i n r e l a ­
t i o n to th e e f f o r t req u irem en ts o f t h e system. I f
th e i n d i v i d u a l has t h e ch o ice o f a j o b with a n o th e r
company i n th e same community which r e q u i r e s a l i t t l e
more e f f o r t but o f f e r s much g r e a t e r system rewards in
th e way o f wages and o t h e r b e n e f i t s , he w i l l i n a l l
p r o b a b ility take i t .
I f , however, th e h i g h e r r e q u i r e ­
ments o f a competing system a r e accompanied by very
modest i n c r e a s e s in system rew ard s , he w i l l probably
s t a y where he i s . 5
Three c r i t e r i a

were d e s c r i b e d as r e q u i s i t e f o r i n d i v i d u a l rewards to

be e f f e c t i v e m o t i v a t o r s .

While t h e s e w i l l be mentioned a t t h i s time

they w i l l be d i s c u s s e d a t g r e a t e r le n g t h l a t e r in t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n .
I f rewards such as pay i n c e n t i v e s a r e t o work as
they a r e intend ed they must meet t h r e e primary con­
d i t i o n s . 1: They must be c l e a r l y p e r c e i v e d as l a r g e
enough in amount to j u s t i f y t h e a d d i t i o n a l e f f o r t r e ­
q u i r e d t o o b t a i n . 2: They must be followed d i r e c t l y
on i t s accomplishment. 3: They must be p er ceiv ed as
e q u i t a b l e by th e m a j o r i t y o f system members—many o f
whom w i l l n o t r e c e i v e them.6
While i n d i v i d u a l rewards a r e e f f e c t i v e in en co urag ing e f f o r t from th e
i n d i v i d u a l , th ey do n o t , in some c a s e s , promote l o y a l t y from t h e s e
individuals

toward t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n b u t r a t h e r toward th e type of

work they a r e doing.
The m o t i v a t i o n a l pathway t o high p r o d u c t i v i t y and
t o high q u a l i t y p r o d u c tio n can be reached through
th e development o f i n t r i n s i c j o b s a t i s f a c t i o n . The

^ I b i d . , p. 131.
^ I b i d . , p. 136.

28

man who f i n d s th e type o f work he d e l i g h t s in
doing i s th e man who w i l l n o t worry about the
f a c t t h a t t h e r o l e r e q u i r e s a given amount o f
p roduction o f a c e r t a i n q u a l i t y . His g r a t i f i c a ­
t i o n s a c c r u e from accomplishment, from th e ex­
p r e s s i o n o f a b i l i t i e s , from t h e e x e r c i s e o f h is
own d e c i s i o n s . . . . On t h e o t h e r hand, such a
person i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y t i e d to a given o r g a n i ­
zation. . . .
I t may m a t t e r l i t t l e t o him where
he does work provided he i s given t h e o p p o r tu n i t y
to do t h e kind o f j o b he i s i n t e r e s t e d in d o i n g . /
Herzberg approached th e two f a c t o r t h e o r y from th e p r e c e p t t h a t
man has two s e t s o f needs; th e animal need t o avoid pain and th e human
need t o grow p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y .

This premise was t e s t e d using in t e r v i e w s

with two-hundred en g in e e r s and a c c o u n ta n ts in t h e P i t t s b u r g h , Penns yl­
vania a r e a .

The s u b j e c t s were asked t o d e s c r i b e i n c i d e n t s in t h e i r

jo b s which made them f eel good, i n c i d e n t s which n e u t r a l i z e d t h e s e good
f e e l i n g s , i n c i d e n t s which made them f e e l n e g a t i v e toward t h e i r employ­
ment and i n c i d e n t s which n e u t r a l i z e d t h e s e f e e l i n g s .

From t h e s e s t u d ­

i e s f i v e f a c t o r s were determined to be s tr o n g s a t i s f i e r s :

achievement,

r e c o g n i t i o n , t h e work i t s e l f , r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and advancement.

In t h i s

c a s e , r e c o g n i t i o n r e f e r s to r e c o g n i t i o n f o r accomplishments not merely
r e c o g n i t i o n as a p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s t o o l .

The f a c t o r s which were de­

termined to be d i s s a t i s f i e r s were company p o l i c y , a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,
s u p e r v i s i o n , s a l a r y , i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s and working c o n d i t i o n s .
S a t i s f i e r s were l a b e l e d " m o t iv a to r s " and d i s s a t i s f i e r s were l a b e l e d
"hygiene f a c t o r s . "
Herzberg not only e x p la in e d what t h e m o t i v a t o r s and hygiene f a c ­
t o r s were but he a l s o e x p la in ed why a hygiene f a c t o r cannot become a
m o t iv a t o r:

7I b i d . , p. 136.

29

I t i s c l e a r why th e hygiene f a c t o r s f a i l t o pro vide
f o r p o s i t i v e s a t i s f a c t i o n s ; th ey do not po sse ss the
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s n e c e s s a r y f o r g iv in g an i n d i v i d u a l a
sense o f growth. To f e e l t h a t one has grown depends
on achievement in t a s k s t h a t have meaning t o t h e t a s k ,
the y a r e pow erless to give such meaning t o th e i n d i ­
v i d u a l . Growth i s dependent on some ac hievements,
but achievement r e q u i r e s a t a s k . The m o t i v a t o r s a r e
t a s k f a c t o r s and thus a r e n e c e s s a r y f o r growth; they
pro vide t h e p s y c h o lo g ic a l s t i m u l a t i o n by which the
i n d i v i d u a l can be a c t i v a t e d toward h i s s e l f r e a liz a tio n needs.8
Herzberg makes i t c l e a r t h a t m o t i v a t o r s and hygiene f a c t o r s a r e
n ot o p p o s it e ends o f t h e same continuum b u t r a t h e r a r e p a r a l l e l continua.

The o p p o s i t e o f s a t i s f a c t i o n i s n o t d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n but r a t h e r

not s a t i s f a c t i o n , l i k e w i s e th e o p p o s i t e o f d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i s not s a t i s ­
factio n but r a th e r not d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n .

Lack o f m o t i v a t o r s does not

lea d to d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n nor does an abundance o f hygiene f a c t o r s l ead
to s a t i s f a c t i o n .
H e r z b e r g 's "Motivation-Hygiene Dichotomy Theory" has been widely
d i s c u s s e d in c u r r e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t h e o r y l i t e r a t u r e .

Sal ah and

Gygier found " i n t r i n s i c rewards" r e l a t e c l o s e l y to m o t i v a t o r s in t h a t
they tend to be a s s o c i a t e d with i n d i v i d u a l s who a t t a c k problems in an
a t te m p t to ach iev e w h ile " e x t r i n s i c rewards" r e l a t e c l o s e l y t o hygiene
f a c t o r s in t h a t they te n d t o be a s s o c i a t e d with i n d i v i d u a l s who seek
g
t o avoid punishment.
Haslow's " h ig h e r l e v e l " needs have a l s o been
a s s o c i a t e d with " m o tiv a to r s " in managers in th e h i g h e r l e v e l s o f t h e i r

8 H erzb er g, p. 78.
S. D. Saleh and T. G. Gygier, "Psychodynamics of I n t r i n s i c and
E x t r i n s i c Job O r i e n t a t i o n , " J o u rn a l o f Applied P sychology, v o l . 53,
December 1969, pp. 446-49.

30

p a rtic u la r organizations.

I t must be noted t h a t t h e s e "h ig h e r l e v e l "

needs were not a s s o c i a t e d with "m o tiv ato rs " in middle management p e r ­
sonnel o f t h e s e same o r g a n i z a t i o n s . ^ 0

In an a n a l y s i s o f s e v e r a l s t u d ­

i e s which compared " i n t r i n s i c " and e x t r i n s i c " rewards with m o tiv a to r s
and hygiene f a c t o r s , Dyer and P arker d isc o v e re d co n f u sio n r e g a rd in g
th e d e f i n i t i o n o f th e terms " i n t r i n s i c " and " e x t r i n s i c . "

Since th e

meaning o f th e terms v a r i e d from " i n t e r n a l " and " e x t e r n a l " t o Maslow's
" h i g h e r l e v e l " and "lower l e v e l " needs i t was f e l t t h a t some o f the
s t u d i e s on " i n t r i n s i c " and e x t r i n s i c " rewards must be r e c o n s i d e r e d . ^
While much r e s e a r c h has been a s s o c i a t e d w ith H e r z b e r g 's t h e o r y ,
acce p ta n c e o f th e t h e o r y i s by no means u n i v e r s a l .

C r i t i c i s m o f th e

Herzberg "Motivation-Hygiene Dichotomy Theory" emanates from a myriad
of sources:

Vroom a s s e r t s t h a t i n H e r z b e r g 's own review o f pr ev io us

s t u d i e s , Herzberg draws c o n c l u s io n s which a r e i n c o n s i s t e n t with h is
two f a c t o r

th e o r y .

He f u r t h e r concludes t h a t even i f th e f i n d i n g s o f

Herzberg could be r e p l i c a t e d p e r f e c t l y in f u r t h e r s t u d i e s , t h e r e would
remain t h e major problem r e l a t i n g to " d e f e n s i v e pr o c e ss w i t h i n th e i n ­
d i v i d u a l " ; t h a t i s people tend t o a t t r i b u t e t h e i r s a t i s f a c t i o n to a c ­
complishment they have achieved w h ile they would a t t r i b u t e d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n t o f a c t o r s o u t s i d e t h e i r per so nal c o n t r o l .

12

10John W. Slocum J r . , "Motivation i n Managerial Le vels: R e l a t i o n ­
s h i p o f Need S a t i s f a c t i o n t o Job Perform ance," J o u rn a l o f Applied Ps.ychology , Vol. 55, August 1971, pp. 312-16.
^ L e e Dyer and Donald P a r k e r , " C l a s s i f y i n g Outcomes o f Work Mo­
t i v a t i o n Research: an Examination o f I n t r i n s i c - E x t r i n s i c Dichotomy,"
J o u rn al o f Applied Psychology. Vol. 60, August 1975, pp. 455-58.
12

V. H. Vroom, Work and M o t i v a t i o n , (New York:
Sons, 1964}, p. 129.

John Wiley and

31

Dunnette, Campbell and Habel reviewed te n s t u d i e s t o determine
the ac curacy o f th e two f a c t o r th e o r y and found th e r e s u l t s o f t h e i r
s t u d i e s t o be a t v a r i a n c e with Herzberg.

13

A review o f l i t e r a t u r e by

Soliman found t h a t surveys using t h e Herzberg s t o r y method tended to
s u p p o r t t h e two f a c t o r t h e o r y ; however, when a n o t h e r method was u t i ­
l i z e d t h e r e s u l t s were n o t s u p p o r t i v e o f t h e same t h e o r y ; f o r t h i s
reason Soliman concluded t h a t t h e t heory was " m e th o d b o u n d ." ^
Kallenberg d e s c r i b e d an o v e r s i g h t in th e Herzberg th e o r y which
ten ds t o neg at e th e v a l i d i t y a s c r i b e d t o i t by i t s pr opo nen ts:
. . . i n p a r t i c u l a r i t does n o t c o n s i d e r i n d i v i d u a l
d i f f e r e n c e s in t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n s e x p e r ie n c e d by people
with t h e same j o b c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Such d i f f e r e n c e s
a r i s e n o t only because people e v a l u a t e s i m i l a r
' o b j e c t i v e ' jo b c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i f f e r e n t l y , b u t a l s o
from d i f f e r e n c e s in what people seek t o o b t a i n from
t h e i r w o r k . 15
The c o n d i t i o n s which Katz d e s c r i b e d as r e q u i s i t e f o r an i n d i v i d ­
ual ( p r o d u c ti o n ) reward t o be e f f e c t i v e were a m p l i f i e d by P o r t e r and
Lawler.

Using th e "Value Expectancy Theory" espoused by Vroorn^ as a

guide, P o r t e r and Lawler developed a model showing t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
among the p e r c e iv e d d e s i r a b i l i t y o f a reward, t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f ob­
t a i n i n g t h a t reward through i n d i v i d u a l o r group e f f o r t and th e

M. D. Du nn ette, J . P. Campbell, and M. D. Habel, " F a c to r s Con­
t r i b u t i n g t o Job S a t i s f a c t i o n and Job D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i n Six Occupa­
t i o n a l Groups," O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and Human Per fo rm an ce , Vol. 2,
1967, pp. 143-74.
^ H . M. Soliman, "M otivator - Hygiene Theory o f Job A t t i t u d e s "
Jour na l o f Applied Psyc hology, Vol. 54, 1970, pp. 452-61.
1C
Arne E. K allen b er g , "Work Values and Job Rewards: A Theory of
Job S a t i s f a c t i o n , " American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, Vol. 42, Feb. 1977,
p. 125.
^Vroom, p. 18.

32

s a t i s f a c t i o n gleaned from t h e reward once i t i s o b t a i n e d .

This model

was t e s t e d u t i l i z i n g a q u e s t i o n n a i r e a d m i n i s t e r e d t o managers from both
p r i v a t e i n d u s t r y and government.

The survey sup por ted t h e acc ur ac y o f

th e model. ^
In o r d e r f o r a reward t o l e a d t o e f f o r t , two c o n d i t i o n s must be
p er ceiv ed by t h e i n d i v i d u a l :

"(1) The p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t reward depends

upon perfor mance, and (2) t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t performance depends upon
effo rt."

18

In th e P o r te r - L a w l e r model, th e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e s i t u a t i o n

i s a c t u a l l y more im p o rta n t to m o t i v a t i o n than i s t h e r e a l i t y o f th e
situation:
. . . H i s b e h a v i o r , in terms o f what he w i l l t r y t o
do, w i l l be de ter mined by h i s own e x p e c t a t i o n , in
o t h e r words, wh ether o r not t h i s i s in accord with
' t h e r e a l f a c t s 1 o f t h e s i t u a t i o n . 19
In o r d e r f o r a reward t o be a m o t i v a t o r t o e x e r t e x t r a e f f o r t , t h e r e
must be a d i r e c t p e r c e i v e d t i e between a l l t h e v a r i a b l e s in th e equa­
t i o n , o th e r w i s e t h e r e s u l t o f t h e reward w i l l not prove s a t i s f y i n g
to th e i n d i v i d u a l :
. . . Since both th e amount o f rewards perceived as
r e c e i v e d and t h e p e r c e i v e d e q u i t a b l e le v e l o f rewards
a r e in volv ed in d eter m in in g s a t i s f a c t i o n , and s i n c e
e i t h e r o r both o f t h e s e amounts may, in f a c t , not be
determined by performance i n a given s i t u a t i o n , we
f r e q u e n t l y would n o t ex p ect a s tr o n g p o s i t i o n c o r r e l a ­
t i o n between performance and s a t i s f a c t i o n . 20
17

P o r t e r and Lawler, p. 121.

18I b i d . , p. 19.
^ I b i d . , p. 34.
20I b i d . , p. 18.

33

The f i n d i n g s o f th e P o r t e r and Lawler r e s e a r c h were supported
by Kopelman u s in g a c a u s a l - c o r r e l a t i v e a n a l y s i s approach to model
validation.

21

The model was a l s o supp orted by f i n d i n g s o f Karackiewicz

who s t u d i e d high school s t u d e n t s and found t h a t rewards f o r p a r t i c i p a ­
t i o n d e c r e a s e " i n t r i n s i c m o tiv a t io n " w h ile rewards f o r achievement
increase " i n t r i n s i c m otivation."

22

In an a t t e m p t to determine t h e "unconscious" m o ti v a ti o n a l f a c t o r s
i n f l u e n c i n g t e a c h e r s , Masling and S t e r n conducted an e x t e n s iv e study
of t e a c h e r s in th e S yracuse, New York p u b l i c s c h o o ls .

From t h e s e s t u d ­

i e s they developed ten "unconscious" m o t iv a tio n a l f a c t o r s which they
grouped i n t o f i v e p e r s o n a l i t y type s and m o t iv a t io n a l f a c t o r s .
f i v e f a c t o r s were l a b e l e d :

These

“ (1) Task o r i e n t e d pragmatism, (2) a f f e c ­

t i o n s e e k i n g , (3) dependency n eeds , (4) v i c a r i o u s youth l e a d e r , and
(5) union r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . "
m o tiv a t io n on the j o b .

Each o f t h e s e groups was d i s t i n c t in t h e i r

No a t t e m p t was made t o dichotomize t h e s e f a c -

t o r s i n t o pr o d u ctio n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n m oti v a tio n f a c t o r s .

23

In a comprehensive examination o f t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n , L o r t i e
examined the s ta g e d c a r e e r s a f f o r d e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s and b u s in e s s p e r ­
s o n n e l.

"S tag ing" lends s t a b i l i t y and f u t u r e o r i e n t a t i o n t o i n d i v i d ­

u a l s involved in a p a r t i c u l a r p r o f e s s i o n :
?1

Richard E. Kopelman, "A Causal C o r r e l a t i o n a l T e s t o f th e P o r t e r
and Lawler Framework," Human R e l a t i o n s , Vol. 32, November 7, 1979,
pp. 5 4 5 - 5 6 .
77

J u d i t h M. Karackiewicz, "The E f f e c t s o f Reward Contingency and
Performance Feedback on I n t r i n s i c M o ti v a t i o n , " Journal o f P e r s o n a l i t y
and S oc ial Psychology, August 1979, pp. 1352-63.
^3Masling and S t e r n , p. 58.

34

. . . c a r e e r l i n e s o f t h i s n a t u r e o r i e n t people to
th e f u t u r e ; personal amb itio n i s s u c c e s s i v e l y whetted
and s a t i s f i e d as an i n d i v i d u a l moves from one s ta g e
t o th e n e x t . . . s ta g e d c a r e e r s produce c y c le s o f
e f f o r t , a t t a i n m e n t and renewed a m b itio n . In t y i n g the
i n d i v i d u a l t o th e o c cupation they give him a s t a k e in
i t s f u t u r e ; i t g e n e r a t e s e f f o r t , am bitio n and i d e n t i ­
f i c a t i o n with t h e o c c u p a t i o n . 24
While s t a g i n g a p p l i e s to o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n s and b u s i n e s s e s , i t does not
apply to the te a c h in g p r o f e s s i o n :
In c o n t r a s t to th e l a r g e r packages o f money, p r e s ­
t i g e and power u s u a l l y found in o t h e r c a r e e r s , the
t y p i c a l c a r e e r l i n e o f a classroom t e a c h e r i s a g e n t l e
i n c l i n e r a t h e r than a s t e e p a s c e n t . The s t a t u s o f a
young t enured t e a c h e r i s n o t a p p r e c i a b l y d i f f e r e n t from
t h a t o f th e h ig h ly e xperien ced o l d t i m e r . 25
L o r t i e thus concludes t h a t th e lack o f s t a g i n g causes t e a c h e r s
to be p r e s e n t o r i e n t e d r a t h e r than f u t u r e o r i e n t e d in t h e i r a s p i r a t i o n s .
He f u r t h e r re cognizes t h a t t a n g i b l e rewards such as s a l a r y , v a c a t io n
time and a s h o r t work day a r e not s u f f i c i e n t t o pro vide m o t i v a t i o n to
produce in t h e i r j o b .

They must, t h e r e f o r e , f in d pr o d u ctio n m ot iva­

t i o n in work r e l a t e d rewards:
Unlike e x t r i n s i c and a n c i l l a r y re wards , the ps ych ic
rewards o f t e a c h e r s f l u c t u a t e . The teacher's; enjoyment
o f h i s work can va ry. E f f o r t w i l l not make much d i f ­
f e r e n c e in t h e flow of e x t r i n s i c and a n c i l l a r y rewards,
a t l e a s t not in th e s h o r t run. E f f o r t , on th e o t h e r
hand, might i n c r e a s e t a s k r e l a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n s . Nor
a r e t e a c h e r s so c o n s t r a i n e d t h a t they f e e l t h e i r de­
c i s i o n s make l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e in t h e i r work. . . .
The s t r u c t u r e o f t e a c h i n g re wards, in s h o r t , f a v o rs em­
p h a s is on ps yc hic r e w a r d s . 2 6

2\ o r t i e , p. 85.
25I b i d . , p. 86.
26I b i d . , p. 103.

35

This n e c e s s i t y f o r t e a c h e r s f in d in g p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t i o n in
psych ic rewards was r e i t e r a t e d by James Bess with a warning to ed u cato r s
i f t h e s e i n t e r n a l rewards a r e not r eco gn ized :
In th e concept o f m o tiv a t io n to t e a c h , th e l i f e cour se
can be seen f r e q u e n t l y t o ta ke over and mold t h e s e l f
in ways t h a t r e s u l t not in growth and mastery but in
s i m p l i s t i c , nonmaturational a d a p t i o n . The f a c u l t y mem­
ber who i s not aware o f h i s changing l i f e needs w i l l not
look t o h i s t e a c h i n g f o r s ou rc es o f renewal and personal
e x p a n s i o n s . 27
Bess goes on t o e x p l a i n th e c o n d i t i o n s under which rewards w il l s erv e
as m o t i v a t o r s :
I f t e a c h in g i s to be e x t e r n a l l y rewarded i t must be
i n t e r n a l l y rewarding. Systems v a lu e s w i l l fo llow
from a g g r e g a te personal v a l u e s . F a c u lt y must l e a r n
how te a c h in g can meet t h e i r innermost needs. . .
William F. Casey I I I pursued t h i s p o i n t o f m o ti v a tio n to t h e ex­
t e n t t h a t i n t e r n a l o r psychic rewards a r e i n s u f f i c i e n t t o motivat e
t e a c h e r s in t o d a y ' s p u b l i c s c h o o ls :
The t e a c h e r reward system {or r a t h e r non-reward system)
must be a r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h i s l a c k o f t e a c h e r m o t i­
v a t i o n . P ublic e d u c a tio n i s paying t h e p r i c e as the
q u a l i t y o f l e a r n i n g f a i l s t o improve, ta x p a y e r s pass
p r o p o s i t i o n 1 3 ' s and good t e a c h e r s le a v e p u b l i c scho ols
wh ile th e mediocre and c a t a t o n i c remain to t a p th e pub­
lic t i l l .
(A few good t e a c h e r s do remain, may God have
mercy on them, because th e system w o n ' t ) . . . . Teachers
soon d i s c o v e r t h a t being an e x c e l l e n t t e a c h e r is tremen­
dously demanding wh ile being mediocre i s ex tremely e a s y . 29
M i l l e r proposed i n c e n t i v e s t o a id in t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n ; i n c e n ­
t i v e s which could be f o s t e r e d by th e school and community.

Among

27James L. Bess, "Motivation to Teach" The Journ al of Higher Edu­
c a t i o n , May/June, 1977, p. 255.
28I b i d . , p. 255.
29William F. Casey I I I , "Would Bear Bryant Teach in P u b li c Schools:
The Need f o r Teacher I n c e n t i v e s , " Phi Delta Kappan,Vol. 60, March 1979,
p. 501.

36

t h e s e i n c e n t i v e s was the acknowledgment o f t e a c h e r s who d i s t i n g u i s h
themselves in t h e i r s c h o o ls :
Rec ognition from school a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , f e l l o w t e a c h e r s ,
p a r e n t s and s tu d e n t s must be c a p i t a l i z e d upon and used
to f a c i l i t a t e encouragement and s u p p o rt o f e f f o r t s by
t e a c h e r s to seek b e t t e r r e s u l t s in t h e c l a s s r o o m . 30
The premise t h a t ps yc hic rewards a r e not s u f f i c i e n t f o r t e a c h e r
m o t iv a ti o n i s n o t ac ce pted by o t h e r e d u c a to r s in th e p u b l i c school s y s ­
tem.

Benjamine D. Wright, f o r example, e x h o r t s :

"Most of us b e l i e v e

we have chosen our p r o f e s s i o n in o r d e r t o make l i f e b e t t e r f o r
chi I d ren .
Various t e a c h e r s d e s c r i b e th e importance o f psychic rewards when
they d e s c r i b e t h e i r own te a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e s .

One o f t h e s e is Herb

Kohl who w r i t e s :
. . . I was f o r c i n g my s t u d e n t s to p r e te n d t o l e a r n
o r to be d e f i a n t and throw th e i r r e l e v a n c e o f i t a l l
back in my f a c e . Worst o f a l l , I was bored to o . I
had to t r y o t h e r f r e e r ways o f l i v i n g with young
people and o f being o f use to t h e m . 32
Another t e a c h e r who d e s c r i b e s h i s e x p e r ie n c e t e l l s about a time
when he was co nsid e ri ng le a v i n g t e a c h in g t o a c c e p t a more l u c r a t i v e
p o sitio n outside of education.

John Wooden opted t o remain in te a c h i n g

a f t e r r eading a poem by Glennice L. Harmon.

His words conce rning his

d e c i s i o n to remain in e d u c a ti o n d em onstrate t h e primacy o f psych ic
30

Harry G. M i l l e r and Kevin J . Swick, "Community I n c e n t i v e s f o r
Teacher E x c e l l e n c e , " E d u c a tio n , Spring 1976, p. 235.
"^Benjamine D. Wright, "Our Reason f o r T e ach in g," NASSP B u l l e t i n ,
December 1978, p. 225.
^ H e r b Kohl, "Why Teach," T e a c h e r , November 1976, p. 73,

4

37

rewards to t e a c h e r s ; p a r t i c u l a r l y do they t y p i f y the rewards t e a c h e r s
r e c e i v e when th ey see t h e i r s t u d e n t s le av e th e classroom and become
s u c c e s s f u l members o f s o c i e t y :
Yes, t h e words o f Glennice Harmon a f f e c t e d th e de­
c i s i o n t h a t I was about to make. Perhaps h e r works
a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e p r i d e I tak e when I h e a r from,
o r read a b o u t , o r meet the many l a w y e r s , d o c t o r s ,
t e a c h e r s , salesm en , b a n k e r s , m i n i s t e r s and so many
o t h e r s who were once under my t u t e l a g e .
T h e ir joys a r e my j o y s and t h e i r sorrows and d i s ­
appointments a r e mine. But I l i k e t o f eel t h a t I have
played a p a r t in maximizing t h e i r jo ys and minimizing
t h e i r d i s a p p o i n t m e n t s . 33
P ris on e d u cati o n
These ps ychic rewards r e f e r r e d to in t e s t i m o n i a l s o f p u b l i c
school t e a c h e r s as the rea so n th e y e x e r t e f f o r t in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s
and remain in t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n , a r e not as e a s i l y recogn ized in p r i s o n
education.

