Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

A typological approach to investigate the teaching career decision: Motivations

and beliefs about teaching of prospective teacher candidates
Margareta Maria Thomson a, *, Jeannine E. Turner b,1, John L. Nietfeld c, 2
a
Elementary Education Department, North Carolina State University, 317G Poe Hall, Raleigh, NC 27695-7801, United States
b
Educational Psychology and Learning Systems, Florida State University, 3204L Stone Building, 1114 W. Call Street, Tallahassee, FL 32306, United States
c
Curriculum, Instruction, & Counselor Education, North Carolina State University, 602D Poe Hall, Campus Box 7801, Raleigh, NC 27695, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study utilized cluster analysis to identify typologies of prospective teachers enrolled in a teacher
Received 28 March 2011 education program in the U.S. based upon their self-report motivations for teaching. A three-cluster
Received in revised form solution generated three distinctive typologies of prospective teachers (N’s of 93, 70 and 52), and further
14 October 2011
differences among typologies were investigated with respect to participants’ beliefs about teaching.
Accepted 20 October 2011
Follow-up semi-structured interviews confirmed meaningful differences found between the clusters
with regard to unique combination of motivations and beliefs about teaching relevant to each typology.
Keywords:
Implications for teacher education and teacher development are further discussed in relationship with
Prospective teachers
Teacher education
study findings.
Beliefs Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Motivation
Typologies

1. Introduction and purpose
In recent years, several international studies have examined the
issue of teaching as a career choice as a result of the growing concern
for current teacher shortages worldwide (i.e., Darling-Hammond &
Sykes, 2003; Kyriacou, Hultgren, & Stephens, 1999; Nieto, 2005;
Richardson & Watt, 2005; Watt & Richardson, 2011). Like many
countries around the world, the U.S. educational system is confronted
with acute teacher attrition and a simultaneous need for higher
teaching quality. Particular attention has been given to teacher
recruitment, retention, and teacher education in the U.S., in order to
provide an adequate supply of competent individuals who are willing
to serve as teachers. Thus, the need to examine prospective teachers’
(PT) motivations, aspirations, and early career development have
increasingly been the focus of research amid the climate of escalating
teacher shortage internationally (Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005;
Guarino, Santibanez, & Daley, 2006; Kyriacou & Coulthard, 2000).
There remains an insufficient understanding of how the values,
beliefs and motivations of those entering teacher education
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 919 513 0917; fax: þ1 919 513 0919.
E-mail addresses: margareta_pop@ncsu.edu, pmm2121@gmail.com
(M.M. Thomson), turner@mail.coe.fsu.edu (J.E. Turner), john_nietfeld@ncsu.edu
(J.L. Nietfeld).
1
Tel.: þ1 850 644 2405.
2
Tel.: þ1 919 513 7444.
programs shape their aspirations for professional engagement and
the trajectory of their career development (Fieman-Nemser, 2001;
Watt & Richardson, 2008, 2011). The need of investigating teaching
motivations in relationship with beliefs about teaching is driven by
the lack of sophisticated research in this area and the scarcity of
studies that reflect both concepts (motivations and beliefs)
concurrently. Additionally, most of studies in the field have been
descriptive in nature, using mainly single-item measures, and
unsophisticated designs that have often led to inconsistent findings
across studies (Watt & Richardson, 2007).
Our study is a response to the need for a more sophisticated
methodological approach in identifying and classifying the
connections between prospective teacher’s motivations and beliefs.
The approach in the current study examined empirically identified
typologies of PTs using a methodologically sophisticated large-scale
design, developed motivational profiles for each typology,
compared motivations and perceptions of teaching for different
typologies, and established links between motivation for teaching
and teaching typologies. This approach has the potential to provide
valuable information to teacher education programs regarding PTs
candidates and also to K-12 schools in their mentoring of novice
teachers.
Only five large-scale typological studies exploring at some level
teachers’ motivations for teaching were identified in the literature
(Berger & D’Ascoli, 2011; Kieschke & Schaarschmidt, 2008;
Richardson & Watt, 2005; Watt & Richardson, 2008, 2011), all of

