Administrators face a catch-22 when the intensive evaluation systems, promoted as a lever for teacher improvement, are also a wrecking ball against teacher motivation and relationships with administrators. As a doctoral student, I sought a way through this problem by plumbing the experiences of veteran teachers to find out what impact intensive evaluation had on their intrinsic motivation and which administrator behaviors can lead to positive relationships with teachers, despite evaluation mandates.
Introjected vs. Intrinsic Motivation
In Pelletier and Sharp's analysis (2009), teacher-perceived pressures from administrators resulted in an introjected motivation for teaching rather than an intrinsic motivation. Teachers exhibiting introjected behaviors are motivated to perform to avoid guilt or anxiety, or to attain ego enhancement (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Teacher perception of administrator behavior is key in determining teacher motivation. So which administrator behaviors are more likely to trigger introjected or intrinsic motivation? Intrinsically motivated teachers tend to perceive their administrators as "autonomy-supportive."
The teachers I interviewed described "autonomy-supportive" administrators' approach to supervision and evaluation as including
- Conversations regarding teaching practices
- Informal processes that facilitate a discussion of teaching practices that generate ideas
- Feedback that allows for personal reflection and continuous feedback
- A designated administrator for evaluation
- Encouragement when a job is done well
- An observant administrator in the process of teaching or understands the teaching process
- Clear goals and plans for improvement
- A positive and open relationship between the teacher and the administrator
When teachers perceived administrators to be autonomy-supportive, they reported the following:
- Teachers believed they are good at teaching.
- Teachers believed they are skilled as teachers.
- When compared to others, teachers continued to believe they were good at teaching.
- Over time, teachers continued to believe they were competent.
Teachers who perceived their administrators to be autonomy-supportive felt they had more options and less pressure, and this had positive effects on their intrinsic motivation (Scudella, 2015). These findings are matched in the research of Baard, Deci, and Ryan (2004). However, when teachers perceived the administrators to be more controlling and less autonomy-supportive, they felt more pressure, perceived less choice, and became less confident in their teaching skills.
Transformational vs. Transactional
Administrators' behavior does affect their relationships with teachers, and these relationships may be as crucial to teacher improvement as professional development. The teachers who perceived their administrators to demonstrate more autonomy-supportive behaviors, like providing choices, demonstrating belief in the competence of their teachers, and providing encouragement through feedback, were more likely to characterize their relationships with their administrators as "transformational" (Scudella, 2015).
The teachers I interviewed said autonomy-supportive administrators can create transformational relationships characterized by trust, care, listening, openness, and demonstrated confidence in teachers. On the flip side, controlling administrators are more likely to have only a transactional relationship with their teachers. Transactional relationships are characterized by perceptions of limited choice, lack of understanding and caring, distrust, poor handling of emotions, and top-down tasks and mandates.
Transformational Behaviors Matter
Administrative behaviors during supervision and evaluation such as providing choice, believing in competence and encouraging teachers through feedback will not only encourage teacher intrinsic motivation and build individual capacity, but also sustain positive school climates. This research also has implications for how to prepare future administrators. Professional development for administrators regarding supervision and evaluation is often task-oriented, making the process more efficient. My research, based on the teachers' perspectives of their intrinsic motivation, administrative behavior, and relationships, indicates a specific need to develop administrative skills rather than evaluation processes.
As a doctoral student of leadership and an administrator of a middle school, my research has influenced my administrative behavior, specifically when it comes to teacher evaluations. My continued professional development now focuses on my leadership and relationships with teachers, rather than teacher supervision and evaluation processes.I have focused on delivering meaningful feedback to teachers that intends to not only build teacher capacity, but also enhance teacher intrinsic motivation. The book Thanks for the Feedback: The Science and Art of Receiving Feedback Well (Stone & Heen, 2014) has helped me deliver feedback that points to teacher instruction (behavior) rather than questions teacher intent. This type of feedback has fostered my relationships with teachers by reinforcing teachers' sense of my trust in their instruction, skills, and judgment in the classroom. Additionally, The Multiplier Effect (Wiseman, Allen, & Foster, 2013) has affirmed my research findings that leadership and relationships with teachers is far more critical in building teacher capacity than any supervision and evaluation process when working to increase teacher intrinsic motivation.