The s u c c e s s f u l s t u d e n t in a p r is o n i s not th e " d o c t o r ,

law yer , e t c . " th e t e a c h e r reads about in the newspapers and remembers
how they were once "under my t u t e l a g e " ; b u t r a t h e r t h e s t u d e n t who
leaves th e p r is o n and i s never heard from ag ain by th e Department o f
C o r r e c t i o n s ; t e a c h e r s a l l too f r e q u e n t l y read about t h e i r p a s t s tu d e n t s
and f i n d t h a t they a r e r e t u r n i n g t o th e p r i s o n having f a i l e d in t h e i r
endeavors on th e s t r e e t .

The l i t e r a t u r e su g g ests t h a t th e e f f o r t s of

t e a c h e r s in p r is o n do n o t n e c e s s a r i l y lead to a p o s i t i v e change in
student behavior.
Marshall e t a l . reviewed and e v a l u a t e d c o l l e g e l evel e d u c a tio n
programs in nine s t a t e s , i n c l u d i n g f i v e s t a t e s involved in "Newgate,"

^ J o h n R. Wooden, "They Ask Me Why I Teach," Phi Delta Kappan,
March 1981, p. 544.

38

a government sponsored program which allowed f o r f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e
to inmates a t t e n d i n g
also

c o l l e g e n o t only while they were i n c a r c e r a t e d but

a f t e r they were r e l e a s e d .

The fo llow ing a p t l y summarizes the

f in d i n g s o f t h i s study:
When compared t o a matched group o f n o n p a r t i c i p a n t
inm at es , Newgate p a r t i c i p a n t s were more l i k e l y t o be
employed o r in s c h o o l, t o have b e t t e r jo b s t a b i l i t y ,
l e s s l i k e l y t o have c ontinued drug o r d r i n k i n g prob ­
lems and more l i k e l y t o co n ti n u e t h e i r e d u c a tio n .
Although t h e s e f i n d i n g s s u g g e st t h a t Newgate i s a s u c ­
c e s s f u l program, t h i s s ucc es s was n o t r e f l e c t e d in
lower r e c i d i v i s m r a t e s . 34
This p e s s i m i s t i c view o f the succ es s of p r is o n e d u c a ti o n programs and
t h e i r e f f e c t on r e c i d i v is m i s enhanced by a r e p o r t by M artin so n, who
with a group o f c o lle a g u e s reviewed a l l a v a i l a b l e s t u d i e s o f p r is o n
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n programs w r i t t e n in th e English language.

This review

includ ed both academic and v o c a tio n a l t r a i n i n g programs.

Concerning

the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e s e programs on young male o f f e n d e r s , sup­
posedly the group most amenable to t r e a t m e n t , Martinson wr ote:
. . . many o f t h e s e s t u d i e s o f young males a r e ex­
tremely hard to i n t e r p r e t because o f flaws in r e ­
s ea rc h d e s ig n . But i t can s a f e l y be s a i d t h a t th ey
pro vid e us with no c l e a r ev idence t h a t e d u c a ti o n or
s k i l l development programs have been s u c c e s s f u l . 3 5
34

M a rs h a ll , Kaplan, Gans e t a l . , "Summary o f an E v a lu a ti o n of
'Newgate' and Other P r i s o n e r Education Programs," An Overview of
Findings and Recomnendations of Major Research S tu d i e s and National
Commissions Concerning Education o f O f f e n d e r s , March 1981.
■^Robert M ar tinso n, "What Works? Questions and Answers About
P rison Reform," R e h a b i l i t a t i o n , Recidivism and R es earch, (The National
Council on Crime and Delinqu en cy ), March 1976, ( r e p r i n t e d from the
Public I n t e r e s t , Spring 1974), p. 12.

39

The asse ssm en t by Martinson o f a d u l t male o f f e n d e r s i s e q u a l ly
glum:
. . . One can be reasonab ly s u r e t h a t , so f a r , educa­
t i o n a l and v o c a tio n a l programs have n o t worked. We
d o n ' t know why they have f a i l e d . We d o n ' t know whether
the programs themselves a r e f la w ed, o r whether they a r e
in c a p a b le o f overcoming th e e f f e c t s o f p r is o n l i f e in
g e n e r a l . The d i f f i c u l t y may be t h a t they lack a p p l i c a ­
b i l i t y to the world t h e inmate w i l l f a c e o u t s i d e the
p r i s o n . . . . What we do know i s t h a t , to d a t e , educa­
t i o n and s k i l l development have n ot reduced r e c i d i v i s m
by r e h a b i l i t a t i n g c r i m i n a l s . 36
The dismal r e p o r t s from r e s e a r c h do not a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t a l l
e d u c a to r s seeking to change s t u d e n t b e h a v i o r ; t e s t i m o n i a l s from c e r t a i n
e d u c a t o r s working w i t h i n t h e penal system i n d i c a t e t h a t some, p a r t i c u ­
l a r l y c o l l e g e lev el i n s t r u c t o r s , know t h a t t h e i r s t u d e n t s have not been
r e h a b i l i t a t e d by e d u c a t i o n a l programming, y e t they f eel i t i s the l e a s t
they can
college

do t o t r y to f o s t e r a change in t h e i r s t u d e n t s .

Cuddy, a

i n s t r u c t o r t e a c h i n g co u r se s in A t t i c a P r i s o n , New York, de­

s c r i b e d the f r u s t r a t i o n he f e e l s when he works with a s t u d e n t in c l a s s
and a f t e r c l a s s e s , only to s e e t h a t s t u d e n t pa r o le d and r e t u r n to
p r i s o n , a f t e r f i n d i n g h i m s e l f unable to s u r v i v e i n a f r e e s o c i e t y .
He s t a t e s t h a t he w i l l c o n tin u e h i s e f f o r t s so t h a t :
A t t i c a may someday be remembered f o r something b e s id e s
the a b s u r d i t i e s and h a t r e d s which keep our p r is o n s a t
the v o l c a n o ' s e d g e . 37
Another c o l l e g e i n s t r u c t o r , Selbermann, who t e a c h e s philosophy
a t the Maryland S t a t e P ris on a t J e s s u p , d e s c r i b e s h e r thou ghts upon

I b i d . , p. 13.
37

Edward Cuddy, "College f o r C o n v i c t s ," P r o g r e s s i v e , February
1977, p. 55.

40

the completion o f h e r f i r s t se m e st e r o f te a c h in g i n p r i s o n .

She i n ­

d i c a t e s t h a t perhaps some t e a c h e r s a r e motivated to tea ch i n p r is o n
simply because o f a love f o r mankind:
I love t h e s e men. In many ways I have been i n f e c t e d
by t h e i r p a i n , and hope, and d e s p a i r , and c o urage, and
s o r r o w - - t h e g r o p in g , d e s p e r a t e humanness o f them.
There i s a r e a l s i m p l i c i t y ab out them many t i m e s , a
g r i n , a s p i r i t , an e x p r e s s i o n o f concern f o r me, t h a t
g r a c io u s n e s s i t s e l f . They a r e indeed my b r o t h e r s . 38
The l i t e r a t u r e c o n t a i n s no s i g n i f i c a n t r e s e a r c h

on p r i s o n edu­

c a t i o n r e g a rd i n g th e m o t i v a t i o n o f t e a c h e r s in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .
The pr esence o f psychic rewards i s assumed from a few t e s t i m o n i a l s
l i k e th o s e mentioned above from c o l l e g e t e a c h e r s , not from p r is o n
t e a c h e r s who a r e employed f u l l time w i t h i n a penal i n s t i t u t i o n .

I t is

hoped t h a t t h i s r e s e a r c h w i l l add to c u r r e n t knowledge o f psych ic r e ­
wards f o r t e a c h e r s in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .
The n a t u r e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n rewards f o r p r is o n e d u c a to r s is only
s l i g h t l y b e t t e r r e p r e s e n t e d in th e l i t e r a t u r e .

While the l i t e r a t u r e

c o n t a i n s no s t u d i e s r e g a rd in g p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t i o n , d i r e c t l y r e ­
gar ding t e a c h e r s in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s , some i n d i c a t i o n s in th e l i t e r a ­
t u r e p o i n t t o an e l i t i s t a t t i t u d e on th e p a r t o f p r i s o n ed u c a to r s which
may l e a d to a p r i d e in a s s o c i a t i o n with t h e group, a p o s s i b l e p a r t i c i ­
pation motivator.

These i n d i c a t i o n s a r e drawn from th e p e r c e p ti o n

t h a t p r is o n t e a c h e r s f e e l t h e i r jo b i s more d i f f i c u l t than t h a t p e r ­
formed by p u b l i c school t e a c h e r s .

In 1972 th e Western I n t e r s t a t e

Commission on Higher Education r e p o r t e d on a study o f 500 t e a c h e r s
OO

E i le e n Selbermann, " P ris o n P hil o so phy," America, April 14,
1977, p. 307.

41

from f o r t y j u v e n i l e i n s t i t u t i o n s in the Western United S t a t e s ; n e a r l y
h a l f of the t e a c h e r s surveyed r e p o r t e d t h a t they f e l t t h e i r formal
e d u c a t io n r e q u i s i t e f o r p u b l i c school t e a c h in g was not adequate f o r
th e ir current position.

39

This was again emphasized by th e Syracuse

U n i v e r s i t y Research C orpo ration which recommended the upgrading o f
t r a i n i n g s ta n d a r d s f o r t e a c h i n g s t a f f in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s as a means
o f improving t r e a t m e n t e f f o r t s .

40

In 1973 t h e National Advisory Com­

m i t t e e on Criminal J u s t i c e Standards and Goals in Washington, D. C.
was more s p e c i f i c about the t r a i n i n g and e x p e r ie n c e t e a c h e r s i n penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s need:
Along with meeting s t a t e c e r t i f i c a t i o n r e q u ir e m e n ts ,
t e a c h e r s should have a d d i t i o n a l course work in s o c ia l
e d u c a t i o n , r ea ding i n s t r u c t i o n and abnormal ps y ch o l­
ogy. . . . Teachers in j u v e n i l e i n s t i t u t i o n s should
a l s o be c e r t i f i e d t o te a c h e x c e p t i o n a l c h i l d r e n and
have e x p e r ie n c e te a c h in g i n n e r - c i t y c h i l d r e n . 41
I t i s obvious t h a t l i t t l e has been accomplished in the r e s e a r c h
o f t e a c h e r m o ti v a tio n f o r t e a c h e r s in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .

With th e

e x cep ti o n o f a few t e s t i m o n i a l s and innuendos o f a p o s s i b l e f e e l i n g
39

Western I n t e r s t a t e Commission f o r Higher E duc atio n, Boulder ,
Colorado, 1973, "Summary o f Education f o r Youthful Offender s in Correc­
t i o n s I n s t i t u t i o n s , " An Overview o f Findings and Recommendations o f
Major Research Stu die s and National Commissions Concerning Education o f
O f f e n d e r s , 1976, p. '13'.
^ S y r a c u s e U n i v e r s i t y Research C o r p o r a tio n , "Summary o f School
Behind Bars: A d e s c r i p t i o n Overview o f C o r r e c t i o n a l Education in the
American P r is o n System," Recommendations o f Major Research S t u d ie s and
National Commissions Concerning Education o f O f f e n d e r s , 1976, p. 12.
^ N a t i o n a l Advisory Commission on Criminal J u s t i c e Standards
and Goals, Washington, D. C., 1973. "Summary o f C o r r e c t i o n s " An Over­
view o f Findings and Recommendations of Major Research S t u d i e s and
National Commissions Concerning Education o f O f f e n d e r s , 1976, p. 3.

42

o f being a p a r t o f an e l i t e group doing a d i f f i c u l t t a s k , no thin g con­
c r e t e can be found on t h i s s u b j e c t in c u r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e .

I t i s hoped

t h a t t h i s s tu d y , while l i m i t e d to the Michigan Department o f Co rrec ­
t i o n s , can add t o th e knowledge o f t e a c h e r m otiv a tio n o f C o r r e c t i o n s
teachers.
Summary
The review o f l i t e r a t u r e was co n s id e red in two p a r t s :

the f i r s t

d e a ls with m o tiv a t io n th e o r y in g e n e r a l , p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t p e r t a i n s
to th e "Two F acto r The ory."

The second p a r t d e a l s with t e a c h e r m ot iva­

tion.
The idea o f a dichotomy between m o ti v a t io n a l f a c t o r s which cause,
an i n d i v i d u a l to remain with an o r g a n i z a t i o n ( p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s )
and f a c t o r s which cause an i n d i v i d u a l t o e x e r t e f f o r t w i t h i n th e o r ­
g a n i z a t i o n ( p ro d u c ti o n f a c t o r s ) was suggested by March and Simon.

P ar ­

t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s ar e spoken o f in terms o f "inducements versus con­
t r i b u t i o n s " while p roduction f a c t o r s a r e r e f e r r e d to in terms of
" a n t i c i p a t i o n , p e r c e p t i o n and s a t i s f a c t i o n . "

42

Katz r e f e r r e d t o th e two f a c t o r s as "systems rewards" and " r e ­
wards a d m in is t e r e d f o r i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t . "

System rewards a f f e c t

p r o d u c t i v i t y only to the e x t e n t t h a t an o r g a n i z a t i o n which o f f e r s sub­
s t a n t i a l l y h i g h e r system rewards can r e q u i r e h i g h e r p r o d u c t i v i t y ; p r o ­
d u c t i v i t y i s not maximized.

The t h r e e c r i t e r i a

t i v a t o r to be a pr o d u ctio n f a c t o r a r e :
enough to j u s t i f y e x t r a e f f o r t .
42

March and Simon, p. 93.

r e q u i s i t e f o r a mo­

f i r s t , they must be g r e a t

Second, reward must d i r e c t l y follow

43

accomplishment.

And t h i r d , they must be c o n s id e re d e q u i t a b l e by the

members o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n . ^
Herzberg dichotomized m o t i v a t o r s i n t o s a t i s f i e r s and d i s s a t i s fiers.

S a t i s f i e r s were s p e c i f i c a l l y d e s ig n a te d :

achievement, re cog­

n i t i o n , t h e work i t s e l f , r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and advancement.
were:

D issatisfiers

company p o l i c y , a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , s u p e r v i s i o n , s a l a r y , i n t e r p e r ­

sonal r e l a t i o n s and working c o n d i t i o n s .

S a t i s f i e r s were l a b e l e d

" m o ti v a to rs " and d i s s a t i s f i e r s "hygiene f a c t o r s . "
H erzberg's r e s e a r c h c r e a t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n t r o v e r s y , th e pros
and cons o f which have been t h e s u b j e c t of numerous j o u r n a l a r t i c l e s .
A f a t a l flaw in th e theory was r e v e a l e d by K a lle n b e r g , who pointed
o ut th e lack o f an allowance f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s in s a t i s f a c t i o n among people w ith t h e same jo b c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

44

P o r t e r and Lawler developed a model dem o n str atin g th e r e l a t i o n ­
s h ip among perceived d e s i r a b i l i t y o f a reward and th e p r o b a b i l i t y of
o b t a i n i n g t h a t reward through i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t and the s a t i s f a c t i o n
gleaned from th e reward once i t i s o b t a i n e d .

45

This model a s s e r t s

t h a t p e r c e p t i o n i s more i m p o rta n t to m o t i v a t i o n than i s th e r e a l i t y
of the s i t u a t i o n .
Regarding t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n , Masling and S te rn conducted a
study in which they i s o l a t e d f i v e p e r s o n a l i t y types and m o t i v a t i o n a l
f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d with t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n :

^ K a t z , p. 131.
^ K a l l e n b e r g , p. 125.
45

P o r t e r and L a w le r , p. 121.

44

(1) Task o r i e n t e d pragmatism, (2} a f f e c t i o n s e e k i n g , (3) depend­
ency needs, (4) v i c a r i o u s youth l e a d e r , and (5) union r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . ^
L o r t i e d e s c r i b e d " s t a g i n g " o f c a r e e r s as i t e f f e c t s m o t iv a tio n
with th e c o n c lu s io n t h a t a t e a c h e r ' s c a r e e r i s not " s t a g e d " thus not
p o s i t i v e l y a f f e c t e d by t h i s phenomenon.

47

Teachers a r e m otivated to

produce by psych ic rewards.
Educators who argue t h a t ps y ch ic rewards a r e n o t adequate motiva­
t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s who b e l i e v e t h a t s chools a r e mediocre.

They contend

t h a t under our c u r r e n t reward s t r u c t u r e , t h e rewards f o r e x c e l l e n c e
a r e no d i f f e r e n t from th e rewards f o r m e d i o c r i t y .

On the o t h e r hand,

t e s t i m o n i a l s from t e a c h e r s in e d u c a ti o n a l l i t e r a t u r e a t t e s t to the
adequacy o f ps ych ic rewards in e d u c a t i o n .
The l i t e r a t u r e i s s i l e n t concerning m o t i v a t i o n o f t e a c h e r s in
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .

The r e s e a r c h i s q u i t e c l e a r , however, t h a t educa­

t i o n programs have not been s u c c e s s f u l in s to p p in g r e c i d i v is m in inmate
students.

As with p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n , t e a c h e r s w i t h i n p r i s o n scho ols

a t t e s t to th e e x i s t e n c e o f ps ychic re wards , in j o u r n a l t e s t i m o n i a l s ;
however, u n l i k e p u b l i c school e d u c a t i o n , t h e s e psych ic rewards have
not been demonstrated through survey r e s e a r c h .

I t i s hoped t h a t t h i s

r e s e a r c h w i l l begin to shed l i g h t upon the n e g l e c t e d a r e a o f p r is o n
e d u c a t io n d e a l i n g with t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n .
4ft

Masling and S t e r n , p. 58.

^ L o r t i e , p. 85.

CHAPTER I I I

METHODOLOGY
The purpose o f t h i s study i s to i n v e s t i g a t e th e r e a s o n s , both
per so nal and p r o f e s s i o n a l , t h a t t e a c h e r s m a in ta in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s with
the Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and a l s o t h e f a c t o r s which may
in f l u e n c e them to e x e r t e f f o r t beyond the minimum r e q u i s i t e to maintain
this position.
Iso la tio n of possible motivational facto rs
The f i r s t s t e p in t h i s r e s e a r c h was t o i s o l a t e th e p o s s i b l e
m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s which may have an e f f e c t on t e a c h e r s e i t h e r s t a y ­
ing in t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n o r e x e r t i n g e f f o r t w h ile occupying t h e i r
current position.
ways:

This i s o l a t i o n o f f a c t o r s was accomplished in two

f i r s t a review o f th e c u r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e conce rni ng m o ti v a ti o n

was conducted.

This review c o n c e n t r a t e d on m o t i v a t i o n th e o r y in gen­

e r a l and then more s p e c i f i c a l l y on t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n .

The main works

on t e a c h e r m o ti v a tio n r e f e r r e d to in t h i s r e s e a r c h were th o s e o f
Masling and S t e a r n and L o r t i e , which enumerated th e f a c t o r s m otiv a t in g
t e a c h e r s in p u b l i c s c h o o ls .

M otiva tion o f t e a c h e r s i n penal i n s t i t u ­

t i o n s i s n o t r e f e r r e d t o in c u r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e .
The i n f o r m a tio n gained from th e review o f l i t e r a t u r e was then
an alyz ed using o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n s c h o o l s .
s e r v a t i o n s o c c u r re d over a p eriod o f seven y e a r s .

These ob­

F i r s t , durin g the

t h r e e y e a r s wh ile the r e s e a r c h e r was an a n a l y s t f o r th e c e n t r a l o f f i c e
of th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s , a t which time t h e r e was
45

46

o p p o r tu n i t y t o observ e t e a c h e r s in a l l o f M ichigan 's penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .
These o b s e r v a t i o n s were th o s e o f an o u t s i d e r look ing i n t o th e s c h o o ls ,
n o t th o s e o f a p a r t i c i p a n t in th e s c h o o l s .

Then f o r f o u r y e a r s ob­

s e r v a t i o n s were made o f t e a c h e r s a t th e S t a t e P r is o n o f Southern
Michigan by the r e s e a r c h e r who was a t t h a t time a t e a c h e r a t th e p r is o n
academic s c h o o l.

Thus th e a n a l y s i s encompasses both a ge ne ral o v e r a l l

view of t e a c h e r s systemwide, and then a more i n t i m a t e l e s s general
o b s e r v a t i o n o f t h e day to day e f f o r t s o f t e a c h e r s in one s p e c i f i c i n ­
stitution.

Also t e a c h e r s were in f o r m a l l y i n terv ie w ed r e g a rd i n g the

m o ti v a tio n a l e f f e c t s o f th e v a r i o u s f a c t o r s upon them p e r s o n a l l y .

From

th e review o f l i t e r a t u r e and in te rv i e w s with t e a c h e r s in c o n j u n c t io n
with o b s e r v a t i o n s through seven y e a r s , a l i s t o f twelve p o s s i b l e mo­
t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s was i s o l a t e d f o r i n c l u s i o n in t h i s s t u d y .
The p o s s i b l e m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s were then dichotomized using
the c r i t e r i o n of e f f o r t .

The f a c t o r s which were a l l o c a t e d to a l l

t e a c h e r s , r e g a r d l e s s o f e f f o r t o r p r o d u c t i v i t y , were as s ig n e d to the
group l a b e l e d " p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s " s i n c e e f f o r t was n o t a c o n t r i b ­
uting fa c to r to t h e i r a l l o c a t io n .

There were f i v e f a c t o r s in t h i s

group; t h e s e w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r with th e design o f th e q u e s t i o n ­
naire.

The second group , " p ro d u c tio n f a c t o r s " were th o s e f a c t o r s

which may be e f f e c t e d by th e e f f o r t and performance o f th e t e a c h e r .
They a r e not a l l o c a t e d simply upon t h e c r i t e r i o n o f membership in the
organization.

There were seven f a c t o r s i n t h i s group; a g a in they w i l l

be d i s c u s s e d under t h e des ig n o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
Design o f th e i n s t r u m e n t
The d e c i s i o n was made i n t h i s stu d y to develop an in s tr u m e n t
which resembled t h a t used in the Dade County F l o r i d a study

(see

47

Appendix B : l ) .

That i s , the in str u m e n t c o n s i s t e d o f a gen er al s t a t e ­

ment concerning a p a r t i c u l a r m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r o r p o r t i o n o f a f a c t o r
with more s p e c i f i c s u b state m en ts l i s t e d under t h e gen er al s ta te m e n t.
In t h i s in s tr u m e n t the s u b f a c t o r s were t o be responded t o us in g a
L i k e r t type format with the f o llo w in g c r i t e r i o n :
5.

S tr o n g l y ag ree

4.

Agree

3.

Neutral

2.

Disagree

1.

Strongly disagree

Since t h i s study was des igne d not only t o determ ine th e f a c t o r s
a f f e c t i n g m o tiv a ti o n o f t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s but
a l s o the r e l a t i o n s h i p between c e r t a i n demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of
t e a c h e r s and th o s e f a c t o r s , th e f i r s t page o f th e i n s tr u m e n t was
d e d ic a t e d wholly t o th e c o l l e c t i o n o f t h e s e demographic f a c t o r s , which
include:

(1) th e i n s t i t u t i o n a t which th e t e a c h e r i s employed, (2)

th e s e c u r i t y lev el of the i n s t i t u t i o n (c h o ic e s in c l u d e Minimum, Medium,
and Maximum), (3) th e s u b j e c t a r e a t a u g h t ( choices i n c l u d e :

Mathe­

m a t i c s , E n g l i s h , Reading, S c ie n c e — t h i s was l a t e r e l i m i n a t e d from th e
e v a l u a t i o n s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t i s no l o n g e r p a r t o f th e c u r ric u lu m and
only t h r e e t e a c h e r s were c o n s id e r e d — , l i f e r o l e c o m p eten cies , and
other).

A t e a c h e r who t a u g h t in more than one a r e a could choose more

than one s u b j e c t a r e a , (4) sex o f the t e a c h e r , (5) y e a r s o f e x p e r ie n c e
of the teacher.
The f i r s t seven ge ne ral s ta t e m e n t s on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were
designed t o measure p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s :

48

1.

D e f a u l t : In t h i s item an i n d i v i d u a l was asked t o respond
t o s ta t e m e n t 1c on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( s e e Appendix B:1)
r e g a r d i n g m a in ta i n i n g h i s p o s i t i o n only because he has
no o t h e r o p t i o n .

2.

P r a c t i c a l rewards: In t h i s item i n d i v i d u a l s were asked
to respond t o s ta te m e n t s 2a, 3 a , 4a on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
These s ta t e m e n t s concern th e importance o f pay and a llo w ­
a n c e s , c i v i l s e r v i c e s t a t u s , work h o u r s , and age o f s t u ­
d e n t s . A high mean s c o r e on t h i s p o r t i o n i n d i c a t e s a
p o s i t i v e i n f l u e n c e by t h e s e ite m s .

3.

"Macho": This c a te g o r y was des igne d to measure t h e ex­
t e n t to which t e a c h e r s f e e l t h e i r p o s i t i o n i s a man's
j o b , not to be f i l l e d by a woman. For male t e a c h e r s
a low s c o re in t h i s f a c t o r would i n d i c a t e a p a r t i c i p a t i o n
m o t i v a t o r . Item 5d was used t o measure t h i s f a c t o r .

4.

E l i t e : This item was designed t o measure the e x t e n t to
which t e a c h e r s in penal i n s t i t u t i o n s c o n s i d e r t h e t r a i n ­
ing and e x p e r i e n c e r e q u i s i t e t o perform t h e i r d u t i e s to
be more e x t e n s i v e than t h a t r e q u i r e d f o r p u b l i c school
t e a c h e r s . A high s core on t h i s item would i n d i c a t e a
p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r . The item used to measure
t h i s on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was 6a.

5.