0742-051X/$ e see front matter Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.10.007
 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335
which were conducted with various samples from outside the U.S.
(i.e., Australian career switchers, Swiss vocational school candi-
dates). In our study, we examined motivations about teaching
interconnected with beliefs about teaching with a particular pop-
ulation, namely U.S. undergraduate students enrolled in a tradi-
tional teacher education program. No known studies have so far
investigated typologies of PTs undergraduate students in a tradi-
tional teaching program. Within this sample we identified primary
factors that influenced PTs to consider teaching (motivations) while
also examining their beliefs about the teaching career and beliefs
about schooling (teaching and learning in general).
2. Theoretical considerations
Given the severe teacher attrition worldwide and the need for
quality teaching, it becomes imperative to understand not only why
people leave the teaching profession, but what motivated them to
enter the profession and how their beliefs about teaching aligned
with motivations. The current literature in the field it is unclear on
why individuals choose teaching when so many leave the profes-
sion, how are their entry motives and beliefs about teaching con-
nected, and how these might influence their decisions to remain or
leave the profession. Understanding prospective teachers’ motiva-
tions for teaching in connection with their beliefs about the teaching
profession and schooling supports further our understanding of PTs’
future teaching practices and their attitudes toward teaching.
Research shows that PTs’ motivations for teaching and their beliefs
about teaching influence their future classroom practices, profes-
sional engagement and choice of instructional approach (Cochran-
Smith & Zeichner, 2005; Lauermann & Karabenick, 2011; Wilke &
Losh, 2008). Cochran-Smith and Zeichner (2005) wrote, “We
assume that beliefs and attitudes are the lenses through which
teachers enact and interpret their daily work, and also the filters
through which they use knowledge to construct practice” (p. 52).
Therefore, we consider that PTs’ motivations and beliefs about
teaching are interconnected, playing an important role in shaping
PTs’ future professional identities, their classroom practices,
commitment and attitudes to teaching. In line with the existing
research in the field, in the section to follow we examine research
related to this stance, along with the implications of this research for
the teaching profession.
2.1. Motivation for teaching and views about the profession
Motivation has been conceptualized in varied ways including
“inner forces, enduring traits, behavioral responses to stimuli, and
set of beliefs and affects” (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002, p. 5). Although,
there is much disagreement about the precise nature of motivation,
a general definition provided by Pintrich and Schunk (2002) states
that motivation is the process whereby a goal-directed activity is
initiated wherein “individuals have something in mind that they
are trying to attain or avoid” (p. 5).
A review of the literature on motivation for teaching conducted
through the early 1990s suggested that “altruistic, service-oriented
goals and other intrinsic motivations are the source of the primary
reasons entering teacher candidates report for why they chose
teaching as a career” (Brookhart & Freeman, 1992, p.46). One of the
earliest research in this area (Lortie, 1975) examined teachers’
(N ¼ 94) motivations to become teachers via interviews and found
five factors being crucial to one’s motivation for teaching. These
factors included the interpersonal, service, continuation, material
benefits and time compatibility reasons, illustrating in fact, a combi-
nation of intrinsic, altruistic and extrinsic reasons aligning with
results from more recent studies. More recent studies conducted in
the U.S. and abroad (Abangma, 1981; Pop & Turner, 2009; Kyriacou &
325
Coulthard, 2000; Manuel & Hughes, 2006; Papanastasiou &
Papanastasiou, 1998; Saban, 2003; Watt & Richardson, 2008) indi-
cate that the main reasons for choosing teaching as a career are in
general, altruistic, intrinsic, and extrinsic reasons. Kyriacou and
Coulthard (2000) describe these categories as follows:
1) altruistic reasons: deal with seeing teaching as a socially
worthwhile and important job, a desire to help children succeed
and a desire to help society improve; 2) intrinsic reasons: cover
aspects of the job activity itself, such as the activity of teaching
children, and an interest in using their subject matter knowl-
edge and expertise; and, 3) extrinsic reasons: cover aspects of
the job which are not inherent in the work itself, such as long
holidays and salary (p. 117).
Classical motivational literature (Deci & Ryan, 2000) defines
intrinsic motivation as “doing an activity for its inherent satisfac-
tion rather than for some separable consequences” (p.56). Intrinsic
motivation thus, is described as something desirable, often leading
to long-term engagement and sustained effort of individuals in
selected activities, as well as high-quality learning and creativity
(Deci & Ryan, 2000). Some theorists (e.g., Malone, 1981; Malone &
Lepper, 1987) have defined intrinsic motivation more simply in
terms of what people will do without external incentives. Intrin-
sically motivating activities are described widely as those in which
people will engage for no reward other than the interest and
enjoyment that accompanies them (Deci, 1971; Deci & Ryan, 2000).
In contrast, extrinsic motivation is defined as “doing an activity for
the attainment of a separable outcome “ (Deci & Ryan, 2000, p. 56).
Extrinsic motivation emphasizes the instrumental value of an
activity and differ thus from intrinsic motivation which refers to
doing an activity, simply for enjoyment and personal satisfaction.
However, the last two decades of research have shown that the
quality of experience and performance are very different when
individuals display extrinsic or intrinsic motivation for task
engagement. Generally, extrinsic motivations lead to short-range
activity involvement, while reducing long-range interest in
a topic or an activity (Malone & Lepper, 1987).
Conventional views of motivation (i.e., Deci, 1971; Weiner, 1985)
hold the assumption that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations
contrast, thus they are not just separate processes but incompat-
ible, if not antagonistic. Furthermore, altruistic reasons for teaching
are considered by some to be an extension of the intrinsic reasons
(e.g., Kasser & Ryan, 2001) or, by others a distinctive motivational
construct (e.g., Pop & Turner, 2009; Kyriacou et al., 1999; Saban,
2003). Other motivational approaches (i.e., Covington & Mueller,
2001) have suggested a one-dimensional model of motivation
where both intrinsic and extrinsic tendencies blend within the
same individual. Covington and Mueller (2001) describe motivation
as a single continuum combining a mixture of reasons, where one
construct is dominant (i.e., an individual can display high intrinsic
orientation at one end, and low extrinsic motivation orientation at
another). One important consideration when examining teaching
as a career choice is the extent to which motives are primarily
intrinsic, or extrinsic. The primary reasons for teaching are viewed
therein as the extent to which they are “intrinsically or extrinsically
motivated behaviors” (Covington & Mueller, 2001, p. 161).
International studies have shown that one’s motivation for
teaching can vary across different sociocultural contexts. For
instance, studies conducted with preservice and inservice teachers
in France, Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Slovakia,
Estonia, Cyprus and the U.K. found that the most frequently selected
reasons for teaching were the altruistic reasons and enjoyment in
working with children (i.e., Fokkens-Bruisma & Canrinus, 2011;
Kyriacou et al., 1999; Richardson & Watt, 2005, 2006). Addition-
ally, individual intellectual fulfillment and making a social
326 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335
contribution were also listed high among reasons to teach (Brunetti,
2001; Mau, Ellsworth & Hawley, 2008; Taimalu, Luik, Voltri and
Kalk, 2011). Other studies conducted in Brunei (Yong, 1995),
Zimbabwe (Chivore,1998), Cameroon (Abangma,1981), and Jamaica
(Bastick, 1999) have found that more extrinsic motivations such as
salary, job security, and career status are important for choosing the
teaching career. Therefore, it appears that the sociocultural contexts
(such as the socioeconomic status and cultural values) from
different countries could shape PTs’ motivations for teaching and
their teaching views.
2.2. Beliefs about the schooling (teaching and learning)
Beliefs “are propositions and networks of ideas that a PT holds to
be reasonable, whether those propositions are expressed overtly by
the PT or held implicitly and inferred from statements and actions”
(Torff & Sternberg, 2000, p. 148). As such, beliefs have much in
common with concepts such as “attitudes, values, judgments,
opinions, dispositions, implicit theories, perceptions, preconcep-
tions and perspectives” (Pajares, 1992, p. 308), and often are used
interchangeably with these terms.
Most studies have examined PTs’ perceptions of effective teaching,
beliefs about pedagogical and content knowledge, and epistemic
beliefs (i.e., Braten & Olaussen, 2005; Minor, Onwuegbuzie, Witcher,
& James, 2002; Schraw, Bendixen, & Dunkle, 2002; Shen & Hsieh,
1999). This research suggested that generally PTs described effec-
tive teachers as enthusiastic about teaching, competent, using
a student-centered approach in their teaching, implementing effec-
tive classroom management strategies and possessing great content
and pedagogical knowledge (Minor et al., 2002). Other studies have
examined the impact of teacher education courses and field experi-
ences on PTs’ beliefs about teaching; their findings suggested that
many PTs’ beliefs about schooling (teaching and learning) change
very little during their program of study (Roehrig et al., 2008; Pop,
2010; Feiman-Nemser, McDiarmid, Melnick, & Parker, 1989; File &
Gullo, 2002; Hancock & Gallard, 2004).
Additional studies suggest that PTs’ beliefs about effective
teaching are more in line with behavioral perspectives of instruc-
tion (e.g., implementing a system of reward and punishment for
effective classroom management) rather than cognitive perspec-
tives (e.g., teaching self-regulation strategies). Additionally, this
research has shown that PTs placed more value on affective
components in teaching (i.e., loving children, caring), than on
cognitive components, such as pedagogical and content knowledge
(Lauermann & Karabenick, 2011; Salisbury-Glennon & Stevens,
1999; Wilke & Losh, 2008). Similarly, another line of research has
reported that PTs perceive classroom teaching activity primarily
through a teacher-centered model, a transmissive approach
(teaching is telling), rather than a student-centered model with
a constructivist approach in teaching (Author et al., 2010; Berger &
D’Ascoli, 2011; Hancock & Gallard, 2004; Hollingsworth, 1989).
However, recent research suggests that PTs hold eclectic views
about teaching and learning and therefore it is difficult to classify
into a single pedagogical belief category their views (i.e., Wilke &
Losh, 2008).
Further research (Pop, 2010; Clark & Peterson, 1986; Saban,
2003; Woolfolk Hoy & Murphy, 2000) shows that students
entering teacher education programs have already had a personal
experience with the field (unlike students pursuing other academic
domains) and subsequently each PT holds a personal teaching
schema, or a personal value system about what teaching means
based upon their experiences. These already established schemas
with embedded personal experiences and value systems can act as
filters through which PTs understand and interpret their future
teaching roles and practices.
3. Research questions
The purpose of our study was to explore typologies of PTs based
on their motivations (reasons) for teaching in conjunction with
their beliefs about the teaching profession and beliefs about
schooling (teaching and learning). A mixed-methods approach
using survey and interviews was applied in a two-phase approach.
The research questions addressed were the following:
1. What specific types of motivations (i.e., factors) for teaching
were influential in PTs’ decisions to become teachers?
2. What typologies of PTs (i.e., clusters) emerged from the moti-
vations for teaching and how demographic characteristics
(i.e., gender, major/specialization, year of study, and commit-
ment to teaching) were relevant across typologies?
3. What specific beliefs (i.e., factors) about teaching do PTs hold
and how these beliefs differ across identified typologies?
4. How were different motivations and beliefs about teaching
described by each cluster?
4. Method
4.1. Participants and context
Participants (N ¼ 215) were undergraduate students who were
prospective teachers enrolled in Educational Psychology or Class-
room Assessment courses in the College of Education of a major U.S.
southeastern university. All participants were following a tradi-
tional teacher education program, which in the U.S. typically
includes a four-year university degree with a strong pedagogical
and content focus in an educational field (i.e., mathematics
education, science education, elementary education). The majority
of teachers in the U.S. are prepared via a traditional teacher
education program.
Participants included a total of 173 (80%) females and 42 (20%)
males, aged 18e41 years. Also, 147 (68%) participants were White,
23 (11%) were Latino/Hispanic and 40 (19%) were African American.
Major/specialization varied; students predominantly were
Elementary Education majors (N ¼ 56, 26%) and Social Science
Education majors (N ¼ 46, 21%). Most PTs were juniors (N ¼ 121;
57%) and seniors (N ¼ 45; 21%), followed by sophomores (N ¼ 43;
20%) and freshman (N ¼ 6; 3%). Demographics for all participants
are summarized in Table 1.
4.2. Data sources
Data was collected using surveys (phase 1) and semi-structured
interviews (phase 2). The survey instrument (phase 1) collected
quantitative data, using three distinctive questionnaires: Demo-
graphic Questionnaire (gathered data about age, gender, ethnicity,
major/specializations, and career intentions), Reasons for Teaching
Scale (RTS) and the Career Statement Scale (CSS) investigating PTs’
motivations and beliefs about teaching.
4.2.1. Reasons for Teaching Scale (RTS)
The RTS instrument (see items in Table 2) adapted from Kyriacou
et al. (1999) gathered data about PTs’ motivations (reasons) for
teaching. Participants were asked to rate on a scale 1 to 5 (1 ¼ “not
important at all” and 5 ¼ “extremely important”) the importance of
specific reasons when choosing teaching as a career. The original
study (Kyriacou et al., 1999) reported descriptive data only
(i.e., counts, means) with no accompanying information about the
validity and reliability of the RTS instrument. We discuss psycho-
metric properties of the RTS along with factor analysis in our
Results section.
 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335 327