P r e s t i g e : These items were designed to measure the
amount o f p r e s t i g e a p r i s o n t e a c h e r p la c e s on th e cr iminal
j u s t i c e system in r e l a t i o n to t h e p u b l i c e d u c a tio n system.
He is asked t o eq u ate th e p r e s t i g e o f comparable p o s i ­
t i o n s in the two systems comparing th e f o llo w in g a r e a s
(corrections f ie ld s e rv ic e s , p o lic e , prison adm inistra­
t i o n , and p r is o n school a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) with comparable
p u b l i c school p o s i t i o n s . A high mean s c o r e on t h e s e
items would i n d i c a t e a p o s i t i v e a f f i l i a t i o n with the
c r im in al j u s t i c e system. Items 7a, b, c , d were used
in t h i s f a c t o r .

Items e i g h t through s i x t e e n on th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e were used to
measure p roductio n f a c t o r s .

These f a c t o r s a r e :

1.

C o gnitive:
A d e s i r e t o reach th e s t u d e n t by te a c h i n g
him the s u b j e c t : f o u r items were used in t h i s f a c t o r
which were designed to measure t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p th e
t e a c h e r a s s o c i a t e d between su c c e ss and c o g n i t i v e l e a r n ­
ing w i t h i n th e s t u d e n t . Items used in t h i s f a c t o r were:
8b, 11a, 12c and 16a. A high mean s core on t h i s f a c t o r
would i n d i c a t e a p r o p e n s i t y t o be a p roductio n m o t i v a t o r .

2.

A ffective:
A d e s i r e t o change th e s t u d e n t i n t o a p r o ­
d u c t i v e c i t i z e n . The f o u r items used in t h i s f a c t o r
were des igned to measure t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p th e t e a c h e r

49

f e e l s e x i s t s between su c c e ss and a change in h i s
d e n t ' s b e h a v io r . The items used f o r t h i s f a c t o r
8c, 11c, 12e and 16a. A high mean s core i n t h i s
t o r would i n d i c a t e a p r o p e n s i t y to be a p o s i t i v e
duction m otivator.

stu­
are:
fac­
pr o­

3.

E x h i b i t i o n i s t : The d e s i r e to de m onst rat e h i s pedagogi­
cal s k i l l s . The f i v e items in t h i s f a c t o r were d e ­
s ig n ed t o measure th e d e s i r e o f t e a c h e r s t o dem on stra te
t h e i r knowledge o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r and t h e i r a b i l i t y to
p r e s e n t t h a t m a t e r i a l t o t h e i r s t u d e n t s through verbal
communication. The items used in t h i s f a c t o r a r e : 6d,
9a, 10a, 12b and 16e. A high mean s c o r e would i n d i c a t e
a p r o p e n s i t y t o be a p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r .

4.

A u t h o r i t y : The d e s i r e t o manage and c o n t r o l o t h e r i n d i ­
v i d u a l s . The f o u r items used i n t h i s f a c t o r were de­
s ig n e d t o measure t h e importance an i n d i v i d u a l p la c e s
on clas sroo m management and on a u t h o r i t y p e r s e .
Items
used in t h i s f a c t o r a r e : 8 a , 9d, 11b and 16f . A high
mean s c o r e i n d i c a t e s a p r o p e n s i t y t o be a p r o d u c t io n
m otivator.

5.

Advancement: The d e s i r e t o advance t o a h i g h e r p o s i ­
t i o n w i t h i n th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .
The f o u r items used in t h i s f a c t o r were des igne d to
measure th e d e s i r e o f an i n d i v i d u a l t o o b t a i n a promo­
t i o n . The items used a r e : 12d, 13a and 16d. A high
mean s c o r e on t h e s e items would i n d i c a t e a p r o p e n s i t y
t o be a p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r .

6.

Rec ognit io n: The d e s i r e t o be r ec ognize d both as a
good t e a c h e r by f e l l o w t e a c h e r s and as a p r o f e s s i o n a l
w i t h i n th e i n s t i t u t i o n . The f o u r items used in t h i s
f a c t o r were des igned to measure t h e d e s i r e o f a
t e a c h e r f o r pee r group r e c o g n i t i o n as well as t h e de­
s i r e t o be t r e a t e d as a " p r o f e s s i o n a l " w i t h i n t h e
p la c e o f employment. The f o u r items used i n t h i s f a c ­
t o r a r e : 12a, 14a, 15a and 16c. A high mean s c o r e
i n t h e s e f a c t o r s would i n d i c a t e a p r o p e n s i t y to be a
p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r .

7.

Reform: The d e s i r e o f th e t e a c h e r to e f f e c t reform
upon t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system w i t h i n t h e i n s t i t u t i o n
a n d / o r w i t h i n the Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s . The
t h r e e items in t h i s f a c t o r were des ign ed t o measure
t h e d e s i r e and need t o reform th e e d u c a t i o n a l system
f e l t by th e t e a c h e r . The items used i n t h i s f a c t o r
a r e : 8 e , 9b and 16d. A high mean s c o r e on t h e s e
f a c t o r s would i n d i c a t e a p r o p e n s i t y t o be a p r o ­
duction motivator.

50

Success
Since p o s s i b l e m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s do n o t m o tiv a te an i n d i v i d u a l
u n l e s s t h a t i n d i v i d u a l f e e l s th ey a r e o b t a i n a b l e , th e nex t p o r t i o n o f
th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was des igne d t o measure t h e degree o f success t e a c h e r s
f e e l they can o b t a i n in t h e i r c u r r e n t system.
Satisfaction
The s a t i s f a c t i o n o f th e t e a c h e r with h i s c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n i s de­
termined i n q u e s t i o n 19a which asks th e t e a c h e r i f he were given the
o p p o r t u n i t y t o begin aga in would he a c c e p t a te a c h i n g p o s i t i o n with
th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .
P i l o t study
The i n s t r u m e n t was p i l o t t e s t e d using a group o f n o n - te a c h i n g
t e a c h e r s employed a t th e S t a t e P r is o n o f Southern Michigan; t h i s group
c o n s i s t e d o f school c o u n s e lo r s and media pe rsonnel c e r t i f i e d t o teach
b u t working i n p o s i t i o n s which r e q u i r e d u t i e s o u t s i d e th e academic
classro om.

The p i l o t confirmed both t h e r e l i a b i l i t y and t h e v a l i d i t y

of the instrument.

The r e l i a b i l i t y was dem onstrated by t h e answers

r e c e i v e d on r ed un dan t o r s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s ; s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s r e c e i v e d
sim ilar scores.

I n te rv i e w s with t h e i n d i v i d u a l s who were a d m i n i s t e r e d

th e t e s t dem on strated t h e v a l i d i t y o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

These

t e a c h e r s ag re ed t h a t th e in s tr u m e n t d id measure t h e items i t was de­
signed to measure.
Analysis
Data were analyz ed using t h e means and s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f t h e
twelve f a c t o r s to de te rm ine both th e p r o p e n s i t y o f a given f a c t o r to

51

be e i t h e r a p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r or a p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r .

The

s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n f o r each f a c t o r determined th e homogeneity o f th e
group as i t involved t h a t p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r .

The means could not

n e c e s s a r i l y determine t h e s t r e n g t h o f a p a r t i c u l a r m o t i v a t o r b u t could
be used t o measure t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e f a c t o r as a p o s s i b l e m o t i v a t o r .
Means were a l s o used t o compare th e f a c t o r s as they were dichotomized
by s e x , age o f s t u d e n t , ex p e r ie n c e o f th e t e a c h e r , s u b j e c t a r e a , sex
o f th e s t u d e n t , s e c u r i t y l e v e l o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n , s a t i s f a c t i o n o f
the t e a c h e r and success f e l t by th e t e a c h e r .
C r o s sta b s were used with the twelve f a c t o r s and each o f th e
f o llo w i n g :

sex o f th e t e a c h e r , e x p e r ie n c e o f th e t e a c h e r , s u b j e c t

a r e a t a u g h t , age o f th e s t u d e n t , sex o f th e s t u d e n t , s e c u r i t y lev el
o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n , s a t i s f a c t i o n o f th e t e a c h e r and su c c e ss th e t e a c h ­
e r s f e e l they can o b t a i n .

From th e c r o s s t a b s th e chi squared s c o r e s

were o b t a i n e d t o determine i f a d i f f e r e n c e does e x i s t between expected
frequency and observed f r e q u e n c i e s , a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .05 was s e t as
a s ig n ific a n t difference.
S e l e c t i o n of th e study group
The group chosen f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h a r e a l l academic school t e a c h ­
e r s , t e a c h i n g in a classroom in t h e academic s c h o o ls o f t h e Michigan
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

This group does not in c l u d e v o c a t io n a l

t e a c h e r s , because th e goals and e d u c a t i o n a l r e q u ir em ents f o r a voca­
t i o n a l t e a c h e r may d i f f e r from t h o s e o f an academic t e a c h e r .

Nor does

t h e sample i n c l u d e school c o u n s e l o r s o r c e r t i f i e d t e a c h e r s who s e r v e
as t e a c h e r s ' a i d e s o r i n o t h e r c a p a c i t i e s w i t h i n th e i n s t i t u t i o n s .

52

Since t h e r e ar e l e s s than one-hundred academic school classroom
t e a c h e r s s e r v i n g in t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s , i t was
de cided t h a t a l l should be su rv ey ed ; a complete census o f th e group,
n o t a sample s urv ey .

Before t h i s census could be accomplishe d, p e r ­

mission had t o be o b t a i n e d from th e Program Bureau o f t h e Michigan
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

When t h i s approval was r e q u e s t e d the

A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r o f th e Program Bureau reviewed th e proposal and
q u e s t i o n n a i r e b e f o r e he could make any d e c i s i o n con ce rn ing the r e ­
search.

A f t e r reviewing t h e i n fo r m a t io n he n o t only g r a n te d permis­

s i o n t o conduct t h e r e s e a r c h but a l s o s e n t l e t t e r s to th e v a r i o u s
wardens and s u p e r i n t e n d e n t s t h ro ughout t h e S t a t e as kin g f o r t h e i r co­
o p e r a t i o n in t h i s m a t t e r .

This l e t t e r made ac c e s s t o a l l i n s t i t u t i o n s

much more e x p e d i e n t .
All i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i n c i p a l s were then c a l l e d t o determine the
e x a c t number o f t e a c h e r s th ey c u r r e n t l y employed as academic school
t e a c h e r s in t h e i r s ch ools and to o b t a i n c o o p e r a t i o n in th e r e s e a r c h .
The co unt o f n i n e t y - f i v e t e a c h e r s s ubm itted by th e p r i n c i p a l s was
used t o deter mine t h e number o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s s e n t o r d e l i v e r e d to
each s c h o o l .
Since over 60% o f th e t e a c h e r s employed by th e Michigan Depart­
ment o f C o r r e c t i o n s a r e l o c a t e d in t h e J a c k s o n , Michigan and I o n i a ,
Michigan a r e a s , i t was decided t h a t th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s would be de­
l i v e r e d t o t h e s e t e a c h e r s p e r s o n a l l y , a t which time th e r e s e a r c h would
be e x p l a i n e d .

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e could then be picked up th e same day,

i n s u r i n g th e r e t u r n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

The remaining in str u m en ts

were s e n t t o th e p r i n c i p a l s o f th e v a r i o u s s c h o o ls who had b e f o r e
a s s u r e d t h a t they would d e l i v e r th e in s tr u m e n t to t h e t e a c h e r s .

53

Included with the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were a s e l f - a d d r e s s e d stamped envelope
and a cove r l e t t e r a s s u r i n g the c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l r espons es.
Cooperation from a l l p r i n c i p a l s in t h e system was e x c e l l e n t with
t h e e x c e p t io n o f th e Marquette Branch P r is o n .

In t h e Marquette p r is o n

t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e a r r i v e d immediately p r i o r t o t h e May d i s t u r b a n c e s
which r e s u l t e d i n a lockdown o f a l l inmates f o r s e v e r a l weeks.

The

p r i n c i p a l in t h i s school opted not to d i s t r i b u t e t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
d e s p i t e r e q u e s t s from t h i s r e s e a r c h e r and from t h e r e g io n a l d i r e c t o r
o f e d u c a t i o n in J a c k s o n , Michigan.

While the absence of r e s u l t s from

t h i s , th e most s e c u r e o f a l l Michigan P r i s o n s , w i l l reduce th e p r e ­
c i s i o n o f th e s t u d y , th e problems caused by th e d i s t u r b a n c e and r e s u l t ­
ing lockdown may have a l t e r e d th e f e e l i n g s o f t e a c h e r s i n t h i s p r is o n
f o r a s h o r t time r e g a r d l e s s , thus th e f i n d i n g s from t h e Marquette
Branch P r is o n may f o r the i n t e r i m be l a c k i n g .

However, t h e v a l i d i t y

o f the o v e r a l l f i n d i n g s may be more p r e c i s e w it h o u t Marque tte.

The

r e s u l t s o f t h i s s tu d y w i l l not be a p p l i e d to t h e t e a c h e r s a t the
Marquette Branch P r is o n .
Of t h e remaining e i g h t y - s e v e n t e a c h e r s w i t h i n th e system, e i g h t y one completed th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e and r e t u r n e d i t t o th e r e s e a r c h e r ,
g i v i n g a 93% r e t u r n from a l l t e a c h e r s r e c e i v i n g t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e o u t ­
s i d e o f Marqu ette.

The demographics o f t h i s 93% a r e incl uded on th e

c h a r t (Tab le 3 : 1 ) .

This high r e t u r n on a complete census o f t h e popu­

l a t i o n allows t h e r e s u l t s to be t r e a t e d as census m a t e r i a l r a t h e r than
as a sample.

54

Table 3 : 1 --Demographics o f Teachers in Michigan Penal I n s t i t u t i o n s

Breakdown o f th e Teachers by S e c u r i t y
S e c u r i t y l e v e l _________________ Number_______________ P e r c e n t
Maximum S e c u r i t y

25

30.9

Medium S e c u r i t y

21

25.9

5

6.2

Female P rison

Breakdown o f Teachers by S u b j e c t Area
S u b je c t

Number o f Teachers

Mathematics

29

English

24

Reading

35

L.R.C.

10

Other

10

Breakdown o f Teachers by Sex
Sex

_____________ Number

Percent

Male

62

76.5

Female

19

23.5

55

Table 3:1 — (c ontinued)

Breakdown by Expe rience o f th e Teacher
Years

Number

Category

1

3

1i t t l e

2

9

1i t t l e

3

8

little

4

3

1i t t l e

5

13

medium

6

12

medium

7

4

medium

8

3

medium

9

2

medium

10

3

medium

11

7

medium

12

2

much

13

1

much

14

2

much

15

4

much

16

1

much

17

1

much

18

1

much

19

1

much

20

1

much

Total 8
Teachers with no p u b l i c school t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e — 16

-

19.83S

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The purpose o f t h i s s tu d y i s t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e r e a s o n s , both
per so na l and p r o f e s s i o n a l , t h a t t e a c h e r s m a in ta in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s with
the Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and a l s o th e f a c t o r s which may
i n f l u e n c e them t o e x e r t e f f o r t beyond th e minimum r e q u i s i t e t o m aintain
th is position.

In o r d e r t o accomplish t h i s purpose i t i s n e c e s s a r y to

answer t h e f oll ow ing q u e s t i o n s :
I.

II.

What a r e th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t e a c h e r s in
the academic s ch ools o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
A.

Do t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s m a i n t a in
t h e i r employment because they f e e l th ey have no
oth er option?

B.

How do t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s view
th e p r a c t i c a l rewards o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n ?

C.

Do t e a c h e r s in academic s c h o o ls o f Michigan penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s enjoy t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n w ith th e
cr i m in a l j u s t i c e system?
1.

Do they a s s o c i a t e t h e i r job with th e "Macho"
image?

2.

Do they c o n s i d e r themselves an e l i t e group?

3.

Do th ey a s s o c i a t e more p r e s t i g e to p o s i t i o n s
in c r im in a l j u s t i c e th an t o p o s i t i o n s i n pub­
l i c e d u c a t io n ?

What a r e th e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g academic school
t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
A.

Do they a s s o c i a t e s uc ce ss w ith c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g
in t h e i r s t u d e n t s ?

B.

Do they a s s o c i a t e s u c c e ss with s t u d e n t change?
56

57

III.

IV.

V.

C.

Do they d e s i r e t o dem on stra te t h e i r pedagogical
sk ills?

D.

Do they d e s i r e t o e x e r t c o n t r o l over o t h e r s ?

E.

Do th e y seek advancement to a h i g h e r p o s i t i o n w i t h i n
th e c o r r e c t i o n ' s h i e r a r c h y ?

F.

Do th ey seek r e c o g n i t i o n from o t h e r s w i t h i n th e
institution?

G.

Do th ey seek t o improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system
w i t h i n t h e i r own i n s t i t u t i o n and w i t h i n th e Michigan
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s ?

Do t e a c h e r s in academic s ch ools o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u ­
t i o n s p e r c e i v e t h e s e pr o d u ctio n f a c t o r s as a c h i e v a b l e in
th e ir current situ a tio n ?
How do t h e f o ll o w in g r e l a t e t o both p r o d u c tio n and p a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
A.

Sex o f th e t e a c h e r

B.

S u b j e c t a r e a t a u g h t by th e t e a c h e r

C.

Experience o f th e t e a c h e r

D.

S e c u r i t y l ev el o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n

E.

Age o f th e s tu d e n t

F.

Sex o f th e s t u d e n t

Would th e t e a c h e r s in t h e Academic Schools o f Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s a c c e p t t h e p o s i t i o n a g a in i f given
a n o t h e r chance t o s t a r t over?

When a sample o f a given p o p u l a t i o n
l a t i o n onany given

t r a i t , t h e items

i s used t o a n a ly z e t h a t popu­

used in t h e a n a l y s i s must

be

spoken o f in terms o f p r o b a b i l i t y ; i f , on th e o t h e r hand, th e e n t i r e
p o p u l a t i o n i s surveyed co ncerning t h a t p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , t h e
a n a l y s i s can be spoken o f in terms o f c e r t a i n t y . ^
1. C. A. Moser and G. Kalton, Survey Methods in Social I n v e s t i ­
g a t i o n . (New York: Basic Books I n c . ) , 1972, p. 64.

58

Since t h e e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n o f t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n s ch ools of Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s was surveyed f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h and a r e t u r n o f 93%
was o b ta i n e d on th e survey (w ith th e e x c e p tio n o f th e t e a c h e r s a t
Marquette Branch P r is o n , who did not p a r t i c i p a t e in th e survey) the
assumption o f n e a r p r e c i s i o n i s made; s c o r e s a r e not c o n s id e re d to be
e s t i m a t e s o f the p o p u l a t i o n .

For t h i s r e a s o n , ex cept f o r minor d i s ­

c r e p a n c i e s , d i f f e r e n c e s in s t a t i s t i c s w i l l i n d i c a t e a c t u a l d i f f e r e n c e s
in p o p u l a t i o n .

The use o f a 95% c o n f id e n c e i n t e r v a l and o f s ta n d a r d

e r r o r o f th e mean w i l l not be r e q u i s i t e f o r t h i s s tu d y .
Because o f v a r i a t i o n s among the d i v e r s e s t a t e s in th e United
S t a t e s in p r is o n c o n d i t i o n s , d e l i v e r y systems f o r t e a c h e r s in thos e
p r i s o n s , p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s a s s o c i a t e d with t e a c h i n g in p r i s o n s , and
gen er al working c o n d i t i o n s i n s i d e p r i s o n s , no a t t e m p t w i l l be made to
generalize

th e

r e s u l t s o f t h i s study to penal i n s t i t u t i o n s o u t s i d e

th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

R ecognition w i l l a l s o be

allowed f o r p o s s i b l e v a r i a t i o n s between f i n d i n g s f o r t e a c h e r s in t h i s
study and the t e a c h e r s in Marquette Branch P r is o n .

This i s s t r i c t l y

a d e s c r i p t i v e study o f t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s , causal
r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i l l not be d e a l t with in t h e a n a l y s i s o f d ata c h a p t e r .
P articip atio n factors
Table 4:1 l i s t s th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s o f t e a c h e r s by o r d e r
o f th e descending means.

The o r d e r i s n o t inten de d t o i n d i c a t e th e

s t r e n g t h o f t h e f a c t o r in r e l a t i o n t o th e s t r e n g t h o f o t h e r p o s i t i v e
f a c t o r s ; because th e mean o f " E l i t e " is g r e a t e r than th e mean o f
" P r a c t i c a l " does n ot i n d i c a t e t h a t th e m o t i v a t i o n a l s t r e n g t h of the
f a c t o r " P r a c t i c a l " i s l e s s than " E l i t e . "

For p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s

59

Table 4 : 1 —P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s by o r d e r o f des cending means

Mean

Standard Deviation

E lite

3.925

1.077

Practical

3.510

.873

Macho

2.886

1.625

D e f a u lt

2.662

1.359

Prestige

2.547

.707

60

th e s e mean s c o re s do not i n d i c a t e the s t r e n g t h o f the f a c t o r as a mo­
t i v a t o r , only th e p r o p e n s i t y o f th e f a c t o r t o be a m o t i v a t o r .

The

s t r e n g t h o f th e m o tiv a t o r cannot be measured in t h i s s tu d y .
Teachers do n o t f eel they hold t h e i r p o s i t i o n s merely because
they ca nnot f in d a p o s i t i o n e l s e w h e r e , nor do they a t t r i b u t e more p r e s ­
t i g e t o a p o s i t i o n with c r im in a l j u s t i c e than th e y do t o a p o s i t i o n
with p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n .

In f a c t , t o th e c o n t r a r y , th ey f e e l p u b l i c

e d u c a t io n i s a more p r e s t i g i o u s f i e l d than i s cr im in a l j u s t i c e .

Not

only i s p r e s t i g e the lowe st numeric mean f a c t o r b u t i t i s a l s o t h e f a c ­
t o r with t h e lowest s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f a l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s
( .7 0 7 ) . This i n d i c a t e s a high le v e l o f agreement by t e a c h e r s in t h i s
factor.
The f a c t o r s " E l i t e " and " P r a c t i c a l " a r e both very p o s i t i v e p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r s which i n d i c a t e two t h i n g s .

F i r s t , t h a t teachers

f e e l they a r e an e l i t e group o f t e a c h e r s and t h a t t h e p o s i t i o n s th ey
hold r e q u i r e more t r a i n i n g and e x p e r ie n c e than th e p o s i t i o n s o f p u b l i c
school t e a c h e r s .

Secondly, th e p r a c t i c a l a s p e c t s o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n s ,

such as pay, hours o f work, c i v i l s e r v i c e s t a t u s , v a c a t i o n time and
t e a c h in g a d u l t s t u d e n t s r a t h e r th an youth a r e p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n
m o t i v a t o r s , h e l p in g t o keep t h e t e a c h e r in h i s p o s i t i o n , n o t because
he has no o t h e r o p t i o n but because he chooses t o keep h i s c u r r e n t p o s i ­
tion.
While a s c o r e o f l e s s than t h r e e on t h e f a c t o r "Macho" i n d i c a t e s
a tendency f o r t h i s f a c t o r to be a p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r ,
the s c o r e o f 2.886 obtained on t h i s r e s e a r c h ca nnot i n d i c a t e a n yth in g
o t h e r than a n e u t r a l f i n d i n g .

I t must be remembered t h a t t h i s f a c t o r

r e l a t e s t o the f e e l i n g t h a t p r is o n s should be th e p l a c e f o r men and

61

not f o r women, thus th e combined s c o re o f a l l t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e d in
t h i s c h a r t i s not a f a i r e v a l u a t i o n o f th e m o t iv a tio n a l e f f e c t o f th e
factor.

A more v a l i d f i n d i n g w i l l be o b t a i n e d when male t e a c h e r s and

female t e a c h e r s a r e c o n s id e re d s e p a r a t e l y .
Pro duction f a c t o r s
Table 4:2 i l l u s t r a t e s th e p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r s by descending
numeric o r d e r o f th e means f o r a l l t e a c h e r s in t h e Michigan Department
of Corrections.

As i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s , t h e p o s i t i o n of th e item

on th e l i s t does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y i n d i c a t e th e s t r e n g t h o f th e f a c t o r .
In t h i s t a b l e a p o s i t i v e s c o r e (above t h r e e ) does n o t i n d i c a t e t h a t
t h e f a c t o r i s a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t i o n a l f o r c e , i t i s a p r o d u c tio n mo­
t i v a t o r only i f th e i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r p e r c e i v e s i t as a c h i e v a b l e .

A

p o s i t i v e s c o re i n d i c a t e s only a p r o p e n s i t y o f th e f a c t o r o r t o be a
p o s i t i v e pro d u ctio n m o t i v a t o r .
While a l l o f th e f a c t o r s l i s t e d a r e g r e a t e r than t h r e e , th e f a c ­
t o r "Advancement" a t 3.016 i s c l o s e t o th e n e u t r a l such t h a t i t cannot
h o n e s tl y be c o n s id e r e d p o s i t i v e but r a t h e r must be c l a s s i f i e d as neu­
tral .
Teachers i n the Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s seek t o teach
both t h e i r s u b j e c t m a t t e r and to change t h e i r s t u d e n t s ' b e h a v i o r .

They

enjoy dem o n str atin g t h e i r pedagogical s k i l l s and e x e r t i n g a u t h o r i t y
over t h e i r s t u d e n t s .

They want t o reform th e e d u c a t i o n a l systems

w ith in t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n s a n d / o r w i t h i n th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .
They seek r e c o g n i t i o n from o t h e r s w i t h i n t h e i n s t i t u t i o n f o r t h e i r
p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a t u s and f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s .

62

Table 4 : 2 — Pr odu ction f a c t o r by o r d e r o f des cending means

Mean

S tandar d Deviation

Co gnit iv e

4.074

.553

Affective

3.836

.696

A u t h o r it y

3.833

.552

Reform

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.633

.706

Exhibition

3.543

.624

Advancement

3.016

.972

63

P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s co n s id e red by
the sex o f the t e a c h e r ______________
The sex o f the t e a c h e r has a very d e f i n i t e e f f e c t on the p a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n f a c t o r s o f academic school t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e Michigan Dep ar t­
ment o f C o r r e c tio n s as shown in Table 4 : 3 .

The o r d e r i n which the f a c ­

t o r s a r e ar ra nge d does not d i f f e r from t h e o v e r a l l with e i t h e r sex;
however, th e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e sexes i s e v i d e n t in a l l f a c t o r s .
In every f a c t o r female t e a c h e r s showed a h i g h e r mean s c o r e and a lower
s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n than male t e a c h e r s .

This lower s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n

i n d i c a t e s more homogeneity among female t e a c h e r s than among male t e a c h ­
e r s in m o ti v a tio n to p a r t i c i p a t e .
For male t e a c h e r s and f o r t e a c h e r s as a whole, t h e f a c t o r
" D efault" i s d e f i n i t e l y n o t a p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r ; however, f o r
female t e a c h e r s th e f a c t o r "D e f a u l t" i s n e u t r a l , not p o s i t i v e b u t a l s o
not u n r e l a t e d .

Female t e a c h e r s ap pea r more l i k e l y t o f e e l tr a p p e d in

t h e i r p o s i t i o n than a r e t h e i r male c o u n t e r p a r t s .
As was mentioned p r e v i o u s l y , t h e mean s c o r e on t h e f a c t o r "Macho"
was r e l e v a n t to male t e a c h e r s o n l y , female s c o r e s s e rv e d as a confound­
ing v a r i a b l e .

The s c o r e o f 2.758 f o r th e male t e a c h e r s i n d i c a t e s t h a t

"Macho" i s , in f a c t , a p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r f o r male t e a c h ­
ers.

The female s c o r e o f 3.333 i s i n d i c a t i v e t h a t female t e a c h e r s do

not f e e l t h a t t h e r e a r e any i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h i n t h e Michigan Correc­
t i o n a l System r e s e r v e d only f o r male t e a c h e r s , women should be a b le
to te a c h in a l l i n s t i t u t i o n s .
The t a b l e o f chi squar e s c o r e s (Appendix C.:l) i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e
i s a d i f f e r e n c e in th e d i s t r i b u t i o n s of th e s c o r e s f o r male and female
t e a c h e r s f o r th e f a c t o r " E l i t e . "

This raw s c o r e o f 13.97522 with

Table 4 :3 —P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s of te a c h e r s considered by sex of the te a c h e r

n = 62

n = 19
Female

Male

Teachers

Mean

Standard
Deviation

Mean

Elite

3.738

1.079

4.526

Practical

3.430

.912

3.772

Macho

2.754

1.629

3.333

Default

2.557

1.360

3.000

Prestige

2,523

.724

2.566

Teachers
Standard
Deviation

•

N - 81
Overall
Mean

Standard
Deviation

.841

3.925

1.077

.685

3.510

.873

1.572

2.886

1.625

1.333

2.662

1.359

.655

2.547

.707

65

f o u r degre es o f freedom give s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e o f .0074.

No

o t h e r f a c t o r s d i f f e r e d a t th e .05 l ev el o f s i g n i f i c a n c e .
P r oduc tion by sex o f th e t e a c h e r
Table 4:4 i n d i c a t e s t h a t , as in p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s so a l s o in
p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s , female t e a c h e r s r a t e each o f t h e p o s s i b l e motiva­
t i o n a l f a c t o r s h i g h e r than male t e a c h e r s r a t e them.

Again, a l l f a c ­

t o r s have a p r o p e n s i t y t o be p r o d u c tiv e m o ti v a to r s with t h e exception
o f "Advancement" which i s too c l o s e to th e n e u t r a l number o f t h r e e to
be c o n s id e r e d a s e r i o u s m o ti v a tio n a l f a c t o r f o r e i t h e r sex.
In t h e t h r e e f a c t o r s " C o g n i t i v e , " "Reform" and "Recognition"
t h e r e were s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s between the s c o r e s o f male t e a c h e r s
and female t e a c h e r s , with female t e a c h e r s s c o r i n g h i g h e r on th e mean
and lower on th e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n , i n d i c a t i n g a more homogeneous
grouping f o r female t e a c h e r s than f o r male t e a c h e r s .

This i n d i c a t e s

t h a t female t e a c h e r s e x p r e ss a s t r o n g e r d e s i r e to teach t h e i r s u b j e c t
m a t t e r , reform t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system and o b t a i n r e c o g n i t i o n than do
male t e a c h e r s .
The chi squa re d t a b l e (Appendix C:2) i n d i c a t e s t h a t in none o f th e
p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s i s t h e r e a d i f f e r e n c e in d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s due
to sex o f th e t e a c h e r a t th e .05 lev el o f s i g n i f i c a n c e .
P a r t i c i p a t i o n by s u b j e c t a r e a
o f th e t e a c h e r ________________
As can be seen i n Table 4 : 5 , th e t o t a l number o f t e a c h e r s f o r a l l
s u b j e c t a r e a s i s g r e a t e r than t h e t o t a l number o f t e a c h e r s f o r the
whole.

This i s because any t e a c h e r t e a c h i n g more than one s u b j e c t

marked a l l s u b j e c t s which th ey were c u r r e n t l y t e a c h i n g .

Table 4 :4 --P ro d u c tio n fa c to rs o f teachers considered by sex o f the teacher

Cognitive

Male

Teachers

Mean

Standard
Deviation

4.024

Female
Mean

Teachers
Standard
Deviation

.584

4.237

.404

Overall
Mean
4.074

Standard
Deviation
.553

A f fectiv e

3.827

.774

3.861

.347

3.836

.696

Authority

3.831

.572

3.842

.494

3.833

.552

Reform

3.581

.644

3.842

.436

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.573

.740

3.829

.553

3.633

.706

E xh ibition

3.529

.624

3.589

.627

3.543

.624

Advancement

3.016

.920

3.018

1.152

3.016

.972

Table 4 : 5 - - P a r t ic ip a t io n fa c to rs o f teachers considered by su b ject area taught

n = 29
Mathematics

n = 24
English

n = 35
Reading

n = 10
L.R.C.

n = 9
Other

N = 81
Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

El i t e

3.966

1.017

4.375

.875

3.971

1.150

4.000

.940

3.333

1.414

3.925

1.077

P r a c t ic a l

3.632

.720

3.819

.785

3.467

.772

3.400

1.004

3.033

1.559

3.510

.873

Macho

2.759

1.683

2.783

1.678

2.886

1.659

2.200

1.757

2.333

1.803

2.886

1.625

Default

2.345

1.078

2.500

1.319

3.000

1.372

2.300

1.160

2.333

1.581

2.662

1.359

Prestige

2.494

.679

2.417

.754

2.643

.490

2.500

.825

2.575

1.061

2.547

.707

68

The s u b j e c t a r e a s L. R. C. and Other were the two c a t e g o r i e s not
in a l l school c u r r i c u l a .

L. R. C. s ta n d s f o r L i f e Role Competencies,

and c o n s i s t s o f cou rse s des igne d to a id t h e s t u d e n t i n coping with l i f e
problems which may a r i s e e i t h e r w h ile he i s i n c a r c e r a t e d o r when he i s
r e l e a s e d from th e i n s t i t u t i o n .

These cou rse s i n clu d e such s u b j e c t s as

Job Seeking S k i l l s , Legal Research and Consumer Mathematics.

The

t e a c h e r s who marked the column "Other" were t e a c h e r s who teach such
s u b j e c t s as Social Sc ie n c e , S c ie n c e , o r Business P r a c t i c e s ( i n programs
where i t i s co n s id e red an academic program).
Mathematics t e a c h e r s
There i s l i t t l e v a r i a t i o n between th e o v e r a l l s c o r e o f t e a c h e r s
and t h e s c o r e o f t e a c h e r s o f mathematics in any o f t h e f a c t o r s with
the e x c e p ti o n o f " D e f a u l t . "

Mathematics t e a c h e r s r a t e d the f a c t o r

"D efault " lower than the o v e r a l l i n d i c a t i n g t h a t they do not f eel they
r e t a i n t h e i r employment because they cannot f i n d any o t h e r p o s i t i o n .
En glish t e a c h e r s
English t e a c h e r s v a r i e d from th e o v e r a l l in two f a c t o r s :
and " P r a c t i c a l . "

"Elite"

In both o f t h e s e th e mean s c o re was h i g h e r than the

o v e r a l l and the s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n was lower.

En glish t e a c h e r s thus

tend t o c o n s i d e r themselves an e l i t e group and a l s o val ue t h e p r a c t i ­
cal a s p e c t s o f th e jo b h ig h ly as ex p r e ss e d in t h i s r e s e a r c h .
Reading t e a c h e r s
Reading t e a c h e r s v a r i e d from t h e o v e r a l l in only one a r e a ,
" D e f a u l t , " which was 3.000 f o r re a d in g t e a c h e r s .

This n e u t r a l number

does not make "Def au lt" a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t i o n a l f o r c e b u t i t i n d i c a t e s

69

t h a t i t i s not an u n r e l a t e d f a c t o r as with t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l .

Thus

r e a d i n g t e a c h e r s have more o f a tendency t o f e e l th e y must m a in ta in
t h e i r p o s i t i o n because th ey c an n o t f i n d a n o t h e r p o s i t i o n , as do o t h e r
teachers.
L. R. C. t e a c h e r s
L. R. C. t e a c h e r s v a r i e d from t h e o v e r a l l i n t h e f a c t o r s "Macho"
and " D e f a u lt" both o f which were lower than t h e o v e r a l l .

This low

s c o r e in "Macho" i s i n d i c a t i v e t h a t "Macho" i s a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t o r
in t h a t th e L. R. C. t e a c h e r s f e e l p r i s o n e d u c a tio n t o be t h e domain
o f t h e male t e a c h e r .

A low s c o r e in " D efault" i n d i c a t e s t h e L. R. C.

t e a c h e r s do hot f e e l th e y a r e keeping t h e i r p o s i t i o n s only because
t h e y ca nno t f i n d a n o t h e r p o s i t i o n .
Other t e a c h e r s
With t h e e x c e p t io n o f " P r e s t i g e " o t h e r t e a c h e r s r a t e d a l l f a c t o r s
lower th an th e o v e r a l l and t h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n f o r o t h e r t e a c h e r s
was h i g h e r th a n t h e o v e r a l l i n a l l f a c t o r s .

Thus th e group o f t e a c h ­

e r s t e a c h i n g "Other" s u b j e c t s i s l e s s homogeneous in t h e i r o p in io n s
o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s than t h e o t h e r t e a c h e r s .
f a c t o r " P r a c t i c a l " a t 3.0333 i s c l o s e t o th e number t h r e e t o
te n t th at "Practical"
motivator.

t h e ex­

c an n o t be c o n s id e re d a p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n

To t h e c o n t r a r y , i t must be c o n s id e r e d a n e u t r a l

The f a c t o r "Macho" i s

The

lower than th e o v e r a l l which i n d i c a t e s

factor.
that

t e a c h e r s who te a c h t h e s u b j e c t "Other" a r e more l i k e l y t o c o n s i d e r a
p r i s o n a man's domain, not a p l a c e f o r fem al es .

While they r a t e t h e

f a c t o r s " E l i t e " and " P r a c t i c a l " lower than t h e o v e r a l l , th ey a l s o r a t e

70

t h e f a c t o r " D efault" low er, thus th ey a r e m o tiva ted t o s t a y with th e
p o s i t i o n by f a c t o r s o t h e r than being t ra p p e d in t h e p o s i t i o n .
As can be seen from t h e chi sq uare t a b l e s (Appendices C:3, C:4,
C:5, C:6 and C:7) t h e o n ly p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s which vary from th e
norm in d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s a t t h e .05 l e v e l a r e in th e f a c t o r s
" E l i t e " and " P r a c t i c a l " f o r t h e t e a c h e r s te a c h in g " O ther."

In " E l i t e "

t h e r e i s a raw s c o r e o f 9.26378 w ith a de gre e o f freedom o f 4 and a
s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0526.

In " P r a c t i c a l " t h e raw s c o r e i s 20.81814 with

e lev en degrees o f freedom and a s i g n i f i c a n c e of .0353.
Produ ction f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by s u b j e c t
a r e a o f t h e t e a c h e r _______________________
Mathematics t e a c h e r s
Mathematics t e a c h e r s do not vary from t h e o v e r a l l in any o f th e
p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r s , as shown in Table 4 : 6 .
En glish t e a c h e r s
E ng li s h t e a c h e r s vary from t h e o v e r a l l in only th e f a c t o r "Re­
form," i n which En gli sh t e a c h e r s tended t o be more adamant i n t h e i r
d e s i r e t o reform t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system than t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l .
Reading t e a c h e r s
Reacing t e a c h e r s do n o t var y from t h e o v e r a l l in any o f - t h e p r o ­
d u c t io n f a c t o r s .
L. R. C. t e a c h e r s
L. R. C. t e a c h e r s sc ore d h i g h e r than th e o v e r a l l i n t h r e e f a c ­
tors:

" A f f e c t i v e , " "Reform" and " E x h i b i t i o n . "

While th e s c o r e o f

th e L. R. C. t e a c h e r s was not a t v a r i a n c e with th e o v e r a l l on th e

Table 4 :6 --P ro d u c tio n fa c to rs o f teachers considered by su b je c t area taught

Mathematics
Mean

S.D.

English

Reading

L.R. C.

Other

Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Cognitive

4.190

.446

4.167

.482

4.093

.425

4.025

.416

3.750

1.093

4.074

.553

A f fe ctive

3.879

.596

3.896

.536

3.836

.624

4.275

.478

3.700

1.383

3.836

.696

Authority

3.974

.497

3.958

.670

3.864

.486

3.650

.669

3.725

.640

3.833

.552

Reform

3.621

.810

3.931

.501

3.695

.551

-3.900

.589

3.833

.653

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.638

.703

3.604

.634

3.671

.666

3.650

.530

3.550

1.295

3.633

.706

Exhibition

3.607

.649

3.608

.681

3.594

.543

3.860

.481

3.400

.789

3.543

.624

Advancement

2.943

.988

3.097

.860

3.124 1.032

3.300

.974

2.833

1.210

3.016

.972

72

f a c t o r "Cognitive' ' i t was h i g h e r than th e o v e r a l l on " A f f e c t iv e " such
t h a t th e “A f f e c t i v e " s c o r e i s h i g h e r than t h e "Cognitive" f o r t h i s
group.

The L. R. C. t e a c h e r s a r e t e a c h i n g c o u r se s geared t o hel pi ng

s t u d e n t s deal with l i f e .

The a f f e c t i v e s c o r e dem ons tr ates t h i s emphasis.

They a l s o show a s t r o n g e r d e s i r e t o change t h e e d u c a ti o n a l system and
a g r e a t e r d e s i r e to demon strate t h e i r pedagogical s k i l l s than do th e
Department Teachers o v e r a l l .
Other t e a c h e r s
The only f a c t o r a t v a r ia n c e between "Other" t e a c h e r s and t h e over ­
a l l was th e f a c t o r "Cognitive" in which "Other" scored lower.
A check o f th e chi squared t a b l e s (Appendices C:8, C:9, C:10,
C:11 and C:12 i n d i c a t e s t h a t in t h r e e s u b j e c t s :

E n g l i s h , re a d in g and

o t h e r t h e r e i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between th e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the
a r e a t e a c h e r s ' s c o re s and th e o v e r a l l s c o re s o f a t l e a s t .05 l e v e l .
These s c o re s f o r "Cognitive" a r e shown below:
English - raw s c o r e o f 20.81755 with e i g h t degree o f freedom
and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0076.
Reading - raw s c o r e s o f 19.58104 with e i g h t degr ees o f freedom
and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0120.
Other

- raw s c o re o f 17.63850 wit h e i g h t degr ees o f freedom
and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0241.

No o t h e r d i s t r i b u t i o n v a r i e d a t t h e .05 l e v e l .
P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s c o n s id e re d by
ex p e r ie n c e o f th e t e a c h e r ___________
Teachers with over eleve n y e a r s e x p e r ie n c e
This group o f t e a c h e r s showed a lower mean s c o r e on a l l p a r t i c i ­
p a t i o n f a c t o r s than did t h e t e a c h e r s as a whole.

Contrary to what was

73

e x p e c t e d , t h i s group having the most y e a r s o f e x p e r i e n c e as p r is o n
t e a c h e r s tended to have a h i g h e r s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n in a l l f a c t o r s ,
with th e e x c e p ti o n o f " P r a c t i c a l , " than did t e a c h e r s as a whole.

There

was a d i f f e r e n c e i n th e f a c t o r s " E l i t e , " " P r a c t i c a l " and "Macho" i n ­
d i c a t i n g t h a t t e a c h e r s with over ele ve n y e a r s ex p e r ie n c e tend t o t h i n k
o f themselves as l e s s e l i t i s t and more "Macho" than do o t h e r t e a c h e r s .
They a l s o p lace l e s s importance on th e p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s o f t h e i r c u r ­
r e n t p o s i t i o n than do t h e i r c o m p a t r io t s .

This d i f f e r e n c e could be a t ­

t r i b u t e d t o a tendency of t h i s group t o r a t e a l l items low ex cep t t h a t
the t r e n d does n o t co n ti n u e i n t o th e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s (as seen in
Table 4 : 7 ) .
Teachers wit h l e s s than twelve and more than
f o u r y e a r s e x p e r ie n c e in p r i s o n e d u c a tio n
Teachers in t h i s group d i f f e r from t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l in none o f
the f i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s .
Teachers with l e s s than f i v e y e a r s e x p e r ie n c e
in p r is o n ed uca tio n____________________________
Teachers in t h i s group d i f f e r from the o v e r a l l in t h r e e o f th e
five p a rtic ip a tio n fa c to rs :

" E l i t e " - - t h e y c o n s i d e r p r i s o n t e a c h e r s to

be more o f an e l i t e group than o t h e r t e a c h e r s .
c o n s i d e r penal i n s t i t u t i o n s a male domain.

"Macho"--they do not

" D e f a u l t " - - f o r t h i s group

o f t e a c h e r s " D e f a u lt" i s s l i g h t l y h i g h e r than th e n e u t r a l p o i n t o f
t h r e e , n o t enough to c o n s id e r a p o s i t i v e f a c t o r b ut too high to con­
s i d e r completely u n r e l a t e d .

To a g r e a t e r e x t e n t than o t h e r t e a c h e r s ,

t e a c h e r s with l e s s than f i v e y e a r s ex p e r i e n c e f e e l t ra p p e d in t h e i r
position.

Table 4 :7 — P a r tic ip a tio n fa c to rs considered by experience o f the teach er

n = 13
Over
11 y r s .

n = 44
Between 5-11

n = 23
Under 5 y r s .

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

Elite

3.538

1.266

3.795

1.047

4.409

Practical

3.128

.811

3.667

.768

Macho

2.462

1.761

2.886

Default

2.462

1.561

Prestige

2.462

.923

n = 16
No Public

Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

.908

3.500

1.317

3.925

1.077

3.449

1.052

3.438

.685

3.510

.873

1.660

3.143

1.526

2.188

1.471

2.886

1.625

2.568

1.319

3.045

1.290

2.438

1.711

2.662

1.359

2.477

.585

2.435

.820

2.484

.755

2.547

.707

S.D.

75

Teachers with no p u b l i c school te a c h i n g
e x p er ien ce_________________________________
This group c o n s i s t s o f a l l t e a c h e r s in our sample who d id not
te a c h i n p u b l i c s c h o o ls p r i o r t o becoming c o r r e c t i o n a l t e a c h e r s .

The

number o f y e a r s e x p e r i e n c e i n p r i s o n e d u c a ti o n does n o t r e f l e c t in
t h i s group.

This group d i f f e r s from t h e o v e r a l l in two o f t h e f i v e

participation factors:

" E l i t e " — t h e q u e s t i o n used to deter mine t h i s

f a c t o r s u g g ested t h a t t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n s ch ools should have e x p e r i ­
ence i n p u b l i c s c h o o ls b e f o r e t a k i n g a p o s i t i o n i n p r is o n s c h o o ls .
Since t h i s group c o n s i s t s e n t i r e l y o f i n d i v i d u a l s who do not meet t h i s
p r e r e q u i s i t e , i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t e a c h e r s in t h i s group r a t e
" E l i t e " lower th a n o t h e r t e a c h e r s , y e t t h e item i s s t i l l p o s i t i v e ,
g r e a t e r th a n t h r e e .

"Macho"— t h i s group o f t e a c h e r s f e e l s s t r o n g l y

t h a t a p r i s o n i s a man's domain.
A check o f t h e chi squared t a b l e s (Appendices C:13, C:14, C: 15
and C: 16) i n d i c a t e s t h a t two f a c t o r s among t h e f o u r groups d i f f e r from
th e o v e r a l l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s a t t h e .05 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e .
The f a c t o r " E l i t e " f o r t e a c h e r s under f i v e y e a r s o f e x p e r ie n c e has a
raw s c o r e o f 9.61408 w it h f o u r deg ree s o f freedom f o r a s i g n i f i c a n c e
o f .0474 and th e f a c t o r " D e f a u l t " f o r t e a c h e r s w it h no p u b l i c school
t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e d i f f e r s from t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l with a raw s c o r e o f
11.46930 with f o u r d egrees o f freedom f o r a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0218.

76

P r oduction f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by
e x p e r i e n c e o f th e t e a c h e r (Table 4 : 8 )
Teachers with o v e r el e v e n y e a r s
e x p e r i e n c e in p r i s o n e d u catio n
Teachers in t h i s group d i f f e r from th e o v e r a l l in only one o f the
seven p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s :

"Reform"--while t h e s c o r e o f t h i s f a c t o r i s

s t i l l very much p o s i t i v e , h i g h e r th a n t h r e e , i t i s lower th an t h e o t h e r
teach ers'.

This f a c t o r measures t h e t e a c h e r s ' d e s i r e t o reform th e

p r i s o n e d u c a ti o n a l system.
Teachers w i th from f i v e t o el ev en y e a r s
o f e x p e r ie n c e i n p r i s o n e d u c a t io n ______
This group o f t e a c h e r s d i f f e r s from th e o v e r a l l in none o f th e
seven p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s .
Teachers w it h l e s s than f i v e y e a r s
e x p e r ie n c e in p r i s o n e d u c a tio n
Teachers in t h i s group d i f f e r in none o f th e seven f a c t o r s from
teachers o v e ra ll.
In t h e f a c t o r "Advancement" t e a c h e r s under f i v e y e a r s in p r is o n
e d u c a t i o n have th e h i g h e s t mean s c o r e , d e f i n i t e l y a p o s i t i v e s core
3.2 6 1 , as opposed t o t h e o t h e r two c a t e g o r i e s o f t e a c h e r s which have
mean s c o r e s o f l e s s than t h r e e .

I t should be n o t i c e d t h a t as t h e ex­

p e r i e n c e o f a group i n c r e a s e s t h e d e s i r e f o r advancement d e c r e a s e s .
Te achers who have s p e n t more th an f o u r y e a r s i n p r i s o n e d u c a t i o n ten d
to be l e s s m otiva ted by "Advancement" th an do t e a c h e r s w it h under f o u r
years experience.

Table 4 :8 — Production fa c to rs considered by the experience o f th e teach er

n = 13
Over
11 y r s .

n = 44
Between 5-11

n = 23
Under
5 yrs.

n = 16
No Public

Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Cognitive

4.212

.419

4.028

.415

4.087

.814

4.016

.452

4.074

.553

Affective

3.981

.608

3.818

.579

3.783

.942

3.781

.554

3.836

.696

A u th o r it y

3.788

.652

3.795

.601

3.924

.395

3.688

.622

3.833

.552

Reform

3.308

.799

3.750

.548

3.609

.565

3.479

.688

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.634

.574

3.625

.556

3.641

1.014

3.547

.526

3.633

.706

Exhibitio n

3.523

.520

3.536

.591

3.574

.756

3.387

.534

3.543

.624

Advancement

2.821

.888

2.924

.956

3.261

1.035

2.667

.981

3.016

.972

78

P r is o n t e a c h e r s with no p u b l i c
school te a c h i n g e x p e r ie n c e
Teachers in t h i s ca te g o r y d i f f e r from t h e o v e r a l l i n only one of
t h e seven f a c t o r s .

With a mean s c o re o f only 2.667 on th e f a c t o r

“Advancement" th e y view advancement as even l e s s o f a m o t i v a t i o n a l
f a c t o r th an t e a c h e r s i n t h e group over el ev en y e a r s .

As was s t a t e d

b e f o r e , t h i s group i s composed o f t e a c h e r s from a l l t h r e e e x p e r ie n c e
groups, d i f f e r i n g from th e o v e r a l l only in t h a t th ey have n o t ta u g h t
in p u b l i c s c h o o ls .
Appendices C:17, C:18, C:19 and C:20, chi squar e t a b l e s f o r p r o ­
d u c t io n f a c t o r s c o n s id e re d by e x p e r ie n c e o f t h e t e a c h e r s , show t h a t
none o f t h e s e f a c t o r s d i f f e r s from t h e o v e r a l l in d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
s c o r e s a t t h e .05 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e .
P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by
s e c u r i t y o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n (Table 4 : 9 )
Maximum s e c u r i t y
Teachers i n t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s d i f f e r from o v e r a l l i n none o f th e
five particip ation factors.
Medium s e c u r i t y
Teachers in t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s d i f f e r from th e o v e r a l l i n none
o f the f iv e p a r t ic ip a ti o n f a c to r s .
Minimum s e c u r i t y
Teachers i n t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s d i f f e r from t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l in
the f a c to r "D efault."

Since th e mean s c o r e on t h i s f a c t o r i s lower

tha n t h e o v e r a l l , a t 2 .1 4 5 , i t i s c l e a r t h a t t e a c h e r s i n minimum s e ­
c u r i t y i n s t i t u t i o n s do not f e e l they keep t h e i r p o s i t i o n s because they

Table 4 :9 — P a r tic ip a tio n fa c to rs considered by s e c u rity o f the in s t it u t io n

n = 25
n = 30
n = 21
n=5
Maximum ___________ Medium_________ Minimum_________ Female
Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

Elite

3.760

1.091

3.862

1.156

4.048

1.024

4.600

Practical

3.507

.800

3.433

1.033

3.587

.788

Macho

2.760

1.615

3.143

1.458

2.857

Default

2.680

1.435

2.862

1.329

Prestige

2.460

.683

2.400

.778

N = 81
Overall
S.D.