Table 1
Participants’ demographics (N ¼ 215).

Characteristics Total (N ¼ 215) Cluster 1 (N ¼ 93) Cluster 2 (N ¼ 70) Cluster 3 (N ¼ 52)

N % n % n % n %
Gender
Males 42 20 15 16 12 17 15 29
Females 173 80 78 84 58 83 37 71
Age
18e24 209 97 92 99 65 93 52 100
25e30 3 1 1 1 2 3 0 0
31e41 3 1 0 0 3 4 0 0
Major/specialization
Early Childhood Ed. 20 9 6 7 10 14 4 7
Elementary Ed. 56 26 23 25 22 31 11 21
Mathematics Ed. 31 14 10 11 14 20 7 14
Social Science Ed. 46 21 22 24 11 16 13 25
English Ed. 29 14 17 18 5 7 7 14
Physical Ed. 9 4 4 4 1 1 4 8
Other 24 11 11 12 7 10 6 12
Year in program
Freshman 6 3 2 2 1 1 3 6
Sophomore 43 20 24 26 13 19 6 12
Junior 121 57 55 60 38 54 28 54
Senior 45 21 12 13 18 26 15 29
Teaching career intentions
Committed to teaching 154 72 76 82 46 66 32 62
Undecided 33 15 9 9.7 14 20 10 19
Not interested at this time 18 8 5 5 7 10 6 12
Other (i.e., not interested at 5 2 1 1 2 3 2 4
all, or other career plans)

4.2.2. Career Statement Scale (CSS)
The CSS instrument (see items in Table 4) adapted from Saban
(2003) investigated PTs’ beliefs about the teaching profession and
beliefs about schooling (teaching and learning activity). Partici-
pants were asked to rate each item regarding their teaching beliefs
on a scale 1 to 4 (1 ¼ “strongly disagree” and 4 ¼ “strongly agree”)
to indicate the level of agreement with the statements provided by
the questionnaire. We discuss psychometric properties of the CSS
along with factor analysis the Results section.
4.2.3. Interviews
Qualitative data was collected in the second phase of the study,
using semi-structured, in-depth interviews (see Appendix B) con-
ducted face-to-face with each participant for approximately
50 min. All interviews were audio-taped and later transcribed. In
our qualitative analysis of the transcribed interviews we borrowed
grounded-theory techniques using open and axial coding (Creswell,
2007; Strauss & Corbin, 1998) to identify patterns and categories of
PTs’ motivations and beliefs about teaching nominated in their
interviews. A coding scheme was built progressively by two coders
and was tested and constantly revised until complete agreement on
coding was reached (see Appendix A for coding scheme and major
categories).
4.3. Procedures
This mixed-methods study was conducted in two phases as
follows: the survey of Phase 1 and the Phase 2 interview follow-up. In
Phase 1 (survey) participants (N ¼ 215) completed the demographic
questionnaire, the RTS and CSS measures, followed up by interviews
(in phase 2). Interviews were used with selected participants (N ¼ 25)
randomly selected from a larger pool of 114 survey respondents who
agreed to the interview process. The interview selection procedure
followed a stratified approach, and the random selection was
adjusted to represent a proportional distribution per group
(approximately 20e25% of individuals from each cluster, respondents
to the interview invitations were selected for phase 2). First, the RTS
responses for all participants were analyzed using a cluster analysis to
identify typologies of PTs (i.e., clusters) according to their motiva-
tional patterns for teaching. Next, once the typologies were identified,
PTs from each cluster were randomly selected for interviews, as
follows: twelve (out of 55 individuals responding to interview invi-
tation) from Cluster 1 (N ¼ 93), seven (out of 34 individuals
responding to interview invitation) from Cluster 2 (N ¼ 70), and six
(out of 25 individuals responding to interview invitation) from
Cluster 3 (N ¼ 52).
5. Results
5.1. What specific types of motivations (i.e., factors) for teaching
were influential in PTs’ decisions to become teachers?
To determine what specific types of motivations (i.e., factors)
were influential in PTs’ decisions to become teachers, an explor-
atory factor analysis of the RTS responses was conducted on the 21
questionnaire items. Psychometric properties of the RTS were
explored in this phase as well as part of the factor identification,
using: 1) evidence for content validity; 2) exploratory factor anal-
ysis with a large sample of PTs; 3) internal consistency reliability
was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha.
Content validity was assessed using expert opinions and a liter-
ature review of motivations (reasons) for teaching. In an initial
phase, the 20 original RTS items were submitted to expert peers
(faculty members and four graduate students) who independently
reviewed the items for clarity and comprehension. Revisions in the
final RTS form included minor wording changes (i.e., “pupils”
replaced with “students”), and inclusion of one additionally item
(Item #21, “Family members influenced me to become teacher”).
To further ascertain psychometric properties and identify
motivational factors for teaching of the PTs, an exploratory factor
analysis was conducted for the RTS using image factoring and
oblimin rotation. A varimax rotation was used as an orthogonal
328 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335