Mean

S.D.

.548

3.925

1.077

3.667

.667

3.510

.873

1.878

2.200

1.643

2.886

1.625

2.143

1.236

3.600

1.140

2.662

1.359

2.631

.634

2.050

.622

2.547

.707

80

have no o t h e r o p tio n
Female i n s t i t u t i o n
This i s n o t o f f i c i a l l y a s e c u r i t y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s , y e t no s e c u r i t y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n can f i t t h i s i n s t i ­
t u t i o n which houses only female o f f e n d e r s .

Only one i n s t i t u t i o n f i t s

t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and only f i v e t e a c h e r s a r e in v o lv e d .
answers t h e q u e s t i o n co ncerning sex o f th e s t u d e n t ) .

(This a l s o

Teachers in t h e

female i n s t i t u t i o n d i f f e r from th e o v e r a l l in t h r e e f a c t o r s :
"Macho" and " D e f a u l t . "

"E lite,"

The s c o re s on t h e s e f a c t o r s i n d i c a t e t h a t

t e a c h e r s in female i n s t i t u t i o n s f e e l t h a t p r i s o n t e a c h e r s a r e an e l i t e
group, and t h a t p r i s o n i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e a man's domain.

Since th e

m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s i n th e female i n s t i t u t i o n a r e females t h i s s c o r e
on "Macho" cannot be c o n s i d e r e d a p o s i t i v e f a c t o r .

" D e f a u l t" i s d e f i ­

n i t e l y a p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h i s group o f
t e a c h e r s c o n s i d e r them selves tra p p e d i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n s .
As can be seen in th e t a b l e o f chi s q u a r e s , Appendix C:21, th e
d i f f e r e n c e in d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r none o f t h e f a c t o r s i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t
th e .05 l e v e l .
Pro ducti on f a c t o r s c o n s i d e r e d by
s e c u r i t y o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n (Table 4 : 1 0 )
Maximum s e c u r i t y
Teachers i n t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s d i f f e r in none o f t h e seven pr o­
d u c tio n f a c t o r s from t h e o v e r a l l .
Medium s e c u r i t y
Teachers i n t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s d i f f e r from t h e o v e r a l l in none
o f th e seven p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s .

Table 4 :1 0 — Production fa c to rs considered by s e c u rity o f the in s t it u t io n

n = 25
Maximum

n = 30
Medium

n - 21
Minimum

n = 5
Female

N = 81
Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Cognitive

4.110

.402

3.950

.735

4.214

.405

4.050

.444

4.074

.553

Affective

3.830

.710

3.725

.847

3.976

.453

3.950

.481

3.836

.696

Authority

3.890

.564

3.733

.425

3.964

.681

3.600

.548

3.833

.552

Reform

3.480

.501

3.567

.701

3.841

.574

4.067

.279

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.580

.636

3.608

.843

3.762

.630

3.500

.530

3.633

,706

Exhibitio n

3.608

.618

3.340

.626

3.733

.534

3.640

.792

3.543

.624

Advancement

3.093

.926

2.978

.951

2.905 1.106

3.333

.913

3.016

.972

82

Female i n s t i t u t i o n s
Teachers in t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n d i f f e r from th e o v e r a l l i n two pro­
duction f a c to rs :

“Reform—t e a c h e r s i n female i n s t i t u t i o n s e x p r e ss a

g r e a t e r d e s i r e t o e f f e c t change i n t h e e d u c a ti o n systems o f th e
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s a n d / o r i n t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n s .

"Advancement"--

t e a c h e r s in t h i s group express ed a g r e a t e r d e s i r e t o advance to a h i g h e r
p o s i t i o n w i t h i n t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s than d i d t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l ,
w it h a mean s c o r e o f 3.3 33.

Advancement has a p r o p e n s i t y t o be a p o s i ­

t i v e p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r f o r t e a c h e r s in female i n s t i t u t i o n s .
P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by
age o f t h e s t u d e n t __________________
The r e s u l t s r e c e i v e d from t h i s s e c t i o n must be s u s p e c t f o r two
reasons.

F i r s t , because o f t h e overcrowded c o n d i t i o n s e x i s t i n g i n th e

Michigan C o r r e c t i o n a l System, s e g r e g a t i o n o f r e s i d e n t s by age i s a t ­
tempted b u t in r e a l i t y n o t s u c c e s s f u l ; r e s i d e n t s o f a l l ages may be
found i n most i n s t i t u t i o n s .

Second, age grouping o f r e s i d e n t s does

n o t f a l l n e a t l y i n t o t h e two c a t e g o r i e s o v e r t w e n t y - f i v e and under
twenty-five years.

Some i n s t i t u t i o n s have s t u d e n t s under t w e n t y - t h r e e ,

o t h e r s between twenty and t h i r t y , and s t i l l o t h e r s any age.

Two i n ­

s t i t u t i o n s were n o t in c lu d e d in t h i s a n a l y s i s — t h e female i n s t i t u t i o n
and one i n s t i t u t i o n which has no age l i m i t a t i o n .

All o t h e r s were con­

s i d e r e d on t h e b a s i s o f predominance o f s t u d e n t s under o r n o t under
th e age o f t w e n t y - f i v e .

Camps were i n c lu d e d i n t h e n o t under twenty-

f i v e age group.
These groups d i f f e r from each o t h e r in two f a c t o r s (as can be
seen i n Ta ble 4 : 1 1 ) , "Macho" and D e f a u l t . "

This i n d i c a t e s t h a t

83

Table 4 : l l - - P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s o f t e a c h e r s c o n s id e re d by age o f
t h e i r students

n = 25
Under 25 y e a r s

n = 32
Not* under 25. y ear s.

N = 81
O v e r a l1

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

E lite

3.854

1.174

4.031

.897

3.925

1.077

Practical

3.520

.879

3.465

.893

3.510

.873

Macho

3.220

1.589

2.484

1.503

2.886

1.625

Default

2.561

1.484

2.906

1.228

2.662

1.359

Prestige

2.445

.684

2.371

.729

2.547

.707

Table 4 :1 2 — P roduction f a c t o r s o f t e a c h e r s c o n s id e r e d by age o f
t h e i r students
n = 41
Under 25 y e a r s

n = 32
Not under 25 y e a r s

Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

C og nitive

4.146

.478

3.962

.644

4.074

.553

Affective

3.896

.527

3.697

.877

3.836

.696

A u th o r ity

3.896

.565

3.705

.543

3.833

.552

Reform

3.691

.612

3.505

.560

3.642

.610

Rec ognition

3.823

.531

3.386

.836

3.633

.706

Exhibition

3.537

.558

3.552

.726

3.543

.624

Advancement

2.927

1.031

3.051

.878

3.051

.972

84

t e a c h e r s who te a c h s t u d e n t s under age t w e n t y - f i v e tend t o be l e s s
"Macho" in t h e i r view o f p r i s o n e d u c a t i o n , than do t e a c h e r s teach in g
predominantly o l d e r s t u d e n t s .

Te achers o f predominantly o l d e r s t u d e n t s

a r e more l i k e l y t o f e e l they hold t h e i r p o s i t i o n because o f "D efault"
than t e a c h e r s o f younger s t u d e n t s .

Yet, t h e mean s c o r e o f 2.906 f o r

th e former i s n e g a t i v e and not c o n s id e r e d a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t i o n a l f o r c e
f o r even t e a c h e r s o f s t u d e n t s o v e r t w e n t y - f i v e y e a r s .
The t a b l e o f chi squ are s (Appendix C:25) dem onst rates t h a t in
none o f t h e f i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s i s t h e r e a d i f f e r e n c e in th e d i s ­
t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s s i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 l e v e l .
In o r d e r t o determ ine t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which d i s t i n g u i s h th e
t e a c h e r s who f e e l they can o b t a i n s u c c e ss from t hose who f e e l th ey
cannot o b t a i n s u c c e s s , i t was n e c e s s a r y to d i v i d e t h e p o p u l a t i o n i n t o
two groups.

I t was de cided t h a t t h o s e who o b t a in e d a mean s c o re on

the "Success" f a c t o r g r e a t e r than t h r e e , would be l a b e l e d t h e "Can
Obtain" group and th o s e who r e c e i v e d a mean s c o r e of t h r e e o r l e s s
would be l a b e l e d th e "Cannot Obtain" group.

Three was t h e s c o r e used

to dichotomize th e group s i n c e i t i s t h e n e u t r a l number and any i n d i ­
vidual who does n o t know whether he can o b t a i n s u c c e s s o r n o t o b t a i n
s uccess i s l i k e l y n o t t o be m o tiv a te d by t h e f a c t o r s i n v o lv e d .

There

were s i x t y - n i n e t e a c h e r s i n t h e group who f i t i n t o t h e "Can Obtain"
group and twelve who f i t i n t o t h e "Cannot Obtain" group.
Table 4:13 shows th e mean s c o r e s and s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s o f
s c o re s f o r th e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s o f both t h e "Can Obtain" and "Cannot
Obtain" groups along with t h e s c o r e s o f t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l .
d i f f e r e n c e between th e groups in two f a c t o r s :

There i s a

" A f f e c t iv e " and "Recog­

n i t i o n " a r e th e two f a c t o r s r a t e d most h i g h l y by the "Cannot Obtain"

85

Table 4 :1 3 —Production f a c t o r s o f t e a c h e r s c o n s id e r e d by whether the
t e a c h e r s f e e l they can o b t a i n s u c c e ss in t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n

n = 69
Can Obtain

n = 12
Cannot Obtain

n = 81
Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Cogni t i ve

4.098

.563

3.938

.490

4.074

.553

Affective

3.775

.701

4.188

.575

3.836

.696

A u t h o r it y

3.841

.580

3.792

.367

3.833

.552

Reform

3.628

.587

3.722

.750

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.558

.718

4.063

.454

3.633

.706

Exhibition

3.551

.610

3.500

.711

3.543

.624

Advancement

3.000

.886

3.111

1.417

3.016

.972

86

group, wh il e th e f a c t o r s " Cogni tive" and A u th o r it y " were r a t e d the
two top f a c t o r s by t h e “Can Obtain" group.

Thus t h e "Cannot Obtain"

group tends t o have a g r e a t e r d e s i r e

to change t h e i r s t u d e n t s and a

g r e a t e r d e s i r e to o b t a i n r e c o g n i t i o n

from t h e i r pe er s and from

the

i n s t i t u t i o n as a whole than t h e "Can Obtain" group.
The chi s q u a r e t a b l e (Appendix C;27) i n d i c a t e s t h e r e i s

3

sig n ifi­

c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between th e groups "Can Obtain" and "Cannot Obtain" in
th e frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f s c o r e s f o r th e f a c t o r "Advancement"
with a raw s c o r e o f 34.79004 and twelve degr ee s o f freedom t h e r e i s a
s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0005.
S a t i s f a c t i o n as i t r e l a t e s to
p a r t i c i p a t i o n and p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s
To dete rm in e th e s a t i s f a c t i o n o f t e a c h e r s in th e Department o f
C o r r e c t i o n s , our p o p u l a t i o n was asked i f th ey were given th e oppor­
t u n i t y to begin a g a i n , would th ey a c c e p t a t e a c h i n g p o s i t i o n with th e
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

The q u e s t i o n was worded such t h a t th o s e

who would a c c e p t t h e p o s i t i o n would answer with a f o u r o r a f i v e ;
th o s e who would not answered w ith a one o r a two, t h r e e being undecided.
I t was f e l t t h a t a t e a c h e r who was s a t i s f i e d with h i s o r h e r p o s i t i o n
would mark e i t h e r f o u r o r f i v e , th u s a s c o r e o f t h r e e on t h i s s e c t i o n
would i n d i c a t e n o n - s a t i s f a c t i o n .

As can be seen from th e t a b l e (Table

4 :1 4) t e a c h e r s i n t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s a r e s a t i s f i e d with
t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n and would a c c e p t t h e p o s i t i o n a g a i n .
Table 4 : 1 4 - - S a t i s f a c t i o n - a l l t e a c h e r s
Mean N=80
3 .4 2 5

Sta ndard D ev iation
1.376

87

The t e a c h e r s were then d iv id e d between t h o s e s a t i s f i e d with
t h e i r p o s i t i o n ; s a t i s f i e d being th o s e who sco red above t h r e e on the
q u e s t i o n and n o t s a t i s f i e d bein g t h o s e who r e c e i v e d t h r e e or l e s s on
the question.

F i f t y t e a c h e r s were c l a s s i f i e d s a t i s f i e d and l i s t e d under

t h e heading "would r e -d o " w h ile t h i r t y t e a c h e r s were c l a s s i f i e d not
s a t i s f i e d and l i s t e d under t h e heading "would n o t r e - d o ; " one t e a c h e r
d i d n o t respond t o t h i s q u e s t i o n .

A frequ en cy t a b u l a t i o n o f t h e sc o re s

f o r each group on each o f th e m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s y i e l d e d a mean and
s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n f o r each f a c t o r dichotomized i n t o th e two groups.
P articipation factors
As can be seen in Table 4:15

t e a c h e r s who a r e n o t s a t i s f i e d with

t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n r a t e d p r i s o n t e a c h e r s as l e s s " E l i t e " and more
"Macho" th an d id t e a c h e r s who "would r e - d o . "

They a l s o p la c e d l e s s

emphasis on p r a c t i c a l rewards and f e l t t h a t t h e only re a s o n th ey kept
t h e i r p o s i t i o n was because they could n o t f i n d a n o t h e r p o s i t i o n o u t s i d e
t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .
r e - d o 11 group

With t h e e x c e p tio n o f " P r e s t i g e ; 11 "would

had a lower s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n on a l l items i n t h e p a r ­

ticip atio n factors.

This i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e "would r e -d o " group i s

more homogeneous than t h e "would not r e -d o " group.
The chi squa red t a b l e (Appendix C:28) i n d i c a t e s t h r e e o f t h e p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s vary between t h e groups i n d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s
a t a t l e a s t t h e .05 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e , th e y a r e :
P r a c t i c a l - raw s c o r e 21.86701 with el ev en d egrees o f
freedom and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0254.
Macho

- raw s c o r e 11.47317 with f o u r d egrees o f freedom
and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0217

88

Table 4 : 1 5 - - P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s c o n s id e r e d by whether
they would a c c e p t t h e p o s i t i o n a g a i n .

n = 50
Would.redo

n = 30
Would n o t redo

Mean

S.D.

Mean

E lite

4.060

.931

3. 700

Practical

3.827

.667

Macho

3.245

O e f a u lt
Prestige

. , S.D.

N = 81
O v eral1
Mean

S.D.

1.291

3.925

1.077

3. 100

.754

3.510

.873

1.521

2.300

1.643

2.886

1.625

2.220

1.075

3.400

1.476

2.662

1.359

2.560

.660

2.367

.639

2.547

.707

89

D e f a u l t - raw s c o r e 24.13848 with f o u r degre es o f freedom
and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f .0001.
Pro duction f a c t o r s
Table 4:16 shows t h a t t h e mean o f group "would redo" and th e
mean o f group "would n o t redo" d i f f e r from each o t h e r only i n th e
f a c t o r "Advancement" which dem onst rat es t h a t "would redo" has a g r e a t e r
d e s i r e t o advance i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n th an does "would n o t r e d o . "

As

in p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s , so i n p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s , th e s ta n d a r d de­
v i a t i o n o f s c o r e s f o r "would redo" was lower than "would n o t redo"
thus i n d i c a t i n g "would redo" i s more homogeneous grouping than "would
no t r e d o ."
Appendix C:29 dem on str ates t h a t t h e freque nc y d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
s c o r e s f o r th e two groups vary on t h e f a c t o r "Advancement" with a raw
s c o r e o f 23.86314, w i th twelve deg ree s o f freedom and a s i g n i f i c a n c e
o f .0212.
The r e l a t i o n s h i p between s u c c e s s and
s a t i s f a c t i o n __________________________
As was s t a t e d e a r l i e r , t h e mean s c o r e f o r a l l t e a c h e r s in th e
p o p u la tio n f o r t h e v a r i a b l e success was 3.593 i n d i c a t i n g th e y f e e l
they a r e indeed a b l e t o o b t a i n s u c c e s s in t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n .

How­

e v e r , as shown i n Table 4:17 t h e mean f o r th e t h i r t y t e a c h e r s who a r e
no t s a t i s f i e d w it h t h e i r p o s i t i o n s , th e mean s c o r e f o r su c c e ss i s only
2.800 w it h a s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f 1.1 1 9 , wh ile t h o s e f i f t y who a r e
s a t i s f i e d wit h t h e i r p o s i t i o n had a mean s c o r e o f 4.100 w i th a s t a n d ­
a r d d e v i a t i o n o f .589.
t h e s e two groups.

I t i s obvious t h a t a d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between

90

Table 4 : 1 6 - - Pro duction f a c t o r s o f t e a c h e r s c o n s id e re d by whether they
would a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n again

n = 50
n = 30
Would redo________ Would n o t redo

N = 81
Overall

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Cogn itive

4.185

.407

3.992

.457

4.074

.553

Affective

3.885

.485

3.883

.652

3.836

.696

A u t h o r ity

3.905

.573

3,742

.493

3.833

.552

Reform

3.647

.604

3.667

.613

3.642

.610

Recognition

3.610

.558

3.792

.606

3.633

.706

Exhibition

3.640

.557

3.447

.621

3.543

.624

Advancement

3.140

.881

2.867

1.071

3.016

.972

Table 4:17— R e l a t i o n s h i p between s ucc es s and s a t i s f a c t i o n

Success by Redo
Would redo n = 50

Would not redo n - 30

Mean

S t andard
D e v iatio n

Mean

Standard
Deviation

4.100

.589

2.800

1.119

91

A Chi Squared s core on t h e s e two f a c t o r s i n d i c a t e s a raw s c o re
o f 34.12306 w it h e i g h t degrees o f freedom and a s i g n i f i c a n c e o f ,0000,
i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f
s c o r e s f o r t h i s f a c t o r , "Success" when co n s id e red on t h e b a s i s o f s a t i s ­
f a c t i o n w it h th e p o s i t i o n .
Sunnary
From th e a n a l y s i s o f th e d a ta t h e fo llowing answers a r e o f f e r e d :
I.

What a r e th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t e a c h e r s
in th e academic s ch ools o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
a.

No.

Do t e a c h e r s i n Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s m aintain
t h e i r employment because they f e e l th ey have no
o t h e r o p t io n ?

The mean s c o r e f o r t h i s ■f a c t o r i s l e s s : t h a n t h r e e f o r t e a c h e r s as

a gro up , th us th ey do n o t f e e l th e y a r e tra p p e d in t h e i r p o s i t i o n but
r a t h e r f e e l they m a i n t a in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s because th ey choose t o main­
t a i n them.
b.

How do t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s view
th e p r a c t i c a l rewards o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n ?

P r a c t i c a l rewards a r e im p o r t a n t t o t e a c h e r s in t h e population*

They

a r e one o f t h e two p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s which ap pe ar t o d e f i n i t e l y
a f f e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n f o r p r is o n t e a c h e r s .
c.

Do t e a c h e r s in academic s ch oo ls o f Michigan penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s enjoy t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n with t h e
c r im in al j u s t i c e system?
1.

No.

Do th ey a s s o c i a t e t h e i r job with th e "madid11
image?

For t e a c h e r s as an a g g r e g a t e t h i s f a c t o r was n e a r l y n e u t r a l in

i t s a p p a r e n t e f f e c t , however, when male t e a c h e r s and female t e a c h e r s
were dichotom iz ed, male t e a c h e r s did r a t e t h i s f a c t o r p o s i t i v e l y .

The

92

p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t i o n e f f e c t o f t h i s f a c t o r must be q u es ti oned.
However, s i n c e t e a c h e r s who a r e not s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r p o s i t i o n ob­
t a i n e d a p o s i t i v e s c o r e w h ile those who a r e s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r p o s i ­
t i o n o b ta in e d a n e g a t i v e s c o r e i n t h i s f a c t o r .
2.
Yes.

Do th ey c o n s i d e r themselves an e l i t e group?

The mean on t h i s s c o r e was t h e most p o s i t i v e o f a l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n

f a c t o r s , combining with p r a c t i c a l t o be t h e two p o s i t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n
f a c t o r s c o n s id e re d .
3.

No.

Do they a s s o c i a t e more p r e s t i g e to p o s i t i o n s
i n c r im in a l j u s t i c e than t o p o s i t i o n s in p u b lic
e d u c a ti o n ?

To t h e c o n t r a r y , th ey c o n s i d e r p u b l i c e d u c a ti o n more p r e s t i g i o u s

than c r im in al j u s t i c e .

This f a c t o r was th e l e a s t p o s i t i v e o f a l l p a r ­

t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s ; none o f t h e groups c o n s id e re d f e l t t h i s to be a
positive factor.
II.

What a r e t h e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g academic
school t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
a.

Yes.

Do t h e y a s s o c i a t e s u c c e s s with c o g n i t i v e l e a r n ­
ing in t h e i r s t u d e n t s ?

This i s t h e most p o s i t i v e o f a l l th e p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r s .

All

te a c h e r s in t h e survey c o n s id e r e d t h i s f a c t o r as a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t o r .
b.
Yes.

Do th ey a s s o c i a t e su c c e ss with s t u d e n t change?

This i s t h e second most p o s i t i v e pr o d u ctio n m o t i v a t o r , f o r th e

groups n o t r a t i n g c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g as th e most p o s i t i v e p r o d u c tio n
factor.

This was t h e f a c t o r which r e p l a c e d " C o g n i t i v e . "
c.

Yes.

Do t h e y d e s i r e t o de m onst rat e t h e i r pedagogical
skills?

While t h i s f a c t o r i s n o t as p o s i t i v e as o t h e r p r o d u c tio n motiva­

to rs , i t is nevertheless, positive.

93

d.
Yes.

Do they d e s i r e t o e x e r t c o n t r o l over o t h e r s ?

This f a c t o r i s j u s t below " A f f e c t i v e 11 as a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t o r ,

i n some groups i t even ranks ahead o f " A f f e c t i v e . "

As w i l l be noted

l a t e r i t i s one o f t h e f a c t o r s which d i s t i n g u i s h t e a c h e r s who f e e l they
can o b t a i n s u c c e s s and th o s e who do not f e e l they can o b t a i n su c c e ss in
t h e i r current positions.
e.
No.

Do th ey seek advancement t o a h i g h e r p o s i t i o n
w i t h i n th e c o r r e c t i o n s h i e r a r c h y ?

This f a c t o r i s c l o s e t o n e u t r a l such t h a t i t ca nnot r e a l l y be c l a s ­

s i f i e d as a p o s i t i v e p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r .

I t i s , however, a d i s t i n ­

g u is h in g f a c t o r i n v a r io u s groups i n c l u d i n g s u c c e ss and s a t i s f a c t i o n .
f.
Yes.

Do th ey seek r e c o g n i t i o n from o t h e r s w i t h i n t h e
institution?

This f a c t o r i s c o n s i s t e n t l y p o s i t i v e among a l l groups o f t e a c h e r s

i n o u r p o p u l a t i o n , however, i t i s one o f t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f a c t o r s
between t h e p o p u la ti o n who f e e l the y can o b t a i n success and t h e t e a c h ­
e r s who f e e l th ey cannot o b t a i n s u c c e s s .
g.

Yes.

Do th e y seek to improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system
w i t h i n t h e i r own i n s t i t u t i o n and w i t h i n th e
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s ?

This f a c t o r i s p o s i t i v e n o t only f o r t h e p o p u l a t i o n as a whole

but a lso

f o r t e a c h e r s i n each o f th e v a r i o u s groups.

I I I . Do t e a c h e r s i n academic s ch ools o f Michigan penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s p e r c e i v e t h e s e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s as
achievable in t h e i r c u r re n t s itu a tio n ?
Yes.

Te achers o v e r a l l f e e l th ey can o b t a i n s uc ce ss in a c h i e v i n g t h e s e

p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s .

S ix ty -th re e o f the eighty-one teachers in the s u r­

vey f e l t

th ey could a c h ie v e s u c c e s s . This i s a p p roxim a te ly 85% o f th e

teachers;

t h e o t h e r 12-15% f e l t th ey could n o t a c h i e v e s u c c e s s ,

or

94

were not s u r e th ey could ach ie ve s u c c e s s .

Teachers who f e l t they could

not a c h ie v e s uc ce ss dem onstrated a s t r o n g e r d e s i r e t o change s t u d e n t
be h a v io r and t o o b t a i n r e c o g n i t i o n than d id t e a c h e r s who f e l t they
could a c h ie v e s u c c e s s .

There i s a l s o a d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e s c o re s be­

tween th e groups in d e s i r e f o r advancement w i t h i n t h e Department o f
C o r r e c t i o n s . Those who do n o t f e e l th e y can a c h ie v e s u c c e ss have a
h i g h e r mean s c o r e on d e s i r e f o r advancement but a r e n o t as homogeneous
in t h e i r a t t i t u d e toward t h i s f a c t o r as a r e t h o s e who f e e l th ey can
obtain success.
IV.

How do t h e f o llo w i n g r e l a t e t o both p r o d u c t io n and p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s i n Michigan penal i n ­
stitu tio n s?
a.

Sex o f t h e t e a c h e r .

Female t e a c h e r s tended t o r a t e a l l f a c t o r s more p o s i t i v e l y th an male
teachers.

In p a r t i c u l a r female t e a c h e r s f e e l p r i s o n t e a c h e r s a r e more

o f an e l i t e group. They v al ue p r a c t i c a l a s p e c t s o f t h e i r jo b more, and
a r e more l i k e l y t o f e e l tra p p e d in t h e i r p o s i t i o n than t h e i r male
counterparts.

Female t e a c h e r s a l s o e x p r e s s a s t r o n g e r d e s i r e t o r e ­

form t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system and t o o b t a i n r e c o g n i t i o n w i t h i n t h e s y s ­
tem than male t e a c h e r s .
b.

S u b j e c t t a u g h t by th e t e a c h e r .

Mathematics t e a c h e r s .

Te achers o f t h i s s u b j e c t were r e p r e s e n t a t i v e

o f t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l with t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e f a c t o r " D e f a u l t" which
was l e s s p o s i t i v e than th e o v e r a l l , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t mathematics t e a c h ­
e r s do n o t f e e l the y must remain in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s because th ey could
not find another p o s itio n .