rotation technique to create structures (factors) of the question- investigated three-, four-, and five-cluster solutions. Based on
naires’ items. Eigen values greater than one constituted the criteria psychometric evidence (e.g., means, standard deviation, p values)
for factor extraction for the principal component analysis. Cron- we determined that the three-cluster solution fit the data best and
bach’s alpha reliabilities subsequently measured the internal created the most useful categories. The appropriate cluster solution
consistency of derived factors. obtained was based on significant differences between the cluster
Results from the factor analysis produced a six-factor solution, group vectors (i.e., factors) on the subscales used to identify the
explaining 62% of the total variance. Therefore, six categories of cluster groups. After the three-cluster solution was chosen, using
motivations (i.e., factors) were identified as being influential in PTs’ cluster membership as an independent variable, a subsequent
choices to become teachers. These factors were labeled as follows: ANOVA and post hoc tests were performed on the dependent sets
intrinsic value (i.e., enjoyment for teaching); job benefits (i.e., job of derived factors from the CSS in order to assess profiles of iden-
security); meaningful relationships (i.e., social influences); altruistic tified typologies and determine cross cluster differences regarding
views (i.e., desire to help); ability (i.e., personality suited for teaching), their beliefs about teaching.
and opportunities (i.e., professional opportunities through teaching). Three distinctive typologies (clusters) of PTs (N’s of 93, 70 and
The Cronbach’s alpha reliabilities were calculated for each derived 52) were identified, indicating specific sets of motivations as being
factor with alpha values of .82 for intrinsic value, .71 for job benefits, .67 relevant for their teaching career choices. Table 3 displays the
for meaningful relationships, .63 for altruistic views, 62 for ability, and means, standard deviations, and p values for each of the clusters
.60 for opportunities and.79 for the overall questionnaire. Table 2 across the six RTS factors. Characteristics of each cluster are pre-
summarizes the six motivational factors, items contained in each sented next with respect to quantitative findings from the RTS
factor, Cronbach’s alpha measures of internal consistency, as well as responses, and later we present findings from qualitative data
factor loading values. (interviews) for each cluster. We labeled each cluster based on their
most salient characteristics expressed by participants in their
5.2. What typologies of PTs (i.e., clusters) emerged from the survey and interviews, as follows: Cluster 1 was labeled Enthusi-
motivations for teaching and how demographic characteristics astic, because, the most salient characteristic was altruistic and
(i.e., gender, major/specialization, year of study, and commitment intrinsic motivations, and a clear expression in their interviews of
to teaching) were relevant across typologies? enthusiasm for teaching and visionary actions; Cluster 2 was
labeled Conventional, because similarly to Cluster 1 predominant
To determine whether certain “types” of respondents were motivators were altruistic and intrinsic, but rated professional
identifiable in terms of their ratings on derived motivational opportunities the lowest among all clusters, focusing throughout
factors, a hierarchical cluster analysis was performed (following the interviews on customary classroom teaching actions, and Cluster 3,
RTS exploratory factor analysis). Cluster analysis is a statistical Pragmatic, because altruistic reasons were the least influential in
procedure that analytically groups individuals according to their their teaching choice and mostly pragmatic aspects of teaching
similar ratings on more than one variable (Braten & Olaussen, were emphasized in their interviews.
2005). Ward’s method (Milligan & Cooper, 1987) was used in this
study to minimize the variance within clusters. Clusters were 5.2.1. Motivational profile for cluster 1: Enthusiastic
determined based upon participants’ responses to the RTS, and we Participants from Cluster 1, labeled Enthusiastic (N ¼ 93), the
largest group, indicated through their survey responses that their
Table 2
motivation for teaching was highly related to altruistic reasons
Subscales (i.e., factors) and survey items from the RTS. (M ¼ 4.76; SD ¼ .93); intrinsic reasons (M ¼ 4.60; SD ¼ .62), and
abilities (M ¼ 4.48; SD ¼ .84). PTs in this group had also higher
Item Factors/survey items Factor
loading
ratings for opportunities (M ¼ 3.64; SD ¼ .75) and meaningful rela-
tionships (M ¼ 3.61; SD ¼ .87) relative to the other two clusters,
Intrinsic value (4 items, a ¼ .82)
14 The subject I will teach is important to me .902 suggesting that professional development opportunities offered
15 The subject I will teach is an important subject for students .797 through teaching influenced their teaching decisions, and that
5 I enjoy the subject I will teach .741 social factors such as family members, or former teachers were
13 I can get a job as a teacher in any part of the country .412 greatly influential in their teaching choices.
Job benefits (4 items, a ¼ .71)
6 My employment as a teacher is assured after graduation .782
1 Teaching offers good job security .745 5.2.2. Motivational profile for cluster 2: Conventional
9 Teachers have a respectable social status .576 The second largest cluster, labeled Conventional (N ¼ 70), were
4 There are long vacations .539 somehow similar to the Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group in their ratings
Meaningful relationships (4 items, a ¼ .67)
for altruistic, intrinsic reasons and abilities, but distinctively different
19 Other people influenced me to become a teacher .738
(e.g., previous teachers, friends) regarding their ratings for opportunities and meaningful relationships.
20 It can help me to get a job teaching in another country .731
18 Family members influenced me to become a teacher .705
21 My experience as a student has given me a .475
Table 3
positive image of the job
Means and p values across clusters and motivational factors.
Altruistic views (2 items, a ¼ .63)
8 Teaching is a noble profession .760 RTS factors Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 p
16 Being a teacher can help improve society .681 (N ¼ 93) (N ¼ 70) (N ¼ 52)
Ability (4 items, a ¼ .62)
11 I have a personality that is suited for this job .780 Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD)
12 Previous jobs that I had influenced me to become a teacher .685 Intrinsic value 4.60 (.62) 4.38 (.64) 3.76 (.76) p < .001
10 I like the activity of classroom teaching .648 Job benefits 4.12 (.73) 3.40 (.67) 3.39 (.58) p < .001
7 I want to help children succeed .487 Meaningful 3.61 (.87) 2.55 (.78) 2.62 (.66) p < .001
Opportunities (3 items, a ¼ .60) relationships
17 Being a teacher can lead to other jobs in the future .528 Altruistic views 4.76 (.93) 4.70 (.87) 2.42 (.65) p < .001
2 The job offers opportunities to socialize with colleagues .697 Ability 4.48 (.84) 4.04 (.86) 3.66 (.64) p < .001
3 The level of pay is quite good .654 Opportunities 3.64 (.75) 2.60 (.68) 3.05 (.58) p < .001
 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335 329

Cluster 2 participants indicated fairly high ratings for altruistic views Table 4
(M ¼ 4.70; SD ¼ .87), intrinsic reasons (M ¼ 4.38; SD ¼ .64), and Subscales (i.e., factors) and survey items from the CSS.