95

En glish t e a c h e r s .

Teachers o f t h i s s u b j e c t c o n s id e r p r i s o n t e a c h e r s

more e l i t e th an do o t h e r t e a c h e r s ; they a l s o valu e p r a c t i c a l rewards
more and express a g r e a t e r d e s i r e t o reform p r is o n ed u c a t io n .
Reading t e a c h e r s .

Te achers o f t h i s s u b j e c t r a t e d “D ef au lt" more p o s i ­

t i v e l y tha n d i d o t h e r t e a c h e r s ; t h i s i n d i c a t e s a s t r o n g e r tendency o f
re a d in g t e a c h e r s to f e e l th e y hold t h e i r p o s i t i o n only because th ey
have no o t h e r o p t i o n .
L. R. C. t e a c h e r s .

Teachers o f t h i s s u b j e c t f e e l more s t r o n g l y than

o t h e r t e a c h e r s t h a t p r i s o n s a r e n o t a p la c e f o r women to t e a c h .

They

a l s o f e e l t h a t th e y do not hold t h e i r p o s i t i o n only because they cannot
find another p o s itio n .

They a r e t h e only s u b j e c t a r ea which r a t e d

" A f f e c t i v e " more p o s i t i v e l y than " C o g n i t i v e , " i n d i c a t i n g th ey p l a c e a
g r e a t e r emphasis on t e a c h i n g f o r s t u d e n t change than f o r l e a r n i n g a
p a r tic u la r subject.

They a l s o seek to reform p r i s o n e d u c a tio n and to

e x h i b i t t h e i r t e a c h i n g s k i l l s more than do o t h e r t e a c h e r s i n th e
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .
"O ther"teachers.
areas.

This group i s t h e l e a s t homogeneous o f a l l s u b j e c t

They f e e l more p o s i t i v e l y than do t e a c h e r s i n o t h e r s u b j e c t

a r e a s t h a t p r i s o n e d u c a t i o n i s a man's domain.

They p lace l e s s em­

p h a s is on p r a c t i c a l rewards and f e e l l e s s tra p p e d in t h e i r p o s i t i o n
th an do o t h e r t e a c h e r s .

They a l s o p l a c e l e s s emphasis on c o g n i t i v e

l e a r n i n g th an t e a c h e r s o f o t h e r s u b j e c t s .
c.

Expe rience o f t h e t e a c h e r .

Teachers w ith o v e r ele v e n y e a r s e x p er ien ce
in p r is o n e d u c a t io n _________________________
This group o f t e a c h e r s c o n s i d e r s p r i s o n t e a c h e r s l e s s " E l i t e " and
more "Macho" than do o t h e r t e a c h e r s .

They a l s o p l a c e l e s s val ue on

96

p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n than do t h e i r l e s s ex per ienced
counterparts.

D es pite th e low p o s i t i v e r esp onses s ubmitted by t h e s e

ex p e r ie n c e d t e a c h e r s , th ey s t r o n g l y a f f i r m t h a t they do n o t m aintain
t h e i r p o s i t i o n because t h e y ca nno t f i n d a n o t h e r p o s i t i o n .

While on

t h e j o b th ey ex p r e ss a s t r o n g e r d e s i r e t o t e a c h t h e i r s u b j e c t than
other teachers.
Teachers wit h between f i v e and el ev en y e a r s
e x p e r i e n c e in p r i s o n e d u c a t io n ______________
This ap pea rs t o be th e e s t a b l i s h m e n t group o f t e a c h e r s .

They

d i f f e r from t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l in none of t h e p r o d u c tio n and p a r t i c i p a ­
t i o n f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d in t h i s s urv ey.
Teachers with l e s s than f i v e y e a r s ex p e r ie n c e
i n p r is o n e d u c a t io n ____________________________
This group o f t e a c h e r s c o n s i d e r p r i s o n t e a c h e r s more " E l i t e " and
l e s s "Macho" than t h e more exper ien ce d t e a c h e r s and a r e a l s o more
prone t o f e e l tr a p p e d in t h e i r p o s i t i o n than o t h e r groups o f t e a c h e r s
and a r e more m o tivated by advancement p o s s i b i l i t i e s .

I t should be

noted t h a t t h e more e x p e r ie n c e d th e group o f t e a c h e r s th e l e s s p o s i t i v e
th e e x p r e s s i o n o f d e s i r e f o r advancement w i t h i n th e system.
Te achers with no p u b l i c school teach in g
e x p e r i e n c e _______________________________
This c a t e g o r y c o n s i s t e d o f t e a c h e r s from a l l a r e a s o f p r i s o n
e x p e r i e n c e ; d i s t i n g u i s h e d o n l y by t h e i r l a c k o f p u b l i c school te a c h i n g
experience.

They d i f f e r from o t h e r s on ly in t h a t they c o n s i d e r p r is o n

t e a c h e r s l e s s " E l i t e " and more "Macho" than o t h e r t e a c h e r s and they
a l s o e x p r ess ed l e s s d e s i r e f o r advancement th a n o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s o f
teachers.

97

d.

S e c u r i t y l e v e l o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n .

Maximum, medium and minimum s e c u r i t y
L i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e was express ed among th e t e a c h e r s in t h e s e t h r e e
s e c u r i t y l e v e l s in both p a r t i c i p a t i o n and p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s o f t h i s
stu dy.
Female i n s t i t u t i o n s
This c a t e g o r y i s n o t o f f i c i a l l y a s e c u r i t y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , y e t
they do not f i t i n t o any o t h e r s e c u r i t y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
c o n s id e re d h e r e .
student).

Thus they ar e

(This a l s o answers t h e q u e s t i o n concerning sex o f th e

Teachers o f female s t u d e n t s c o n s i d e r p r i s o n t e a c h e r s more

" E l i t e " and more "Macho" than do o t h e r t e a c h e r s .

They a l s o f e e l t h a t

th e y hold t h e i r p o s i t i o n only because they c an n o t f i n d amother p o s i t i o n
o u t s i d e th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

Advancement i s cons id e re d by

t h e s e t e a c h e r s to be a p o s i t i v e m o t i v a t i o n f a c t o r ; t h i s d i s t i n g u i s h e s
them from o t h e r groups in male penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .

This ca te g o r y con­

s i s t e d of only f i v e t e a c h e r s ; r e s u l t s must be tempered by t h i s con­
sideration.
e.

Age o f t h e s t u d e n t .

Because o f c u r r e n t overcrowded c o n d i t i o n s w i t h i n t h e Michigan penal
system, s t u d e n t s cannot always be s e g r e g a t e d a c c o r d in g t o age o f th e
i n d i v i d u a l , thus t h e r e i s a m ix tu re o f ages th ro u g h o u t t h e var io u s
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ; f o r t h i s reas on r e s u l t s r e c e i v e d in t h i s ca te g o r y
are suspect.

Teachers o f s t u d e n t s under t h e age o f t w e n t y - f i v e con­

s i d e r t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n s l e s s "Macho," th an t e a c h e r s o f s t u d e n t s not
under t w e n t y - f i v e .

Teachers o f t h e younger s t u d e n t s f e e l l e s s tra pped

98

in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s and more d e s i r o u s o f r e c o g n i t i o n from t h e i r peer s
w i t h i n t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n and w i t h i n t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n than do t e a c h e r s
o f older students.
V.

Yes.

Would t h e t e a c h e r s in th e academic s chools o f Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n ag ai n i f given
a n o t h e r o p p o r t u n i t y to s t a r t over?

F i f t y o f e i g h t y t e a c h e r s responding to t h i s q u e s t i o n i n d i c a t e d

t h a t th ey d e f i n i t e l y would a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n i f th e y had th e d e c i s i o n
t o make a g a i n .

The remaining t h i r t y a r e e i t h e r n o t s u r e o r would d e f i ­

n i t e l y n o t a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n i f they had th e ch o ice t o make a g a i n .
Teachers who would not a c c e p t t h e i r p o s i t i o n again, d i f f e r from t h o s e
who would in t h a t th e former c o n s i d e r p r is o n t e a c h e r s l e s s " E l i t e "
and more "Macho" th an t e a c h e r s who would a c c e p t the p o s i t i o n a g a i n .
The "would n o t a c c e p t" group plac ed l e s s emphasis on p r a c t i c a l rewards
and f e l t the only rea so n th e y kept t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n was because
th e y could n o t f i n d a n o t h e r p o s i t i o n .

The "would n o t a c c e p t" group

placed more emphasis on advancement w i t h i n the Department o f Correc­
t i o n s than d i d th e "would a c cep t" group.
The most n o t a b l e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e "would a c c e p t " group
and th e "would n o t ac c e p t" group i s in th e f a c t o r s u c c e s s .

The "would

not a c cep t" group i s l e s s l i k e l y to f e e l t h a t they can a c h i e v e success
in t h e i r work i n t h e i r c u r r e n t i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g .

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Purpose
The purpose o f
sonal

t h i s s tu d y i s t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e r e a s o n s , both p e r ­

and p r o f e s s i o n a l , t h a t t e a c h e r s m a in ta in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s with th e

Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and a l s o t h e f a c t o r s which may i n ­
f lu e n c e them to e x e r t e f f o r t beyond t h e minimum r e q u i s i t e to maintain
th is position.
Background
Penal i n s t i t u t i o n s were e s t a b l i s h e d as a p l a c e t o r e t a i n i n d i v i d ­
u a l s whom s o c i e t y wished to o s t r a c i z e f o r a s p e c i f i e d number o f y e a r s .
Because t h e primary f u n c t i o n o f penal i n s t i t u t i o n s i s t o keep t h e s e
i n d i v i d u a l s s e p a r a t e d from s o c i e t y , o t h e r f u n c t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d with
c o r r e c t i o n s such as r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , a r e secondary o r even p e r i p h e r i c
end ea vor s.

Education i s one o f t h e s e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n endeavors.

Because o f t h e
tions

secondary n a t u r e o f e d u c a t io n w i t h i n t h e c o r r e -

system, p r i s o n academic s ch ools have been r e q u i r e d t o adapt

t h e i r programs t o th e needs o f custo dy.

S t u d e n ts may be removed from

clas sroom s f o r d a y s , weeks o r even months a t a tim e; th ey may be t r a n s ­
f e r r e d from one i n s t i t u t i o n t o a n o t h e r w ith p r i o r n o t i c e t o n e i t h e r
th e s t u d e n t nor th e t e a c h e r .

For t h e s e r e a so n s t h e academic schools

th ro u g h o u t th e Michigan C o r r e c t i o n a l System have adopted a s t a n d a r d ­
iz e d c u r ric u lu m i n c l u d i n g

a s t a n d a r d i z e d d e l i v e r y system , m a t e r i a l s

99

100

and r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l s .

The u l t i m a t e goal o f t h e academic program i s

the ob tainmen t o f a G. E. D. c e r t i f i c a t e .
De spite th e d i f f i c u l t n a t u r e o f t h e s t u d e n t s th e y m a i n t a i n , th e
s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n o f programs and t h e secondary n a t u r e o f th e p o s i t i o n ,
the Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s has been a b l e t o m a in ta i n c e r ­
t i f i e d t e a c h e r s t o f i l l a l l s t a f f i n g needs o f ever y academic school
t h roughout t h e Michigan penal system.
Methodology
According to March and Simon t h e r e a r e two ty pes o f m o t i v a t i o n a l
f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g i n d i v i d u a l s in v a r io u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s - - p a r t i c i p a t i o n
f a c t o r s which a f f e c t membership in t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n and pr o d u ctio n
f a c t o r s which a f f e c t e f f o r t e x e r t e d in accomplishing t h e goals o f th e
organization.

The key d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f a c t o r between t h e two ty pe s o f

m o t i v a t o r s i s e f f o r t ; p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s r e q u i r e no e x t r a e f f o r t to
o b t a i n w h il e p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s a r e d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o e f f o r t and
accomplishment.
Through t h e review o f l i t e r a t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r l y th e work o f Dan
L o r t i e , and through f o u r y e a r s of o b s e r v a t i o n by a c o r r e c t i o n s educa­
t o r , t h e f o llo w in g q u e s t i o n s were developed which a t t e m p t t o i s o l a t e
t h e p o s s i b l e m o t i v a t i o n a l f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t e a c h e r s w i t h i n Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s , both p a r t i c i p a t i o n and p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s .
I.

What a r e t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t e a c h e r s in
t h e academic s c h o o ls o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
a.

Do t e a c h e r s i n Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s m ain ta in
t h e i r employment because they f e e l th ey have no o t h e r
o p tio n ?

101

II.

III.

IV.

b.

How do t e a c h e r s in Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s view
th e p r a c t i c a l rewards o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n ? ( S a l a r y ,
b e n e f i t s , s e c u r i t y o f c i v i l s e r v i c e , a d u l t te a c h in g
model and le n g th o f work da y).

c.

Do t e a c h e r s in academic s c h o o ls o f Michigan penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s en joy t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n w ith t h e cr im ­
in al j u s t i c e system?
1.

Do th ey a s s o c i a t e t h e i r j o b with th e "Macho”
image?

2.

Do th e y c o n s i d e r themselves an E l i t e group.

3.

Do they a s s o c i a t e more p r e s t i g e t o p o s i t i o n s in
cr im i n a l j u s t i c e than t o p o s i t i o n s in p u b l i c
ed u c a tio n ?

What a r e t h e p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g academic school
t e a c h e r s i n Michigan penal i n s t i t u t i o n s ?
a.

Do they a s s o c i a t e s u c c e ss with c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g in
t h e i r students?

b.

Do

they a s s o c i a t e s u c c e ss with s t u d e n t change?

c.

Do

they d e s i r e to de m o nst rate t h e i r pedagogical

d.

Do

they d e s i r e to e x e r t c o n t r o l o v e r o t h e r s ?

e.

Do th ey seek advancement to a h i g h e r p o s i t i o n w i t h i n
th e c o r r e c t i o n s h i e r a r c h y ?

f.

Do they seek r e c o g n i t i o n from o t h e r s w i t h i n t h e i n s t i ­
tution?

g.

Do they seek t o improve t h e e d u c a t i o n a l system w i t h i n
t h e i r own i n s t i t u t i o n and w i t h i n th e Department o f
C o r r e c t io n s ?

skills?

Do t e a c h e r s in academic s c h o o ls o f Michigan penal i n s t i t u ­
t i o n s p e r c e i v e t h e s e p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s as a c h i e v a b l e in
th e ir current situation?
How do the fo llowing r e l a t e t o both p r o d u c tio n and p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s i n Michigan penal i n ­
stitutions?
a.

Sex o f t h e t e a c h e r

b.

S u b j e c t a r e a t a u g h t by t h e t e a c h e r

102

c.

Expe rience of th e t e a c h e r

d.

S e c u r i t y le v e l o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n

e.

Age o f th e s t u d e n t

f.

Sex o f th e s t u d e n t

V.

Would t h e t e a c h e r s in th e academic s c h o o ls o f Michigan
penal i n s t i t u t i o n s a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n ag ain i f given a
chance t o s t a r t over?

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e
In o r d e r t o o b t a i n t h i s in fo r m a tio n a two p a r t q u e s t i o n n a i r e was
deve lo pe d.

The f i r s t p a r t o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was des igned t o g a t h e r

demographic i n fo r m a ti o n concerning th e t e a c h e r .
ser ved t o answer q u e s t i o n number f o u r .

This in fo r m a tio n

The second p o r t i o n o f t h e ques ­

t i o n n a i r e was des igned t o det er m ine th e a t t i t u d e o f t h e t e a c h e r conc er n­
ing t h e p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r s , th e p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r s , su ccess
and s a t i s f a c t i o n .

In t h e second p o r t i o n t e a c h e r s were asked t o respond

to s t a t e m e n t s conc er ning p r i s o n t e a c h i n g .

The resp ons e was t o be in

the f o ll o w in g fo rm at:
1.

Strongly disagree

2.

Disagree

3.

Undecided

4.

Agree

5.

S t r o n g l y Agree

The p o p u la ti o n
The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was e i t h e r p e r s o n a l l y a d m i n i s t e r e d o r mailed
t o every academic school clas sro om t e a c h e r in t h e Michigan Department
o f Corrections.

With t h e e x c e p t io n o f t e a c h e r s in Marquette Branch

103

P r i s o n , who did not respond t o the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , th e r e t u r n r a t e was
93%.

Thus t h e p o p u la ti o n co n s id e red in t h i s study was not a sample

but a census o f a l l t e a c h e r s in the Michigan C o r r e c ti o n s System.

No

att em pt was made t o g e n e r a l i z e t h e r e s u l t s to e i t h e r t e a c h e r s in
Marquette Branch P r is o n o r t o c o r r e c t i o n s ed u c a to r s o u t s i d e t h e Michigan
system.
The fo llow ing s t e p s were used i n a n a ly z in g the d a t a :
1.

Frequencies f o r each item were v i s u a l l y an aly zed t o
in s u r e the r e s u l t s of red unda nt q u e s ti o n s were not
c o n t r a d i c t o r y . This was t o i n s u r e r e l i a b i l i t y of th e
q u e s t i o n n a i r e . These frequ en cy a n a l y s e s included p e r ­
cen tag e s c o r e s o f each answer, t h e mean s core f o r each
s t a t e m e n t , the mode, t h e s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n and th e
medium s c o r e f o r each q u e s t i o n . The r e s u l t s were deemed
to be r e l i a b l e .

2.

The v a r io u s items concerning each q u e s t i o n were computed
i n t o a s i n g l e s c o r e with frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r
those new f a c t o r s . These f r e q u e n c i e s i nc lu ded mean,
mode and s ta n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s .

3.

Cross t a b u l a t i o n s were performed on each f a c t o r us in g
th e demographics in q u e s t i o n f o u r , in a d d i t i o n to suc­
ces s o f t h e t e a c h e r and s a t i s f a c t i o n o f th e t e a c h e r .
From t h e s e c r o s s - t a b u l a t i o n s a chi squared t a b l e was
computed f o r a l l th e demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

1.

P a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r a l l t e a c h e r s in th e p o p u la ti o n
in c lu d e t h e b e l i e f t h a t p r i s o n t e a c h e r s a r e an e l i t e
group o f e d u c a t o r s r e q u i r i n g s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g and more
e x p e r i e n c e than p u b l i c school t e a c h e r s .

2.

P ris on t e a c h e r s p la c e g r e a t value on th e p r a c t i c a l r e ­
wards a s s o c i a t e d with th e p o s i t i o n .

3.

Teachers do n o t valu e t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n with t h e cr iminal
j u s t i c e system.

4.

Advancement w i t h i n th e c o r r e c t i o n s h i e r a r c h y i s not a
p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r f o r t e a c h e r s o v e r a l l .

Findings

104

5.

Teachers t e a c h in g t h e s u b j e c t a r e a c l a s s i f i e d " L i f e
Role Competency" d e v i a t e from o t h e r t e a c h e r s in t h a t
th ey c o n s i d e r te a c h i n g f o r a change in s t u d e n t be­
h a v i o r more p o s i t i v e than te a c h i n g f o r c o g n i t i v e
l e a r n i n g in t h e i r s t u d e n t s .

6.

The more e x p e r ie n c e th e group o f t e a c h e r s had th e lower
th e r a t i n g was on th e m o t i v a t i o n a l p o t e n t i a l o f th e
f a c t o r "Advancement" w i t h i n t h e h i e r a r c h y .

7.

The m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s w i t h i n th e Department o f Cor­
r e c t i o n s f e e l they can o b t a i n succ es s i n t h e i r c u r r e n t
in stitu tio n a l settin g .

8.

Te achers who f e e l they can o b t a i n su c c e ss r a t e d th e
t e a c h i n g o f c o g n i t i v e m a t e r i a l and th e d e s i r e to
e x e r t a u t h o r i t y over o t h e r s as th e two most p o s i t i v e
p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s , w h ile t e a c h e r s who did n o t f e e l
th ey could o b t a i n su c c e ss i n t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n
r a t e d te a c h i n g f o r a change i n s t u d e n t be h a v i o r and
r e c o g n i t i o n th e two most p o s i t i v e p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s .

9.

The m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s would a c c e p t t h e p o s i t i o n a g a i n ,
i f th e y were given t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o begin a g a i n .

10.

Te achers who would n o t a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n ag ain d i f f e r e d
from th o s e who would in t h a t th e y f e e l p r i s o n t e a c h e r s
a r e l e s s e l i t e and more macho than o t h e r t e a c h e r s .

11.

Teachers who do not f e e l th ey can o b t a i n su c c e ss in
t h e i r p o s i t i o n would not a c c e p t th e p o s i t i o n aga in i f
th e y were given th e o p p o r t u n i t y .

12.

Teachers in t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t io n s
c o n s i d e r themselves p a r t o f th e e d u c a t i o n a l e s t a b l i s h ­
ment* an e l i t e p a r t o f t h e e d u c a tio n e s t a b l i s h m e n t , not
a p a rt of corrections per se.

13.

The lo n g e r a p r i s o n t e a c h e r remains employed i n t h e s y s ­
tem th e l e s s m o t iv a tio n a l t h e p r o s p e c t of promotion
appears.

14.

Teachers who ad op t th e o b j e c t i v e s of t h e e d u c a t i o n a l
system o f t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s , p r e p a r i n g
s t u d e n t s f o r t h e G. E. D. and c o n t r o l l i n g t h e i r c l a s s ­
rooms, can achieve s ucc es s i n t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n .
On t h e o t h e r hand, t e a c h e r s who a t t e m p t to e f f e c t a
p o s i t i v e change in t h e i r s t u d e n t s and who wish t o be
r e c o g n iz e d as p r o f e s s i o n a l s f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s do not
f e e l th e y can succeed in t h e i r c u r r e n t work s i t u a t i o n .

105

15.

Teachers who t each th e s u b j e c t a r e a L i f e Role
Competencies, desig n t h e i r own c o u r s e s and e s t a b l i s h
t h e i r own o b j e c t i v e s to p r e p a re s t u d e n t s f o r th e f u ­
t u r e . This group o f t e a c h e r s f e e l th ey can e f f e c t a
p o s i t i v e change in s t u d e n t b e h a v io r .

Discussion
Because t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s has l i t t l e d i f f i ­
c u l t y a t t r a c t i n g and m a in ta in i n g c e r t i f i e d t e a c h e r s t o f i l l t h e s t a f ­
f i n g needs o f a l l penal i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h i n t h e S t a t e and because t h e
t u r n o v e r r a t e among t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e Michigan Department o f Correc­
t i o n s i s low, i t was b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e r e were s u f f i c i e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n
m o t i v a t o r s t o keep t e a c h e r s c o n t e n t with t h e i r p o s i t i o n s .

The study

v e r i f i e d t h i s i d e a ; over t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e t e a c h e r s responding t o t h e
q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a i d th ey would a c c e p t t h e p o s i t i o n a g a in i f given t h e
opportunity to s t a r t t h e i r careers over.

These t e a c h e r s do n o t f e e l

th e y have been tr a p p e d in t h e i r p o s i t i o n s and have no o t h e r o p t i o n ; but
r a t h e r , they f e e l th e y m a in ta i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n s because th ey choose t o .
Two f a c t o r s emerge as p a r t i c i p a t i o n m o t i v a t o r s in t h i s s t u d y .
The f i r s t f a c t o r i s t h e f e e l i n g t h a t , as p r i s o n t e a c h e r s , th ey a r e an
e l i t e group o f t e a c h e r s doing a jo b which r e q u i r e s more e x p e r ie n c e and
more t r a i n i n g th an t e a c h i n g in p u b l i c s c h o o l s .

The second f a c t o r i s an

a f f i n i t y f o r t h e p r a c t i c a l rewards o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n .

They n o t only

p l a c e g r e a t v a l u e on th e r em une ra tion th ey r e c e i v e , b u t th e y a l s o valu e
t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n with c i v i l s e r v i c e , i n c l u d i n g a l l t h e b e n e f i t s a s s o ­
c i a t e d wit h c i v i l s e r v i c e .

They en joy t e a c h i n g a d u l t s as opposed t o

y outh and the y a p p r e c i a t e n o t having to t a k e t h e i r work home with them
when th e y lea ve t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a t t h e end o f th e day.

Teachers in

p r i s o n i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e w i l l i n g to work an e i g h t hour day as opposed

106

t o t h e s h o r t e r day o f a p u b l i c school t e a c h e r i n exchange f o r not having
t o spend t h e i r evenings p r e p a r i n g f o r c l a s s and g r ading p a p e r s .
At t h e o u t s e t o f t h i s study i t was f e l t t h a t t e a c h e r s i n penal
i n s t i t u t i o n s would c o n s i d e r themselves an e l i t e group o f t e a c h e r s d i s ­
t i n c t from p u b l i c school t e a c h e r s by t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n .
I t was f e l t t h a t t h i s e l i t e a t t i t u d e i s a s s o c i a t e d w ith an a f f i l i a t i o n
o f t h e t e a c h e r w i th t h e c r im i n a l j u s t i c e system as opposed to a f f i l i a ­
t i o n w ith p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n .

This a f f i l i a t i o n with th e c r im in a l j u s t i c e

system proved t o be n o n e x i s t e n t .

Two f a c t o r s were d e s ig ne d to d e t e r ­

mine th e a f f i l i a t i o n o f a p r i s o n school t e a c h e r w ith t h e c r im inal j u s ­
t i c e system.

The f i r s t o f t h e s e f a c t o r s was t h e “Macho" image ge n e r ­

a l l y a s s o c i a t e d with c r im in al j u s t i c e and p a r t i c u l a r l y with penal i n ­
stitu tio n s.

"Macho" r e f e r s t o t h e b e l i e f t h a t employment i n a penal

i n s t i t u t i o n should be l i m i t e d t o male employees, p r i s o n s a r e a man’s
w o r ld , n o t a p l a c e f o r fe m a le s .

The study de mons tr ated t h a t t h e

"Macho" image i s not a p o s i t i v e f a c t o r f o r t e a c h e r s who a r e s a t i s f i e d
with t h e i r p o s i t i o n , w h i l e i t i s p o s i t i v e f o r t e a c h e r s who a r e not
s a t i s f i e d w it h t h e i r p o s i t i o n .