abilities (M ¼ 4.04; SD ¼ .86), but had the lowest ratings for oppor- Item Factors/survey items Factor
tunities (M ¼ 2.60; SD ¼ .68) and meaningful relationships (M ¼ 2.55; loading
SD ¼ .78) relative to other two clusters. Thus, these ratings might Career dedication (3 items, a ¼ .79)
suggest that participants in the Conventional group were the least 2 For me teaching is a lifelong career .851
1 If I had to start all over I would choose teaching .843
motivated the professional opportunities offered through teaching
again without any hesitation
(i.e., advance in their teaching career, develop professionally), and 3 I look forward to meeting my first students as a .720
that social influences (i.e., family, teachers) were not present or not classroom teacher
influential in their teaching decisions. Student development (3 items, a ¼ .76)
7 I believe that one of the most important roles as a .839
classroom teacher is to foster students’ social growth
5.2.3. Motivational profile for cluster 3: Pragmatic 13 I believe that one of the most important roles as a .803
PTs from Cluster 3, labeled Pragmatic, the smallest group classroom teacher is to foster students’ emotional growth
(N ¼ 52) indicated as main influential teaching motivations intrinsic 8 I believe that one of the most important roles as a .751
reasons (M ¼ 3.76; SD ¼ .67), abilities (M ¼ 3.66; SD ¼ .64) and job classroom teacher is to foster students’ moral growth
Learning approach (4 items, a ¼ .66)
benefits (M ¼ 3.39; SD ¼ .58) and less influential teaching motiva-
11 I believe that students learn best through active .807
tions meaningful relationships (M ¼ 2.62; SD ¼ .66) and altruistic participation in cooperative learning activities
views (M ¼ 2.42; SD ¼ .65). An extremely distinctive finding about 10 I believe that students learn more from asking .739
Cluster 3 PTs was their ratings on altruistic views (M ¼ 2.42; questions than from listening to the teacher
SD ¼ .66); they obtained the lowest score on this factor across all 6 I believe that one of the most important roles as a .496
classroom teacher is to facilitate learning
clusters (and across all factors), suggesting therefore that altruistic 4 I believe that one of the most important roles as a .486
reasons were possible the least influential in their teaching career classroom teacher is to dispense knowledge
choices. Table 3 presents the three identified clusters and their
ratings on motivational factors.
.66e.79 as follows: .79 for career dedication, .76 for student devel-
5.2.4. Demographic differences across typologies (clusters) opment and .66 for learning approach. Table 4 summarizes the three
In addition to investigating the variety of motivations (reasons) subscales, items, factor loadings, and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
across these clusters, we also investigated the extent to which the for each subscale.
typologies (clusters) were consistent across the various degree In order to interpret differences and similarities among the
majors, and if demographic characteristics were relevant for the three clusters with respect to their beliefs about teaching (derived
identified typologies. A comparative analysis (Chi-Square Test) was factors from CSS) follow-up ANOVA and Scheffe post hoc tests were
conducted with major/specialization (i.e., Elementary Education, conducted. Results (illustrated in Table 5) showed significant
Mathematic Education, etc.) as an independent variable and also differences among the clusters with respect to all three derived
other demographic characteristics such as gender, year of study factors: career dedication (F [2, 212] ¼ 19.039; p < .001), student
(i.e., junior, senior) and commitment to teaching (i.e., committed, development (F [2, 212] ¼ 13.06; p < .001), and learning approach (F
undecided, not interested) as independent variables. Cluster [2, 212] ¼ 20.33; p < .001). Analyses of mean scores and standard
membership was selected as the dependent variable. We found no deviations from ANOVA procedures also indicated that participants’
significant differences between the typologies (cluster member- from Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group scores were consistently high on
ship) and participants’ demographic characteristics for major/ all three factors: career dedication (M ¼ 3.46; SD ¼ .58), student
specialization (X2 (12) ¼ .27), nor for gender (X2 (4) ¼ .25), year of development (M ¼ 3.47; SD ¼ .46) and learning approach (M ¼ 3.56;
study (X2 (6) ¼ .10), or commitment to teaching (X2 (8) ¼ .27). SD ¼ .37). Cluster 2 had similar ratings to Cluster 1 participants, but
Therefore, such results imply that the primary cluster division and slightly lower on each factor: career dedication (M ¼ 3.36; SD ¼ .53),
composition was based on participants’ motivations for teaching student development (M ¼ 3.23; SD ¼ .49) and learning approach
(i.e., six categories of reasons/factors) regardless of participants’ (M ¼ 3.53; SD ¼ .34), followed by Cluster 3, The Pragmatic with
demographic characteristics. lowest rating scores across all clusters: career dedication (M ¼ 2.87;
SD ¼ .58), student development (M ¼ 3.06; SD ¼ .48) and learning
5.3. What specific beliefs (i.e., factors) about teaching do PTs hold approach (M ¼ 3.17; SD ¼ .38).
and how these beliefs differ across identified typologies? Post hoc tests results using Scheffe’s HSD showed specific
differences for each of these three factors with respect to clusters’
To identify PTs’ beliefs (i.e., factors) about teaching we con- formation. For PTs’ ratings on career dedication, results showed
ducted an initial exploratory factor analysis on the 15 original items significant differences between Cluster 2, Conventional group and
of the CSS (Saban, 2003). Eigen values greater than one constituted Cluster 3, The Pragmatic group (p < .001) and between Cluster 1,
the criteria for factor extraction. This initial factor structure Enthusiastic group and Cluster 3, The Pragmatic group (p < .001), but
accounted for 60% of the total variance. Five of these items (5, 9, 12, no significant differences between Cluster 2, Conventional group
14, and 15) were eliminated due to factor loadings (lower than .40). and Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group (p ¼ .514). Results on the student
A second factor analysis was conducted for this reduced set of 10
items, yielding three factors labeled as follows: career dedication
(i.e., beliefs about career engagement and commitment), student Table 5
development (i.e., beliefs about students’ development), and Means and p values across clusters and factors from CSS.
learning approach (i.e., beliefs about learning). The factor structure CSS factors Cluster Cluster Cluster F p
for these 10 remaining items (1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 13) 1 (N ¼ 93) 2 (N ¼ 70) 3 (N ¼ 52)
accounted for 69% of the total variance with no cross-loadings of Career dedication 3.46a (.58) 3.36a (.53) 2.87b (.58) 19.03 p < .001
items evident across factors. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient ob- Student development 3.47b (.46) 3.23a (.49) 3.06a (.48) 13.06 p < .001
tained for internal reliability was a ¼ .83 for the 10 questionnaire Learning approach 3.56a (.37) 3.53a (.34) 3.17b (.38) 20.33 p < .001