I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t t h e image o f danger

and d a r i n g a s s o c i a t e d with penal i n s t i t u t i o n s i s n o t a p o s i t i v e p a r ­
t i c i p a t i o n motivator fo r prison te ach ers.

The second f a c t o r r e l a t i n g

t o t e a c h e r a f f i l i a t i o n w i th c r im i n a l j u s t i c e was t h e r e l a t i v e p r e s t i g e
o f t h e c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system t o t h e p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n system.

I t is

f e l t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l a s s o c i a t e a h i g h e r l e v e l o f p r e s t i g e to
p o s i t i o n s i n a system which t h e y f e e l t o be more p r e s t i g i o u s than
o t h e r sy stem s.

A t e a c h e r who a f f i l i a t e s c l o s e l y with t h e cr im in a l

j u s t i c e system w i l l c o n s i d e r p o s i t i o n s w i t h i n c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e more

107

p r e s t i g i o u s than e q u i v a l e n t p o s i t i o n s in p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n .

The study

demonstrated j u s t t h e o p p o s i t e ; t e a c h e r s a s s o c i a t e more p r e s t i g e to
p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n than t o cr im in a l j u s t i c e .

Teachers c o n s i d e r them­

s e l v e s p a r t o f th e e d u c a t i o n system , an e l i t e p a r t o f t h e system t o be
sure, but a p a rt of i t nevertheless.
I t i s l i k e l y t h a t t e a c h e r s r e j e c t t h e i r p o s i t i o n w i t h i n t h e crim­
i n a l j u s t i c e system because th e y have been r e j e c t e d by th e system.
They a r e ac c e p te d as equ als by n e i t h e r th e p r i s o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n nor
t h e c u s t o d i a l pe rsonnel who occupy th e p r e s t i g i o u s p o s i t i o n s w i t h i n
th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

Teachers a r e simply secondary per so n ­

nel s e r v i n g a se co nd ary f u n c t i o n .

I n d iv id u a l t e a c h e r s a r e aware o f

t h e i r s t a t u s w i t h i n t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s and have compensated f o r t h i s
s t a t u s by i n t e l l e c t u a l l y s e p a r a t i n g themselves from th e system.
P r o d u ctio n m o t i v a t o r s
The P o r t e r and Lawler model d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h r e e f a c t o r s which
must be p r e s e n t b e f o r e a given reward can be a p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r :
i t must be c o n s id e r e d v a l u a b l e t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l ; i t must r e q u i r e
e f f o r t f o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o a c h ie v e and th e i n d i v i d u a l must view i t
as a c h i e v a b l e .

March and Simon s t i p u l a t e d t h i s e f f o r t must exceed

th e minimum e f f o r t r e q u i s i t e f o r maintenance o f th e p o s i t i o n .

This

stu dy c o n s id e r e d a l l t h r e e c r i t e r i a s t i p u l a t e d i n t h e P o r t e r and

;

Lawler model; however, more c o n s i d e r a t i o n must be given t o t h e minimum
e f f o r t r e q u i s i t e f o r maintenance o f th e p o s i t i o n .
w i l l be r e f e r r e d t o i n t h i s c h a p t e r .

This c o n s i d e r a t i o n

F u r th e r s tu d y r e g a r d i n g e f f o r t

and minimum req u irem en ts in t h i s ar ea should be covered in f u r t h e r
r e s e a r c h o f t e a c h e r m o t i v a t i o n i n penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .

108

Of t h e p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s c o n s id e re d in t h i s r e s e a r c h , a l l were
viewed as p o t e n t i a l l y p o s i t i v e pr o d u ctio n m o t i v a t o r s with th e exception
o f advancement w i t h i n th e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .

Advance­

ment was c o n s id e r e d a p o t e n t i a l l y p o s i t i v e p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r only
by t h e group o f t e a c h e r s w ith l e s s than f o u r y e a r s e x p e r ie n c e i n p r is o n
education.

The l o n g e r a t e a c h e r remains employed wit h th e Department

o f C o r r e c tio n s t h e l e s s p o s i t i v e th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f advancement be­
comes to him.

Teaching i n penal s y ste m s, l i k e t e a c h i n g in p u b l i c

s ch ools i s " u n s t a g e d " ; a t e a c h e r remains i n h i s c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n as a
classroom t e a c h e r with t h e same r i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s he had when he
f i r s t became a t e a c h e r , o r he advances t o a p r i n c i p a l ' s p o s i t i o n .
There a r e no i n t e r m e d i a t e s t e p s between a r e g u l a r classroom t e a c h e r
and p r i n c i p a l .

L i t t l e d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h e beginning t e a c h e r from th e ex­

p e r i e n c e d t e a c h e r ; p r i s o n s do n o t even o f f e r th e more d e s i r a b l e t e a c h ­
ing as signments t o t e a c h e r s on t h e b a s i s o f s e n i o r i t y .

The l o n g e r a

t e a c h e r remains with th e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s th e more r e so lv e d
he may become t o h i s f a t e o f being s t a g n a t e d i n h i s c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n ;
he simply l e a r n s t o a c c e p t t h e i d e a t h a t he w i l l not be promoted, thus
advancement g r a d u a l l y l o s e s i t s d e s i r a b i l i t y .

The d e s i r a b i l i t y o f a

p r i n c i p a l p o s i t i o n may a l s o be decrease d i n t h e eyes o f t h e e x p e r i 1*
enced t e a c h e r by t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n o f t h e school p r i n c i p a l in th e
corrections hierarchy.

P r i n c i p a l s a r e a l l o t t e d l i t t l e c o n t r o l over

th e s c h o o ls th ey a r e charged wit h a d m i n i s t e r i n g .

S tu d en ts a r e a s sig n ed

to school by a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n committee which does not i n c lu d e t h e
school a d m i n i s t r a t o r ; d i s c i p l i n e in t h e school i s meted o u t by a com­
m i t t e e which does not i n c l u d e t h e school a d m i n i s t r a t o r ; c u r ri c u lu m i s

,

109

developed in c e n t r a l o f f i c e and then given to th e school a d m i n i s t r a t o r
with l i t t l e i n p u t from t h e school a d m i n i s t r a t o r .

Personnel problems

a r e handled by a personnel o f f i c e o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n .

Some exp er ience d

t e a c h e r s view t h e p o s i t i o n o f p r i n c i p a l in a penal school as a f i g u r e ­
head with l i t t l e r e a l a u t h o r i t y .

Teachers reaso n t h a t th ey a r e in

charge o f t h e i r own c lassr oom and thus i n ch ar ge o f more th an t h e
school p r i n c i p a l .

Teachers say they have more impact and a u t h o r i t y in

t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n th an th e y would i f th e y were promoted t o p r i n ­
cipal .
Teachers who f e e l th ey can o b t a i n succ es s in t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i ­
t i o n d i f f e r from t e a c h e r s who do n o t f e e l th ey can o b t a i n s u c c e s s , th e
f a c t o r s which they ranked in t h e f i r s t two p o s i t i o n s f o r d e s i r a b i l i t y
o f p o s s i b l e p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r s .

Teachers who f e e l they can o b t a i n

s u c c e s s r e g a r d t e a c h i n g o f s u b j e c t a r e a ( c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g ) and con­
t r o l o f t h e i r clas sro om ( a u t h o r i t y ) th e two most dominant p r o d u c tio n
f a c t o r s , w h il e t e a c h e r s who do n o t f e e l they can ach iev e su c c e ss in
t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n , c o n s i d e r t e a c h i n g f o r s t u d e n t change ( a f f e c ­
t i v e l e a r n i n g ) and r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e i r e f f o r t s ( r e c o g n i t i o n ) as th e
two most dominant f a c t o r s .

This d i s t i n c t i o n in p r i o r i t i e s between

th e two groups o f t e a c h e r s i s r e f l e c t e d in p r i o r i t i e s o f t h e Michigan
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s .
Because t h e primary c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e Michigan Department o f
C o r r e c t i o n s i s c u s to d y , s t u d e n t s may be removed from school f o r d i s ­
c ip lin a r y reasons, t r a n s f e r to another f a c i l i t y , r e le a s e to c o u rt,
v i s i t s from c i v i l i a n s , meetings with t h e i r c o u n s e l o r s , o r any o t h e r
re as on deemed a c c e p t a b l e t o th e i n s t i t u t i o n .

S t u d e n ts may have t h e i r

no
ed u c a t io n i n t e r r u p t e d f o r a few h o u r s , d ay s , months o r even y e a r s , they
may r e t u r n t o th e clas sroo m which th ey l e f t o r th ey may be t r a n s f e r r e d
hundreds o f m iles t o a n o t h e r i n s t i t u t i o n o p e r a t e d by t h e dep ar tm en t.
To a d ap t t o th e inc on ven ienc e caused by t h e i n t e r m i t t e n t s t u d e n t the
Department has adopted a " s t a n d a r d i z e d module" system o f i n s t r u c t i o n ,
s t a n d a r d i z e d t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t a s t u d e n t may le a v e any c o r r e c t i o n a l
f a c i l i t y f o r any l e n g t h o f t i m e , e n t e r a n o t h e r f a c i l i t y and begin h i s
s t u d i e s e x a c t l y where he l e f t o f f a t h i s pr ev io us s c h o o l , wit h t h e same
module, t h e same te x t b o o k , t h e same t e a c h i n g s t y l e employed by th e
teacher.

Using t h i s system a s t u d e n t can p r o g r e s s toward com pletion

o f a G. E. D. w i t h i n th e l e a s t amount o f time p o s s i b l e .

Completion o f

a G. E. D. i s t h e u l t i m a t e goal o f th e e d u c a ti o n a l system o f t h e De­
partm e nt.

Any v a r i a t i o n from th e s t a n d a r d i z e d norm e s t a b l i s h e d by th e

Department may impede t h e c o n t i n u i t y o f t h e s t u d e n t and may f r u s t r a t e
t h e s t u d e n t who i s bein g t r a n s f e r r e d among s c h o o ls .

T o ler an ce o f

d e v i a t i o n from t h e s t a n d a r d i z e d system ca nn ot be accep ted under th e
c u r r e n t program o f i n s t r u c t i o n .

S in c e each i n d i v i d u a l module has a

minimum s t a n d a r d , each l e s s o n has a minimum s t a n d a r d , each c o u r s e has
a minimum s ta n d a r d and each s t u d e n t must meet a minimum s t a n d a r d o f
p r o g r e s s w i t h i n th e c o u r s e ,

teachers are a l l o t t e d l i t t l e opportunity

t o d e v i a t e from t h e minimum r e q uire m ents o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n s .

I t is

obvious t h a t t h i s system has been s u c c e s s f u l in acco mplishing t h e
goals o f t h e Department, p r o v id in g th e q u i c k e s t , most e f f i c i e n t method
o f p r e p a r i n g s t u d e n t s f o r t h e G. E, D.

Teachers u t i l i z i n g t h i s system

can s e e t h e i r s t u d e n t s p r o g re s s i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t a r e a , how­
e v e r , th e q u e s t i o n o f e f f o r t beyond t h e r e q u i r e d minimum must be

Ill

c o n s id e r e d .

The system tend s t o d is c o u r a g e e f f o r t beyond th e minimum

r e q u i r e d r a t h e r th a n f o s t e r i n g e x t r a e f f o r t .

Teachers a r e encouraged

t o p l a c e t h e emphasis o f t h e i r t e a c h i n g on l e a r n i n g s u b j e c t m a t t e r
because t h i s i s t h e r eq u ir em en t e s t a b l i s h e d f o r maintenance o f t h e i r
position.

Te achers who c o n s i d e r c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g t h e i r top goal in

t e a c h i n g can be s u c c e s s f u l in acco mplishing t h i s goal b u t may n o t be
motiva ted t o e x e r t e f f o r t beyond t h e minimum r e q u i r e d i n o b t a i n i n g t h i s
goal.
The second goal o f t e a c h e r s who f e e l s u c c e s s f u l in t h e i r c u r r e n t
p o s i t i o n i s t h e maintenance o f c o n t r o l over t h e i r s t u d e n t s .

This goal

i s e a s i l y unde rst oo d when t h e r o l e o f a t e a c h e r w i t h i n t h e Department
o f C o r r e c t i o n s i s u n d e r sto o d .

While t e a c h e r s a r e h i r e d t o t e a c h t h e i r

p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t s and i n f a c t a r e a l l o t t e d minimum s t a n d a r d s f o r
t e a c h i n g , t h e primary goal o f ever y t e a c h e r i s t h e same as t h e primary
goal o f ev er y employee o f t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s , c o n t r o l o f
the i n s t i t u t i o n .

By p o l i c y , every employee working in a penal i n s t i t u ­

t i o n has t h e primary f u n c t i o n o f cus to dy .

Teachers i n t h e i r classr oom

o r anywhere th e y happen to be in t h e i n s t i t u t i o n have t h e same d i s c i ­
p l i n a r y powers a l l o t t e d a custody o f f i c i a l .

They a r e charged with

m a i n t a i n i n g c o n t r o l o v e r t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l classrooms and o v e r t h e
hallways o u t s i d e t h e i r cla s s r o o m s .

They may be held r e s p o n s i b l e f o r
r

any i n c i d e n t o c c u r r i n g w i t h i n t h e i r a r e a o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .

Thus,

c o n t r o l , t h e second primary goal o f t e a c h e r s who f e e l they can o b t a i n
s u c c e s s i n t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n , i s a minimum req uire m en t f o r a l l
teachers.

Unlike c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g , a u t h o r i t y lends i t s e l f t o e f f o r t

beyond t h e minimum r e q u i r e d .

Teachers who en joy e x e r t i n g c o n t r o l may

exceed th e minimum s t a n d a r d s and enjoy a g r e a t deal o f success in t h i s

112

endeavor.
The t r a d i t i o n a l measure o f su c c e ss f o r any c o r r e c t i o n a l program
has been th e e f f e c t o f t h e program on r e c i d i v i s m .

Thus f a r , merely

l e a r n i n g s u b j e c t m a t t e r and o b t a i n i n g a diploma o r c e r t i f i c a t e has not
been a s s o c i a t e d w i th a r e d u c t i o n i n r e c i d i v i s m f o r inmates o f c o r r e c ­
tional f a c i l i t i e s .

Yet t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e Michigan Department o f

C o r r e c t i o n s a r e n o t encouraged t o develop t h e i r co u r se s in such a way
as to promote change i n s t u d e n t b e h a v i o r .

Not only a r e t e a c h e r s not

encouraged t o t a i l o r c o u r se s f o r s t u d e n t change, b u t t h e h i g h l y s t r u c ­
t u r e d system o f i n s t r u c t i o n u t i l i z e d by t h e Department p r o h i b i t s modi­
f ic a tio n s to c u rren t courses.

Teachers who seek t o change t h e i r s t u ­

dents as t h e i r to p goal do n o t f e e l they can o b t a i n succ es s w i t h i n
th e ir current position.
The second goal o f t e a c h e r s who f e e l th e y c an n o t c u r r e n t l y o b t a i n
s u c c e ss in t h e i r j o b s i s r e c o g n i t i o n from o t h e r s .

They seek t o accom­

p l i s h t h e i r j o b s in such a way as to g l e a n r e c o g n i t i o n f o r t h e i r a c ­
complishments.

Rec ognition f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s from o t h e r s w i t h i n t h e

Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s i s n e a r l y im p o s s ib le f o r a t e a c h e r t o o b t a i n
becaus e t h e r e i s simply no o p p o r t u n i t y t o d i s t i n g u i s h h i m s e l f from any
o th er teacher.

Nor i s i t p o s s i b l e f o r t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s t o o b t a i n th e

r e c o g n i t i o n th ey d e s i r e from th e i n s t i t u t i o n , due t o t h e i r p r o f e s *
sional s ta t u s .

P r o f e s s i o n a l r e c o g n i t i o n i s not extended because

t e a c h e r s have n o t been a c c e p t e d by t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s as
professionals.

R ecog nition by t h e community o u t s i d e th e i n s t i t u t i o n

i s p o s s i b l e because o f th e n a t u r e o f t h e work and t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f
the t a s k a t e a c h e r per form s.

However, community r e c o g n i t i o n i s not a

113

p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r because i t i s n o t r e l a t e d t o e f f o r t .

I f an i n d i v i d ­

ual t e a c h e r o b t a i n s community r e c o g n i t i o n i t i s becaus e o f h i s a f f i l i ­
a t i o n w it h a group and n o t because o f t h e e f f o r t he has expended.
Because o f t h e s t a n d a r d i z e d method o f i n s t r u c t i o n th ro u g h o u t th e
Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s , l i t t l e v a r i a t i o n i n p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r s
was noted i n th e v a r i o u s t e a c h e r s ; which may have been due t o t h e type
o f s t u d e n t , typ e o f i n s t i t u t i o n , sex o r e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e t e a c h e r .
The s ta n d a r d s o f t h e Department have e s t a b l i s h e d t h e p r o d u c t io n m o t i­
v a t o r s f o r a l l t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e Department.

I t i s ex pected t h a t

th e above mentioned v a r i a t i o n s among t e a c h e r s a n d / o r i n s t i t u t i o n s
would be r e f l e c t e d in d i f f e r e n c e s o f p o s s i b l e p r o d u c t io n m o t i v a t o r s
i f t e a c h e r s i n t h e v a r i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s were p e r m i t t e d t o t a i l o r t h e i r
c o u r se s t o accomplish t h e i r g o a l s .

The c u r r e n t system simply d i s ­

co urages d e v i a t i o n from th e dual g o a ls o f c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g and con­
trol.

The e x c e p ti o n to t h i s p r i o r i t y d e s i g n a t i o n i s noted i n t h e

group o f t e a c h e r s t e a c h i n g th e co u r se " L i f e Role Competencies."

This

group o f t e a c h e r s i s encouraged t o develop t h e i r own co u r se s with th e
goal i n mind o f p r e p a r i n g s t u d e n t s f o r r e l e a s e from th e i n s t i t u t i o n .
L. R. C. t e a c h e r s a r e n o t p a r t o f t h e main co u r s e s t r u c t u r e w i t h i n
th e s y stem , t h a t i s completion o f L. R. C. c o u r s e s does n o t l e a d t o
completion o f a G. E. D. nor i s a s t u d e n t a t t e n d i n g an L. R. C. cour se
in one i n s t i t u t i o n ex pected t o c o n t i n u e t h a t c o u r s e upon a r r i v a l in
another i n s t i t u t i o n .

L. R. C. t e a c h e r s a r e p e r m i t t e d t o develop

t h e i r own m a t e r i a l s , use t h e i r own d e l i v e r y system and t e a c h th e
c o u r s e in any way th ey see f i t , w i t h i n r e a s o n a b l e g u i d e l i n e s .

They

a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e co u r s e th e y d e v e l o p ; th ey must o b t a i n t h e i r

114

own m a t e r i a l s , r e c r u i t t h e i r own s t u d e n t s , and s e t t h e i r own s ta n d ­
ar ds f o r s u c c e s s f u l completion o f t h e c o u r s e .
s e t s as t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s :

This group o f t e a c h e r s

changing s t u d e n t b e h a v i o r , t e a c h i n g s u b j e c t

m a t t e r and o b t a i n i n g r e c o g n i t i o n f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s .

They f e e l they

can o b t a i n su c c e ss in ac complishing t h e s e go als w i t h i n t h e c o n f in e s o f
t h e i r c u r r e n t work s i t u a t i o n .

Since th ey a r e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r th e suc­

ce s s o r f a i l u r e o f t h e i r own c o u r s e s , L. R. C. te a c h e r s can o b t a i n
r e c o g n i t i o n f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s from o t h e r t e a c h e r s who may be f a m i l i a r
with t h e work o f th e L. R. C. t e a c h e r .
Recommendations f o r f u r t h e r s tu d y
I t i s e v i d e n t t h a t t h e Michigan Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s i s
doing an ade qu ate j o b o f p r o v id in g s t u d e n t s with t h e i n s t r u c t i o n neces­
s a r y t o o b t a i n t h e G. E. D. c e r t i f i c a t e .

I t i s also evident th a t

t e a c h e r s have t h e a u t h o r i t y and s a n c t i o n s ne ces sary t o m a in ta in con­
t r o l o f t h e i r c lassr oom s.

However, i t i s n o t known i f t h e c u r r e n t

emphasis and s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n a r e th w a r tin g p r o d u c t i v i t y o f t e a c h e r s .
Does t h e c u r r e n t c u r ric u lu m d is c o u r a g e p r o d u c t i v i t y o r e x t r a e f f o r t
in t e a c h e r s ?

I t is apparent t h a t the p a r tic ip a tio n motivators are

adeq uate t o i n s u r e minimum e f f o r t from t e a c h e r s , b u t t h e adequacy o f
p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r s must be q u e s t i o n e d .
The scope o f t h i s study was l i m i t e d to academic clas sro om t e a c h - '
e r s w i t h i n t h e Michigan penal system.

F u r t h e r s t u d i e s in v o l v i n g voca­

t i o n a l t e a c h e r s w i t h i n t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s and a l s o t e a c h e r s
from penal i n s t i t u t i o n s o u t s i d e t h e Michigan system may l e a d to f u r t h e r
i n s i g h t i n t o p r o d u c tio n m o t i v a t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s .

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

PUBLIC SCHOOL: EDUCATION I S PRIMARY

SCHOOL A D M IN IS T R A T IO N

GUIDANCE

DEPARTMENT
C H A IR PE O PL E

CLASSROOM

ST U D E N T

TEACHERS

S E R V IC E S

O F F IC E

PER SO N N EL

M AINTENANCE

P A R A P R O F E S S IO N A L S

STAFF

AND
FOOD S E R V IC E

ST U D E N T S

P R IS O N

SY ST E M :

ED U C A T IO N I S

SECONDARY

P R IS O N A D M IN IS T R A T IO N

IN S P E C TORS

TREATMENT
D IR E C T O R

C H IE F E N G IN E E R

TREATMENT
FOREMEN

C U ST ODY

S U P E R V IS O R S
(I N C L U D I N G

S U P E R I V SORS

E D U C A T IO N )

TREATMENT
M AINTENANCE

CUSTODY

PER SO N N EL
(I N C L U D I N G

PER SO N N EL

PER SO N N EL

T E A C H E R S)

ST U D E N T S

R E S ID E N T S

115

WORKERS

APPENDIX B

QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX B

QUESTIONNAIRE
PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONNAIRE AS COMPLETELY AS
POSSIBLE:
In what i n s t i t u t i o n do you teach?___________________________________
What i s t h e s e c u r i t y l e v e l o f y o u r i n s t i t u t i o n ?
Close c u s to d y , _____Medium,

Maximum,

Minimum.

How many y e a r s have you t a u g h t in c o r r e c t i o n s ?

In p u b l i c

school?_______
What s u b j e c t a r e a do you t each (choose one o n ly ) ?
English,

Reading,

Science,

Other .
What i s y o u r sex?

Male,

P le a s e c o n t i n u e on n e x t page.

116

Female.

Mathematics,

L i f e r o l e com pe ten ci es ,

117

Each o f t h e f o llo w in g numbered s t a t e m e n t s i s followed by a s e r i e s o f
l e t t e r e d s t a t e m e n t s ; i n d i c a t e th e de gree o f ag reem ent/ dis agreem ent you
f e e l toward the l e t t e r e d s t a t e m e n t . P l e a s e read th e complete s t a t e m e n t
and th en respond to th e l e t t e r e d s t a t e m e n t in i t s e n t i r e t y . PLACE A
NUMBER IN EACH BLANK PROVIDED. Use t h e f o llo w i n g s c a l e as a guide:
5 ___________ 4________________ 3
strongly
agree
no o p inion
ag r ee
1.

2.

3.

disagree

2_________ 1
strongly
disagree

Some t e a c h e r s f e e l t h e b e n e f i t s and rewards o f f e r e d by te a c h i n g in
a p r i s o n school o f f s e t t h e drawbacks a s s o c i a t e d w i th th e p o s i t i o n ;
o t h e r s f e e l , to t h e c o n t r a r y , t h a t f r u s t r a t i o n s a r e not o f f s e t by
t h e b e n e f i t s and rewards. How do you f e e l ?
a.

I am s a t i s f i e d with my c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n .

b.

I am a c t i v e l y see king employment o u t s i d e th e Department o f
Corrections.

c.

I m a in t a i n my c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n only because t h e r e a r e no
o t h e r p o s i t i o n s a v a i l a b l e t o me, i n my f i e l d .

Some o f th e
Corrections
position, a
t r a c t i v e to

p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s a s s o c i a t e d with te a c h i n g f o r th e
Department, such a s : a measure o f s e c u r i t y i n th e
l i v a b l e income and c i v i l s e r v i c e s t a t u s , make i t a t ­
many t e a c h e r s . How do you f e e l ?

a.

P r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s a r e im p o rtan t t o my f a m ily and me.

b.

While t h e s e p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s a r e n i c e , t h e y do not
a f f e c t my s t a y i n g in my c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n .

c.

I f p r a c t i c a l b e n e f i t s were i m p o rta n t t o me, I would have
entered another profession.

Te achers in a K - 12 system have t h e b e n e f i t s o f working wit h
young people and being involved i n t h e i r l o c a l communities;
however, th ey must contend w i th i r a t e p a r e n t s and d i s r u p t i v e
s t u d e n t s . N e i t h e r t h e b e n e f i t s nor t h e d i f f i c u l t m a t t e r s men­
t i o n e d a r e r e l e v a n t t o p r i s o n s c h o o l s . With t h i s i n mind p l e a s e
respond t o th e f o llo w in g s t a t e m e n t s .
a.

I p r e f e r t e a c h i n g a d u l t s i n a p r i s o n school t o t e a c h i n g
youth i n a K - 12 s e t t i n g .

b.

Teaching i s t e a c h i n g , t h e age and circ um st ance o f t h e
stu d e n t are not important.

118

4.

P u b li c school t e a c h e r s work a s h o r t day ( appr oxim ately s i x hours)
b u t a r e ex pe cted to t a k e p a r t o f t h e i r work home w ith them a t th e
end o f t h e i r day (gra ding papers and p r e p a r i n g l e s s o n s ) . P ris on
t e a c h e r s , on the o t h e r hand, work an e i g h t hour day b u t lea ve
t h e i r work a t t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n when they go home a f t e r a d a y ' s
work. How do you f e e l about th e s e two models:
a.