items and the alpha coefficients for the derived factors ranged from Note: Means with different subscripts are significantly different at the .05 level.
330 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335
development factor showed significant differences between Cluster
1, Enthusiastic group and Cluster 3, Pragmatic group (p < .001), and
between Cluster 2, Conventional group and Cluster 1, Enthusiastic
group (p < .001), but no significant differences between Cluster 2,
Conventional group and Cluster 3, Pragmatic group (p ¼ .158). PTs’
ratings on learning approach also indicated variability of responses
across the three clusters. Significant differences were obtained
between Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group and Cluster 3, Pragmatic
group (p < .001), between Cluster 2, Conventional group and Cluster
3, Pragmatic group (p < .001), but no significant differences
between Cluster 2, Conventional group and Cluster 1, Enthusiastic
group (p ¼ .857).
5.4. How were different motivations and beliefs about teaching
described by each cluster?
Qualitative results from the interviews are presented in this
study as narrative accounts from each cluster to illustrate the
patterns and categories identified via interviews about PTs’ moti-
vations for teaching and beliefs about teaching. Overall, the inter-
view data revealed similarities at some level across the clusters, but
also notable differences related to their teaching goals. Each cluster
revealed a combination of reasons and beliefs about teaching with
individual unique approaches in understanding their teaching
goals.
5.4.1. Narrative accounts from cluster 1: Enthusiastic
In support of quantitative findings, results from the interviews
showed that Cluster 1 participants’ motivation for teaching was
greatly influenced by altruistic reasons (i.e., desire to help) and
intrinsic reasons (i.e., enjoyment for teaching), meaningful rela-
tionships, and opportunities to advance professionally. Addition-
ally, interview data showed that PTs from Cluster 1 seemed to have
a high appreciation for the teaching profession, passion and
enthusiasm for teaching. They perceived teaching more holistically,
extending beyond classroom duties; teaching was perceived not
just a classroom/instructional activity, but a mission with the
purpose to improve society. An important reason for becoming
teachers mentioned by Cluster 1 participants were their enjoyment
of working with children and desire to help children succeed. They
expressed a desire to serve; the majority (80%) of PTs in Enthusiastic
group said that they decided to become teachers because they
wanted to help others. Moreover, their willingness to help was
driven by examples in their lives. They were also helped, so they
wanted to return this service, and help others improve their lives.
LC, a participant from this group, mentioned that she was greatly
inspired by her previous teachers, and they served as models for
her career choice. As she explained:
I had awesome teachers all throughout school. I want to make
a difference in someone’s life as they made in mine, because I
remember all of them; I remember things from each year, and
what I learned from them. I want to have that effect on someone
else’s life, just like they had on mine.
Distinctive for this group was the idea of extended opportunities
through teaching. Participants (58%; 7 out of 12) mentioned in their
interviews their desire to advance their education (through grad-
uate school) to be able take leadership positions in their schools.
Therefore, they saw teaching as an opportunity to engage in various
leadership tasks such as school boards, school district administra-
tive duties, or in community projects that would enable them to
help society in a different way than classroom teaching. In many
ways, participants from Cluster 1 sought professional empowerment
by wanting to extend their professional roles beyond classroom
teaching.
As far as their expressed beliefs about the teaching career,
participants from Cluster 1, saw teaching as an important profes-
sion in all societies. Education was perceived as imperative for the
development of any society, and teachers’ role in society was
perceived as crucial in achieving this goal. One PT from this group
explained her views about teaching:
But I believe that there always will be teachers, and in every
single civilization some of the most respected people at times,
like Socrates for instance, they were teachers. I believe then
even though the profession in the U.S. isn’t that highly regarded
as I would like it to be, I still think is a very noble profession and
it is good.
Interestingly, even though participants from this cluster seemed
extremely enthusiastic about teaching, almost holding romantic
(possibly naïve) views of the profession, they were also able to
articulate disadvantages of teaching as well, and the challenges of
the teaching profession. Also, extremely unique for Cluster 1
participants, they (unlike Cluster 2 and 3) were able to articulate as
well main characteristics of an effective teacher, such as caring for
students, despite hardship of profession. One PT from this group
explained:
I think teaching is a wonderful job, is a challenging job, it’s not
that respected as much, but I think that people [who] that are
quality teachers, that actually care about the students, they
know how difficult it is, so their opinion is the one that really
matters.
In their interviews, participants from Cluster 1 were able to
describe very clear and were able to elaborate on specific instruc-
tional strategies they would use in class as effective teaching
strategies. Effective teaching was believed to be teaching with
a purpose; setting long-term goals for their students such as being
able to apply knowledge in real-life situations. Effective teachers
were described by Cluster 1 participants as role models who had
both content expertise and pedagogical expertise, but also indi-
vidual qualities that would ultimately inspire their students. One
said, “I think quality teaching is when students learn for a purpose,
not necessarily learn to get the teacher credit for teacher of the year.
Learning about something that they are going to use and apply in
life.” Most participants from Cluster 1 (unlike Cluster 2 and 3)
mentioned that an effective teacher should hold himself/herself
accountable for students’ learning, and not just someone else (i.e.,
school principal, superintended). Another characteristic of quality
teaching, mentioned only by those in the Enthusiastic group, was
attention to issues of and respect for diversity, and the importance
of including such issues in their daily teaching.
Overall, participants from Cluster 1, Enthusiastic reflected in
their interviews excitement about teaching and dedication to this
profession, a desire to help children learn and progress, and a very
keen awareness of their key role as educators in the society. Unlike
Cluster 2 participants, Conventional, participants from Cluster 1,
Enthusiastic, perceived teaching not just as a solely classroom/
instructional activity, but as a mission beyond classroom walls,
a continuing process, involving other social entities in educating
and improving students’ lives. Cluster 1 participants also demon-
strated complex notions of classroom pedagogy and principles of
teaching and learning. They seem to come to the teaching profes-
sion with deep values about teaching and learning, and a desire to
transmit these values to their students through teaching.
5.4.2. Narrative accounts from cluster 2: Conventional
Participants from Cluster 2, labeled Conventional were similar in
many ways to participants from Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group, but
 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335
yet different in many aspects. Similarity between the two clusters
was found with respect to their main reasons for becoming
teachers; both groups expressed mainly altruistic and intrinsic
reasons for becoming teachers. However, distinct views about
teaching and schooling were expressed by the two groups in their
interviews. PTs from Cluster 2, perceived teaching in a more
conventional way, strictly as classroom activity, with a particular
focus on ordinary instructional actions (i.e., instructional strategies
and classroom management), unlike Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group
who perceived teaching more holistically, as a social mission to
educate students with help from society (family, community). PTs
from Cluster 2 expressed primarily intrinsic and altruistic reasons
for teaching (i.e., enjoyment to teach others, desire to help), similar
to Cluster 1, but with a lack of passion and enthusiasm for teaching,
or visionary actions (as Cluster 1 participants did). One PT from
Cluster 2 illustrated his reasons for teaching:
It seems pretty cool to be able to help people understand things
better. When I lived in the dorm there were people that were
taking basic algebra classes, and they were struggling with it and
that was discouraging to me, so I thought that it would be cool if
I could help people not have that kind of trouble with math.
Similar to Cluster 1, Enthusiastic group, teaching was perceived
by Cluster 2 Conventional group as an important profession for the
development of society, but also a challenging job that is not
rewarded enough by the society. Among disadvantages of the
teaching career mentioned by participants in this group were
demanding tasks, emotional stress, high accountability based on
students’ test scores, bureaucracy, and social status in decline.
It’s a good profession and a lot of people respect teachers, but I
think that teachers should be respected a little bit more, because
there is a big crunch for standardized testing and teachers are
being watched carefully . you hear stories about these teachers
who do crazy things, so there’s that pressure too.
Throughout their interviews, Cluster 2 participants, viewed
teaching mostly as a set of daily instructional duties one must carry
in order to educate students, and emphasized the importance of
pedagogical and content knowledge in teaching. The main focus on
teaching was on pedagogy and content expertise, and the teaching
purpose was to convey the expertise to their students. Quality
teaching therefore were perceived as content expertise, and being
able to transmit knowledge to all students (as a group, but at the
individual level as well). One participant said:
Quality teaching is knowing your subject matter extremely well,
having the ability to portray that knowledge. Also, I believe that
teachers really need to know their students on a one-to-one
level, because every student is different. For me an effective
teacher is when they demonstrate their knowledge and show
how much they care about education.
PTs from the Conventional group expressed very little in their
interviews the idea of opportunities through teaching (i.e., advancing
their teaching career, or develop professionally). They were not
interested advancing professionally and therefore educating chil-
dren in that capacity (as Cluster 1 mentioned), but described their
professional roles exclusively as regular classroom duties, providing
thus a more conventional picture of the teaching profession. They
expressed commitment for their K-12 classroom teaching, and
willingness to remain in teaching, even if they would advance their
education to a higher educational degree. Going to graduate school
to obtain a Masters or Ph.D. degree was directly related to their
desire to gain more content and pedagogical expertise, so they can
return to classroom teaching better prepared. Their commitment to
331
teaching at the K-12 level was more obvious, compared to Cluster 1
participants who aspired to advancing their education so they
could hold higher positions (such as administration), but educate
students in that capacity.
Overall, interview data revealed that PTs from the Conventional
cluster were similar in some aspects with the Enthusiastic group,
yet different in many ways. Cluster 2 was distinct in that the salient
characteristic that defined all members of this cluster was that they
saw the classroom as almost the singular place that education
happens. Their responses did not move beyond the teacher and
students to the community or family as had the Enthusiastic group
expressed. In their interviews Cluster 2 participants demonstrated
good understanding of the pedagogical aspects of teaching and
content knowledge, but did not mention at all other important
aspects of education, related for instance to individualized
instruction, diversity issues, or including other social entities
(family, community) in their teaching.
5.4.3. Narrative accounts from cluster 3: Pragmatic
Compared to participants from the other two clusters, Cluster 3,
Pragmatic group expressed in their interviews primarily extrinsic
motivators for teaching (i.e., job security, availability of teaching jobs
and long vacations), suggesting therefore a more pragmatic
perception of teaching. Cluster 3 participants also mentioned that
relationships, such as influences of former teachers or families, to
become teachers were not crucial in their decisions to undertake
teaching. Mostly, the job benefits, availability of the teaching posi-
tions, and the teaching activity itself were influential motivators for
their teaching career choice. Such aspects of the teaching career
made teaching appealing for them. One participant explained:
Teaching offers a good job security. I don’t know where I’m
going to live yet, but I know wherever I’ll go, I can find a job.
There is always going to be a demand for teachers; it’s not like
one of these careers where you know it’s going to be close and
can’t find a job. Teaching is dependable.
Additionally, several participants in this group talked about
teaching as a job that offers the opportunity to leave and come back,
so teaching was perceived as a “fall back plan”, thus suggesting
a temporary commitment to teaching. None talked clearly about
their professional fulfillment through teaching, nor did they describe
teaching as being their passion and dedication. Their perception of
the teaching career was somewhat that of a “middle class career”,
but at the same time, offering several important advantages, such as
“ good job benefits”, “a stable career,” and “a family friendly career”,
which was desirable for them. Among the disadvantages of being
a teacher mentioned by the participants in this group were “job
related stress,” “demanding profession,” “pressure from higher
authorities,” and “accountability.” One participant explained:
It’s stressful, because there is a lot of pressure, and with a lot of
changes in the laws, that’s even more pressure and account-
ability. So, you’re stretching in so many directions trying to
please others and sometimes it’s pretty hard.
Also, unlike participants from the other two clusters, the Prag-
matic participants’ perceptions of the teaching activity was
somehow simplistic, with almost no ability to describe and elabo-
rate on teaching strategies and main principles of teaching and
learning. In their descriptions of effective teaching there was no
mentioning of any pedagogical aspects or content expertise, nor the
importance of personal qualities in teaching. In general, the length
of their interviews was shorter, and less elaborative when
describing their beliefs and perception of teaching, compared to
participants from the other two clusters. When asked to describe
332 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335
their future teaching style, they did not speak of subject matter, of
students, nor of specific approaches/styles of teaching, but made
very generic references to teaching as being “fun” and “nice”. One
PT described her teaching:
I want there to be fun in the classroom. I don’t want to be the
teacher that everyone thinks is just so mean and doesn’t like,
but specific instructional [strategies] I haven’t really thought of
.I’ll just put it all together and make one for myself.
Interestingly, very distinctive for Cluster 3 participants (unlike
any from Cluster 1 and 2) they expressed concerns about their lack
of teaching experience, lack of content expertise, inadequate
training, and about feeling unprepared for teaching. One PT
described her concerns:
Well, [I’m concern about] lack of knowledge, on being a teacher.
I’m not prepared. I’m anxious because I feel I don’t really have
enough experience but you know, I haven’t taught a real student
classroom as a teacher. Having students in all this different age
groups would be so difficult, like, in a middle school, kids there
are so trying because at that age group, they are kind of going
crazy, so you definitely have to deal with more behavioral issues
and problems.
Overall, the Pragmatic participants seemed to be motivated
predominantly by extrinsic reasons, but not exclusively. Their desire
to work with children was ignited by previous experiences with
children (camp counselor, tutoring), but their understanding of the
teaching profession was dominated by pragmatic aspects of life,
such as job security, long holidays, and availability of the teaching
positions. Compared to the other two clusters, members in the
Pragmatic group had problems articulating their understanding of
their teaching goals or how they will achieve their goal, perceived
teaching as “middle class” (therefore less noble) profession, and
expressed concerns about the quality of their teaching preparation.
6. Discussion
Findings from the present study identified three distinct typol-
ogies of PTs highlighting different and subtle combinations of factors
relevant to choosing teaching as a career and perceptions of the
profession. Different combinations of reasons were relevant to each
group’s choice of teaching as a career, but at the same time, common
sources of influence were found across the three groups. Interview
data showed in more depth the complex, personal, and situated
nature of PTs’ decisions. Current findings in the literature align with
our study results regarding the predominance of altruistic and
intrinsic reasons for teaching as powerful motivators (Pop & Turner,
2009; Brookhart & Freeman, 1992; Kyriacou & Coulthard, 2000;
Kyriacou et al., 1999; Richardson & Watt, 2005; Saban, 2003; Watt
& Richardson, 2008). Our findings indicated that all participants
expressed altruistic, intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for teaching at
some level, but none expressed solely one type of reasons; rather,
a combination of motivations was found to be characteristic for each
cluster of PTs. We find our study results in line with Covington and
Mueller’s (2001) approach, a unidimensional model of motivation
suggesting that different types of motivation blend within the same
individual with one type of motivation being more predominant
than other(s), as opposed to Deci and Ryan (2000) who suggested an
antagonistic relationship of different types of motivations (i.e.,
intrinsic versus extrinsic).
One noticeable finding in our study indicated that demographic
characteristics of participants were not relevant to clusters’
composition, therefore suggesting that PTs’ typologies were based
on their motivations for teaching regardless of participants’
demographics. We found no significant differences among cluster
membership (cluster variable) and variables such as major/
specialization, gender, year of study and commitment to teaching.
Similarly, other recent studies (Richardson & Watt, 2005; Watt &
Richardson, 2008) have shown that demographic characteristics
such as gender, degree majors (elementary versus secondary level
teacher education), and commitment to teaching (i.e., whether
individuals had seriously considered or pursued a different career
prior to enrolling in teacher education) were not relevant for cluster
compositions (teachers’ typologies). This is particularly important,
and suggests the need for adopting more sophisticated methodol-
ogies in exploring motivations for teaching of beginning teachers.
Our results show the complexity of motivation for teaching,
contrary to previous research that used less sophisticated designs
and found differences in motivations for career choice with respect
to grade level, suggesting that elementary PTs were more child
centered in their motivations for teaching and secondary PTs were
more subject centered (i.e., Book & Freeman, 1986).
Additionally, most research in this area has focused solely on
motivations (i.e., specific reasons for entering, remaining, or leaving
teaching), and little attention has been given to PTs’ motivations
(reasons) for teaching as related to their beliefs about teaching
(Saban, 2003; Schutz, Crowder, & White, 2001). Our study findings
suggest that a combination of motivations and beliefs is unique to
each typology, and PTs’ motivations and beliefs about teaching play
an important role in shaping their career paths and approaches to
teaching. Scholars in the field suggest that motivation and beliefs
about teaching influence greatly teachers’ future classroom prac-
tices, including their strategies for delivering instruction, as well as
persistence and engagement in instructional tasks and commit-
ment to teaching (Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005; Saban, 2003;
Wilke & Losh, 2008).
The last few decades have resulted in numerous international
studies of teacher attrition. There is a growing consensus among
researchers and educators worldwide that many teachers leave the
profession because teaching is not what they believed it would be,
and gradually become dissatisfied with the profession. Findings
from our study have implications not just for understanding the
different motivational underpinning of prospective teachers for
entering the teaching profession, but eventually understanding
their commitment to teaching, job satisfaction, and possibly
teacher attrition. For instance, most research conducted both in the
U.S. and abroad, show that PTs enter teaching primarily because of
their altruistic and intrinsic reasons, but they leave the profession
after a few years because job dissatisfaction, therefore, it is possible
that a mismatch between PTs’ motivations and beliefs about
teaching with the realities of the profession exists, and could fuel
attrition. Findings from our study, similar to other international and
U.S. research suggest that most PTs enter teaching primarily
motivated by altruistic and intrinsic motivation and favorable views
of teaching (Pop & Turner, 2009; Pop, 2010; Brookhart & Freeman,
1992; Manuel & Hughes, 2006; Richardson & Watt, 2005; Saban,
2003; Watt & Richardson, 2011). Furthermore, most studies on
teacher attrition and perception of success for beginning teachers
indicate a high turnover in teaching with almost 50% of teachers
leaving the profession in their first five years on the job (i.e., Corbell,
Reiman, & Nietfield, 2008; Ingresoll & Smith, 2004; Johnson &
Birkeland, 2003; Kauffman, Johnson, Kardos, Liu, & Peske, 2002;
Reiman & Paramore, 1994). In the current era when so many
leave the teaching profession one might then ask what motivates
others to enter this profession? Are PTs’ reasons and beliefs about
teaching aligned with the realities of teaching? Just by anticipating
that teaching is a challenging profession is not sufficient to have PTs
understand the reality of this career (Liu, Kardos, Kauffman, Preske,
& Johnson, 2000; Richardson & Watt, 2006; Wubbels, 1992).
 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335 333

In light of our findings, teacher education programs and policy
makers, from different countries might reflect on the importance of
recognizing the different types of prospective teachers with
particular motivational profiles and views about the teaching
profession and schooling (the teaching and learning activity).
Teacher educators must be aware of the diversity of prospective
teachers’ goals prior to or early in their teacher preparation
programs so they can counsel the prospective teachers into richer
understandings of teaching, and further provide robust field-based
experiences. Counseling prospective teachers into the realities of
teaching can help those committed to completing their teacher
preparation programs into developing appropriate goals for their
teaching careers, healthy dispositions and expectations for their
daily teaching lives, and a deep appreciation for the important work
they will be doing (Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 2003; Guarino
et al., 2006). Many teacher education programs often neglect
these difficult conversations in favor of painting a glowing picture
of teaching. One possible reason teacher educators do not have
these difficult conversations could also be that they are unaware of
the multiple reasons prospective teachers choose the profession,
what these candidates believe about the field and the complex
relationships between their goals and beliefs.
Moreover, teacher-training programs do not always provide
sufficient field-based experiences for PTs, which could adequately
prepare them for a good understanding of the complex psycho-
logical and pedagogical nature of teaching, especially high-quality
teaching. Often, PTs proceed through their programs of study
holding the same beliefs about teaching, which contradict facets of
their training and teaching practices in the classroom. Many
researches shows that teacher education courses did little to
prepare them for real classroom experiences and participants often
referred to the existing gap between theory and practice in training
(Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005; Darling Hammond, LaFors, &
Snyder, 2001).
6.1. Limitations and future research
Findings from this study could be limited by the cultural aspects
of the study (i.e., participants were from a major research U.S.
university and their views could be representative only for the
specific school culture of a research institution). Additionally, all
participants in this study were undergraduate students following
a traditional teacher-training program. Their views could be
different from PTs following a non-traditional teacher-training (i.e.,
alternative teacher certification). Future studies could compare
teacher candidate populations from diverse settings, such as small
teaching colleges from other parts of the U.S. or abroad, which
might have different views of teaching than those enrolled in
a large research university.
Also, in line with the current study findings, future research
could address the possible existing mismatches, examining
whether certain typologies of teachers are more apt to stay or leave
the teaching profession. Would participants from Cluster 1, Enthu-
siastic group, who are passionate about teaching and predominantly
altruistic, be among the ones to remain in teaching (since altruistic
reasons are the most cited for continuing teaching)? Or, would they
be among those leaving the profession in relatively few years,
possibly due to naïve views of teaching contradictory to demanding
work conditions in schools? Would Cluster 3, Pragmatic group show
high rates of attrition (they had the lowest scores on altruistic
reasons), or would their pragmatic views influence them to stay
(possibility because of a more accurate alignment with the realities
of teaching conditions)? Future research utilizing longitudinal
designs can investigate which typologies of teachers are more prone
to stay or leave the profession and how PTs entry motivations and
beliefs about teaching align with their motivations for continuing or
leaving. Contributions from such research could provide insights to
teacher education programs (i.e., regarding PTs’ perceptions), the
teaching profession, (i.e., workplace factors), or both.
Additionally, teachers’ characteristics such as self-efficacy,
content and pedagogical knowledge, involvement in professional
development could be investigated with respect to identified
typologies and relationship with attrition. By measuring these
variables with respect to identified typologies we can develop
a model of teaching efficiency that teacher education programs and
policy makers can address by including more individualized men-
toring and provide different types of field experiences to meet the
needs of each typology.