5.

6.

7.

I p r e f e r working an e i g h t hour day and le a v in g my work on
the jo b t o working a s h o r t e r day and ta k in g p a r t o f my work
home with me.

Because o f th e v o l a t i l e n a t u r e o f t h e s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g p r is o n
s c h o o l s , t h e r e i s an element o f danger invo lv ed in t h e jo b o f
p r i s o n school t e a c h e r ; t h e r e f o r e , some t e a c h e r s f e e l t h a t women
sh ould be p e r m it t e d to te a c h only in i n s t i t u t i o n s des ign ed to
house female p r i s o n e r s . Others f e e l t h i s a t t i t u d e i s o v e r p r o t e c t i v e ; women should be encouraged t o t e a c h in a l l penal i n s t i t u t i o n s .
How do you f e e l ?
a.

Women should

teach only in female i n s t i t u t i o n s .

b.

Women shou ld teach in p r i s o n s with a s e c u r i t y l e v e l
h i g h e r than minimum.

c.

Women should tea ch i n p r i s o n s w ith a s e c u r i t y l e v e l no
h ig h e r than medium.

d.

Women should

no

te a c h in a l l Michigan p r i s o n s .

Because o f th e element o f danger in v o l v e d i n p r is o n t e a c h i n g , some
t e a c h e r s f e e l t h a t i t ta k e s a s p e c i a l ty p e i n d i v i d u a l t o te ac h i n
p r i s o n : o t h e r s f e e l t h a t any t e a c h e r c e r t i f i e d to t each in p u b l i c
school can t e a c h in p r i s o n . How do you f e e l ?
a.

I f e e l only e xperienced t e a c h e r s should be p e r m i t t e d to
teach i n p r i s o n schools and then only a f t e r th ey have r e ­
ce ived s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g on how t o handle t h e j o b .

b.

I f e e l on ly e x p er ien ced t e a c h e r s should t e a c h i n p r i s o n
s c h o o l s , b u t t h a t no s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g i s n e c e s s a r y .

c.

I f e e l t h a t any t e a c h e r c e r t i f i e d t o te a c h i n Michigan
s chools can t e a c h i n p r is o n s c h o o ls w it h no t r a i n i n g nor
e x p e r ie n c e beyond c o l l e g e .

People tend t o a s s o c i a t e more p r e s t i g e t o one p o s i t i o n than to
a n o t h e r . In th e fo llowin g s ta te m e n ts c o n s i d e r only t h e p o s i t i o n
not p a r tic u la r p erso n alities.
a.

P arole o f f i c e r i s more p r e s t i g i o u s than p u b l i c school
te a c h e r .

119

8.

9.

10.

b.

C h ie f o f p o l i c e i s more p r e s t i g i o u s than s u p e r i n t e n d e n t
o f s c h o o ls .

c.

P r is o n warden i s more p r e s t i g i o u s th an s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f
schools.

d.

P r is o n school p r i n c i p a l i s more p r e s t i g i o u s th an p u b li c
school p r i n c i p a l .

Teachers i n p r is o n schools have v a r i o u s g o a ls which they a r e
s t r i v i n g t o a c h i e v e . The obtainment o f t h e s e goals can o f t e n lead
t o a f e e l i n g o f s u c c e s s . What i s y o u r r e a c t i o n t o t h e f oll ow ing
s ta t e m e n t s ?
a.

Since a c t u a l l e a r n i n g i s th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f th e s t u d e n t ,
not t h e t e a c h e r , I f e e l s u c c e s s f u l when I have provided an
environment in which l e a r n i n g can t a k e p l a c e .

b.

Since a t e a c h e r i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t e a c h i n g h i s s u b j e c t , I
f e e l s u c c e s s f u l when a s t u d e n t l e a r n s what I am t r y i n g to
teach w i t h i n my su bj'ec t a r e a .

c.

Since th e u l t i m a t e s ucc es s o f a p r i s o n t e a c h e r i s t o have a
s t u d e n t l eave h i s classroom and become a p r o d u c t iv e member
o f s o c i e t y , I f e e l s u c c e s s f u l only when my te a c h in g le a d s
t o a p o s i t i v e change in s t u d e n t b e h a v io r .

d.

I f e e l s u c c e s s f u l when I have p r e p a re d and p r e s e n t e d an
excellent class.

e.

I f e e l s u c c e s s f u l when I help t o b r i n g
in prison education.

about needed change

D i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f the t e a c h i n g p r o f e s s i o n appeal t o d i f f e r e n t
t e a c h e r s ; which o f t h e f o ll o w in g a c t i v i t i e s ap peals t o you as a
teacher.
a.

I enjoy re a d i n g in my s u b j e c t a r e a and p r e p a r i n g f o r and
presenting in stru c tio n .

b.

I enjoy s e r v i n g on committees which e f f e c t

c.

I enjoy working w it h s t u d e n t s on an i n d i v i d u a l b a s i s .

d.

I enjoy managing my classro om .

prison education.

The method o f i n s t r u c t i o n p r e f e r r e d by t e a c h e r s v a r i e s among t h e
t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n s c h o o ls . What method do you p r e f e r ?
a.

I p r e f e r using t h e l e c t u r e a n d / o r t h e group d i s c u s s i o n
method.

b.

I prefer individualized in stru ctio n .

120

11.

12.

13.

What a s t u d e n t should l e a r n in school i s th e s u b j e c t o f c o n t r o ­
v er sy among t e a c h e r s involved in p r i s o n e d u c a t i o n . What should
a s t u d e n t l e a r n i n y ou r classroom?
a.

Heshould
teach,

l e a r n t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r which I am paid t o

b.

He should

learn basic respect fo r a u th o rity .

c.

Heshould

learn self-aw areness.

Good t e a c h e r s in p r i s o n s c h o o ls have d i v e r s e means by which they
judg e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e i r t e a c h i n g ; w h il e some o f t h e
f o ll o w in g methods may n o t be a v a i l a b l e t o you in y o u r i n s t i t u t i o n ,
which would you use i f i t were a v a i l a b l e ?
a.

I would use th e r e a c t i o n o f o t h e r t e a c h e r s f a m i l i a r with
my te a c h i n g as a gauge.

b.

I would use th e r e a c t i o n o f my s t u d e n t s as a gauge.

c.

I would use a p r e - t e s t / p o s t - t e s t as a gauge.

d.

I would use th e asse ssm ent o f a competent a d m i n i s t r a t o r
as a gauge.

e.

I would use a followup o f s t u d e n t s who have l e f t t h e
t u t i o n as a gauge.

Some t e a c h e r s f e e l the y would l o s e impact upon s t u d e n t s i f they
were t o l e a v e th e classroom and a c c e p t an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n
w i t h i n t h e Department o f C o r r e c t i o n s ; o t h e r s f e e l t h i s would
broaden t h e i r i n f l u e n c e over t h e system th u s i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r
impact. With t h i s in mind p l e a s e respond to t h e f o ll o w i n g :
a.

14.

I f an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n w it h th e Department o f Cor­
r e c t i o n s were o f f e r e d t o me, I would a c c e p t i t .

While some t e a c h e r s f e e l t h a t t e a c h e r s who a r e " e x c e l l e n t " a r e
r e c o g n iz e d as such by t h e i r p e e r s ; o t h e r s f e e l t h i s r e c o g n i t i o n
i s i m p o s s i b l e . How do you f e e l ?
a.

15.

in sti­

I f e e l " e x c e l l e n c e " among t e a c h e r s i s r e c o g n i z e d by t h e
teaching s t a f f .

Some t e a c h e r s f e e l c e r t a i n a s p e c t s o f t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n th e
p r i s o n a r e l e s s than d e s i r a b l e t o people with p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a t u s .
P r o f e s s i o n a l employees should not be r e q u i r e d t o punch a time
c l o c k , nor shou ld they be s u b j e c t to t e l e p h o n e m o n itori ng by a
te l e p h o n e o p e r a t o r . Others f e e l t h a t such inco nveniences a r e
p a r t o f t h e j o b a s s o c i a t e d w it h working in a penal i n s t i t u t i o n
and t h a t n e i t h e r p o s i t i o n nor p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a t u s i s r e l e v a n t in
t h i s environment. How do you f e e l ?

121

a.

16.

17.

Given your answers t o t h e prev ious q u e s t i o n s , p l e a s e c o n s i d e r th e
a r e a s wherein l i e y o u r s t r o n g e s t f e e l i n g s . While a l l th e f o ll o w ­
ing may be a p p l i c a b l e , c o n s i d e r each in comparison with th e o t h e r s .
a.

I f e e l s u c c e s s f u l when I have reached

b.

I would l i k e to o b t a i n a promotion t o an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
position.

c.

I would l i k e t o be t r e a t e d as a p r o f e s s i o n a l in t h i s i n ­
stitu tio n ,

d.

I would l i k e t o e f f e c t im port ant changes i n t h e p r i s o n edu­
c a t i o n a l system.

e.

I en joy p r e p a r i n g and p r e s e n t i n g i n s t r u c t i o n .

f.

I f e e l s t u d e n t s need t o l e a r n r e s p e c t

19.

students.

for authority.

Given y o u r answers t o t h e pr ev io u s nine q u e s t i o n s , w i t h i n y o u r
c u r r e n t i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g can you a c h ie v e su c c e ss o r o b t a i n
a f e e l i n g o f s u ccess ?
a.

18.

I f e e l t h a t t e a c h e r s , as p r o f e s s i o n a l s , a r e e n t i t l e d to
c e r t a i n p r i v i l e g e s g e n e r a l l y a s s o c i a t e d with th e p r o f e s s i o n ,
even in a p r i s o n environment.

I can o p e r a t e w i t h i n t h e c u r r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l s e t t i n g in my
i n s t i t u t i o n and o b t a i n a f e e l i n g o f su c c e ss in my j o b .

With th e answer to t h e p r e v io u s
t o t h e f o llo w in g :

q u e s t i o n i n mind, p l e a s e respond

a.

I can o b t a i n a f e e l i n g o f success i n my c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n .

b.

I ca nn ot now o b t a i n a f e e l i n g o f su c c e ss in my c u r r e n t
p o s i t i o n ; however, I could o b t a i n t h i s f e e l i n g i f the
c u r ri c u lu m in t h e system were changed.

c.

The f a c t o r s which h i n d e r tny o b t a i n i n g a f e e l i n g o f s u c c e s s
a r e beyond t h e c o n t r o l o f t h e p r i s o n e d u c a t i o n a l e s t a b l i s h ­
ment.

In e v a l u a t i n g y o u r c a r e e r s i n c e you have o b t a i n e d y o u r c u r r e n t
p o s i t i o n , you have probably given a measure o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o
what you have gaine d from y o u r p o s i t i o n as well as th e f r u s t r a ­
t i o n s you have f e l t . With t h i s in mind, p l e a s e respond t o th e
f o ll o w in g :
a.

Given th e o p p o r t u n i t y t o begin a g a i n , I would a c c e p t a
p o s i t i o n as a t e a c h e r w i t h i n th e Michigan Department o f
Corrections.

APPENDIX C

CHI SQUARE TABLES

122

p
Appendix C:1—Table o f X c o n s id e re d by sex o f th e t e a c h e r ; p ro ductio n
factor

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o g n itiv e

11.99873

8

.1513

A f f e c t i ve

10.34338

11

.4998

A u t h o r it y

8.26576

10

.6029

13.46547

4

.1988

R ec ognition

9.65756

11

.5614

Exhibition

6.36281

15

.9730

12

.8279

Reform

Advancement

7.43112

2
Appendix C:2- -X t a b l e of p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s c o n s id e re d by sex o f
the teacher

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

E1 i t e

13.97522

4

.0074

Practical

10.00958

11

.5295

Macho

4.18924

4

.3810

D ef a u lt

3.74309

4

.4419

Prestige

13.02866

12

.3670

123

2

Appendix C:3— X t a b le o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r Mathematics teachers

Raw Score
Elite

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

3.85287

4

.4263

15.83309

11

.1474

.57567

4

.9657

Def au lt

7.08503

4

.1315

Prestige

14.06280

12

.2967

Practical
Macho

2
Appendix C:4—X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r En glish t e a c h e r s

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

7.83986

4

.0976

16.70446

11

.1169

Macho

1.24054

4

.8714

D efault

2.27457

4

.6854

Prestige

13.34867

12

.3442

E lite
Practical

124

Appendix C:5— X

2

t a b le o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n fa c t o r s f o r Reading teachers

Raw Score
Elite

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

2.62039

4

.6232

18.34457

11

.0739

Macho

4.82514

4

.3057

D ef a u lt

4.49975

4

.3426

Prestige

15.09681

12

.2362

Practical

2
Appendix C:6—X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r L.R.C. t e a c h e r s

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

1.17338

4

.8825

12.18322

11

.3500

Macho

4.17380

4

.3830

Default

1.89199

4

.7556

34.35190

12

.3440

E lite
Practical

Prestige

125

2

Appendix C :7— X

t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r o th e r teachers

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

9.36378

4

.0526

20.81814

11

.0353

Macho

2.81189

4

.5898

Default

3.93189

4

.4153

Prestige

18.26010

12

.1083

E lite
Practical

Appendix C:8—X2 t a b l e o f p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s f o r Mathematics t e a c h e r s
*

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o g n itiv e

8.12736

8

.4211

A f f e c t i ve

18.01475

11

.0812

Authori ty

6.12941

10

.8043

Reform

11.77372

10

.3005

Rec ognition

13.46466

11

.2640

Exhibition

14.00260

15

.5253

Advancement

12.30854

12

.4212

126

2

Appendix C :9 — X

t a b l e o f pro du ctio n fa c t o r s f o r English t o c h e r s

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o g n itiv e

20.81755

8

.0076

Affective

12.51134

11

.3265

Authority

13.88889

10

.1781

Reform

11.97562

10

.2867

9.45441

11

.5800

15.21164

15

.4363

8.72501

12

.7262

Recogn ition
Exhibition
Advancement

Appendix C:10—

t a b l e o f p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s f o r Reading t e a c h e r s

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C ognitive

19.58104

8

.0120

A ffective

13.66591

11

.2520

Authority

10.02731

10

.4381

Reform

9.54921

10

.4809

Rec og nition

8.88303

11

.6327

Exhibition

15.10668

15

.4438

Advancement

8.37260

12

.7554

127

2

Appendix C : l l — X

t a b l e o f p roduction f a c to r s f o r L .R .C . teachers

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o g n itiv e

3.32207

8

.9126

Affective

12.38095

11

.3357

Authori ty

14.54512

10

.1495

Reform

6.77551

10

.7465

R ec ognition

7.97196

11

.7158

Exhibition

7.71338

15

.9348

Advancement

10.00272

12

.6157

Appendix C:12— X^ t a b l e o f p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s f o r o t h e r t e a c h e r s

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o gnitive

17.63850

8

.0241

Af f e c t i v e

13.52381

11

.2605

Authority

7.19819

10

.7066

Reform

12.91429

10

.2285

Re cog nition

12.82705

11

.3048

Exhibition

12.08889

15

.6723

Advancement

9.25566

12

.6810

128
£
Appendix C:13- -X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s with
over ele v e n y e a r s e x p e r ie n c e

Raw Score
Elite

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

7.11278

4

.1300

11.76385

11

.3817

Macho

6.20454

4

.1844

D e f a u lt

2.41223

4

.6604

Prestige

16.80606

12

.1570

Practical

2
Appendix C:14- -X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s with
between f i v e and el e v e n y e a r s e x p e r i e n c e

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

6.99021

4

.1364

13.63979

11

.2536

.55472

4

.9680

Default

6.99021

4

.8522

Prestige

8.40386

12

.7528

El i t e
P ractical
Macho

129

2
Appendix C :15— X t a b le o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r teachers w ith
• under f i v e years experien ce

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

E lite

'9.61480

4

.0474

Practical

17.10906

11

.1047

Macho

5.19817

4

.2676

D e f a u lt

4.77589

4

.3111

Prestige

14.27909

12

.2832

2
Appendix C :16—X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s with no
p u b l i c school e x p e r i e n c e

Raw Score
E lite

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

7.514

4

.1111

17.26256

11

.1003

7.07938

4

.1318

Default

11.46930

4

.0218

Prestige

8.73584

12

.7253

Practical
Macho

130

2
Appendix C:1 7 — X t a b l e o f production fa c t o r s f o r teachers w ith over
ele ven y e a rs exp erienc e

Raw Score
C og nitiv e
A f f e c t i ve
Authority
Reform
Rec ognition
Exhibition
Advancement

9.35761
13.89454
12.17854
15.58567
11.63426
8.91288
12.51006

Degrees
of
Freedom

8
11
10
10
n
15
12

Significance

.3130
.2389
.2733
.1121
.3918
.8820
.4056

2
Appendix C:18- -X t a b l e o f p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s with between
f i v e and elev en y e a r s e x p e r i e n c e

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C og nitive

6.72305

8

.5668

Affective

8.13368

11

.7013

A u t h o r it y

16.65564

10

.0823

Reform

10.98511

10

.3587

Rec og nition

14.41731

11

.2108

Exhibition

14.91598

15

.4575

Advancement

11.02546

12

.5267

131

?
Appendix C:1 9 — X t a b le o f p ro d u ctio n f a c t o r s f o r teachers w ith under
f i v e y e a rs ex p erien c e

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

Cognitive

14.62015

B

.0670

A f f e c t i ve

10.40376

11

.4954

Authori ty

14.00546

10

.1727

9.11710

10

.5210

Recognition

13.49451

11

.2622

Exhibition

13.45157

15

.5675

Advancement

11.97307

12

.4478

Reform

2
Appendix C:20—X t a b l e o f p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s w it h no
p u b l i c school e x p e r ie n c e

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o g n itiv e

10.83813

8

.2110

A ffective

10.49262

11

.4867

A u t h o r it y

6.35310

10

.7848

Reform

8.63482

10

.5671

Rec ognition

8.07724

11

.7064

Exhibition

11.28937

15

.7318

Advancement

13.08024

12

.3632

132
2
Appendix C:21 — X t a b le o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r considered by s e c u r it y
o f th e i n s t i t u t i o n .

Raw Score
E lite

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

8.68987

12

.7292

Practical

26.71261

33

.7721

Macho

14.74532

12

.2557

2.90505

12

.6243

38.36871

36

.3626

Default
Prestige

Appendix C:22— X2 t a b l e o f p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by s e c u r i t y
of the i n s t i t u t i o n

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

Cogni t i ve

22.25705

24

.5639

A f f e c t i ve

26.63606

33

.7754

A u t h o r it y

35.24781

30

.2337

Reform

34.03802

30

.2793

Re cog nition

22.30125

33

.9207

Exhibition

63.51900

45

.0357

Advancement

26.54714

36

.8748

133
2

Appendix C :2 3 - - X t a b le o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n fa c t o r s f o r teachers o f female
students

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

2.30603

4

.6797

11.16947

11

.4292

Macho

4.71783

4

.3175

Default

3.05778

4

,5482

Prestige

18.89797

12

.0910

Elite
Practical

2
Appendix C:24- -X t a b l e o f p r o d u c tio n f a c t o r s f o r t e a c h e r s o f female
students

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o g n iti v e

7.38059

8

.4962

Affective

5.34731

11

.9132

Authority

12.10128

10

.2783

Reform

8.75556

10

.5554

Recogn ition

8.82751

11

.6378

18.84316

15

.2209

7.19622

12

.8444

Exhibition
Advancement

134
2

Appendix C:25— X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s considered by age o f
the s tu d en t

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

E lite

2.70961

4

.6075

P r a c t i cal

5.87744

11

.8814

Macho

5.89610

4

.2070

D e f a u lt

6.51723

4

.1637

Prestige

9.45894

12

.6633

2
Appendix C:26- -X t a b l e o f p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by age o f
th e s t u d e n t

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o gnitive

4.26608

8

.8324

A f f e c t i ve

9.35743

11

.5889

Authority

7.14938

10

.7113

Reform

4.29532

10

.9330

Re c ognit io n

15.23529

11

.1720

Exhibition

12.17681

15

.6656

Advancement

8.42270

12

.7513

135
2
Appendix C:27— X t a b l e o f p ro du ctio n considered by f e e l i n g successful

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C ognitive

7.48370

8

.4855

A f f e c t i ve

15.32669

11

.1680

A u t h o r ity

11.47332

10

.3218

Reform

13.66218

10

.1890

Recognition

11.49368

11

.4029

Exhibition

21.39457

15

.1247

Advancement

34.79004

12

.0005

2
Appendix C:28- -X t a b l e o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n f a c t o r s c o n s id e r e d by t e a c h e r
satisfactio n

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

7.32474

4

.0982

Practical

21.86701

11

.0254

Macho

11.47317

4

.0217

Default

24.13848

4

.0001

Prestige

13.41465

12

.3396

E lite

136

2

Appendix C:29--X t a b l e o f p r o d u c t io n f a c t o r s c o n s id e re d by t e a c h e r
satisfactio n

Raw Score

Degrees
of
Freedom

Significance

C o gnitive

11.17179

8

.1922

A f f e c t i ve

15.09951

11

.1780

Authority

17.20377

10

.0700

Reform

10.43970

10

.4028

Recogn ition

7.82941

11

.7285

Exhibition

17.24106

15

.3047

Advancement

23.86314

12

.0212

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bess, Janies L. "Motivation t o Teach."
May/June 1977, pp. 243-54.

J o u rn a l o f Higher E d u c a tio n ,

Casey, William F. I I I .
"Would Bear Bryant Teach in P u b li c Schools:
The Need f o r Teacher I n c e n t i v e s . " Phi D el ta Kappa, March 1961,
pp. 500-01.
Chang, Kae H. M o ti v ati o n al T he ori es and P r a c t i c e s .
Grid I n c . , 1977.
Cuddy, Edward.
53-55.

"Colleqe f o r C o n v i c t s . "

Columbus, Ohio:

P r o g r e s s i v e , Feb. 1977, pp.

Dun nette, M. D . , Campbell, J . P. and Habel, M. D. " F a c t o r s C o n t r i b u t ­
ing t o Job S a t i s f a c t i o n and Job D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i n Six Occupa­
t i o n a l Groups." O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and Human Performance,
Vol. 2 , 1970, pp. 143-74.
Dyer, L. and P a r k e r , D. F. " C l a s s i f y i n g Outcomes o f Work M o tivatio n
Research: An Examination o f I n t r i n s i c - E x t r i n s i c Dichotomy."
J o u rn al o f Applied Psy chology, Vol. 60, August 1975, pp. 455-58.
He rz be rg , F r e d e r i c k . Work and t h e Nature o f Man.
P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1966.

New York:

World

K a l l e b e r g , Arne E. "Work Values and Job Rewards: A Theory o f Job
S a t i s f a c t i o n . " American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, February 1977,
pp. 124-43.
Karachiew icz, J u d i t h M. "The E f f e c t s o f Reward Contingency and P e r ­
formance Feedback on I n t r i n s i c M o t i v a t i o n . " J o u rn a l o f P er­
s o n a l i t y and S o c ia l Psy chology , August 1979, pp. 1352-63.
Katz, D a n ie l. " Motivational Basis o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l B eha vio r."
O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavi o r Readings and C as es . New York: McMillan
P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1964.
Kohl, Herb.

“Why Teach?"

T e a c h e r , November 1976, pp. 73-79.

Kopelman, Richard E. "A Causal C o r r e l a t i o n a l T e s t o f t h e P o r t e r and
Lawler Framework." Human R e l a t i o n s , November 7, 1979, pp.
545-56.
L o r t i e , Dan C. S c h o o l t e a c h e r : A S o c i o l o g i c a l S tu d y .
U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago P r e s s , 1975.

137

Chicago:

138

March, James and Simon, H e r b e r t .
and Sons Inc.

O rganization.

New York:

John Wiley

M art inso n, Ro be rt. "What Works? Qu es tio ns and Answers About P r is o n
Reform." R e h a b i l i t a t i o n , Recidivism and R esea rch . The National
Council on Crime' and Delinquency, March 1976.
Masling, Joseph and S t e r n , George. The Pedagogical S i g n i f i c a n c e o f
Unconscious F a c t o r s in Car ee r M oti vation f o r TeachersT Com­
p a r a t i v e Research P r o j e c t , 1966.
M i l l e r , Harry G. and Swick, Kevin J . "Community I n c e n t i v e s f o r Teacher
E x c e l l e n c e . " E d u c a t i o n , Spring 1976.
Moser, C. A. and K alton, G. Survey Methods in Social I n v e s t i g a t i o n ,
2nd E d i t i o n . New York: Basic Books I n c . , 1972.
An Overview o f Fin dings and Recommendations o f Major Research S tu d i e s
and National Commissions Concerning Education o f Offenders" The
C o r r e c t i o n a l Education P r o j e c t , Education Commission o f t h e S t a t e s ,
1976.
P o r t e r , Layman and Lawler, Edward I I I . Managerial A t t i t u d e s and P e r ­
formance. New York: Richard D. Irwin I n c . , 1968.
S a l e h , S. D. and G r y g i e r , T. G. "Psychodynamics o f I n t r i n s i c and
E x t r i n s i c Job O r i e n t a t i o n . " Jou rn al o f Applied Psycho logy,
December 1969, pp. 446-49.
Selberman, E i l e e n .
pp. 305-07.

" P r is o n P h ilo so p h y ."

America, Apr il 14, 1977,

Slocum, John W. J r . "M o ti vat io n in Managerial Leve ls: R e l a t i o n s h i p
o f Need S a t i s f a c t i o n t o Job Per form an ce .'1 J o u rn al o f Applied
P sy chology, August 1971, pp. 312-16.
Soliman, H. M. " M otivato r - Hygiene Theory o f Job A t t i t u d e s . "
o f Applied P sy chology, Vol. 54, 1970, pp. 452-61.
Vroom, V. H.
1964.

Work and M o ti v a t i o n .

New York:

Wooden, John R. "They Ask Me Why I Teach."
1981, p. 544.

J our na l

John Wiley and Sons,
Phi Delta Kappan,March

W r ight, Benjamine D. "Our Reason f o r Teach in g."
December 1978, pp. 225-30.

NASSP B u l l e t i n ,