Appendix A. Coding scheme and major categories

Categories Cod/subcategories Brief description

1. Main motives 1.1 Altruistic reasons (e.g., wanted to help children succeed) Generic reasons related to the teaching career choice
1.2 Intrinsic reasons (e.g., enjoy the activity of teaching)
1.3 Extrinsic reasons (e.g., salary, vacations, job benefits)
2. School and Personal experiences 2.1 PTs’ school experiences as a K-12 student PTs’ reasons for teaching related to their school or personal
2.2 PTs’ school experiences as a college student (prospective experiences
teacher)
2.3 Personal experiences
3. Professional experiences 3.1 Previous academic or professional experience as moti- PTs’ reasons for going into teaching as related to their
vation for teaching professional experiences
3.2 Previous teaching experience, or related experience
4. Relationships 4.1 With children/youth Past, potential or actual relationships with a range of people
4.2 With previous teachers that have been central to the lived experiences of PT and
4.3 With family members their teaching career choice
4.4. Other social relations (e.g., friends, community)
5. Life stage issues 5.1 Marital status Reasons related to life stages such as marital status, age,
5.2 Age parental experience or other life events (i.e., moving, death,
5.3 Parental experience marriage, school choice)
5.4 Life events (crucial events)
6. Emotions 6.1 Positive emotions Emotions expressed by the PT about teaching (e.g., excited,
6.2 Negative emotions relaxed, happy, frustrated)
7. Perception of schooling (teaching and 7.1 Teacher-oriented style PTs’ beliefs/perception about teaching and learning style, in
learning) general (continued on next page)
334 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335

Appendix (continued)

Categories Cod/subcategories Brief description

7.2 Student-oriented style
8. Perception of teacher’s roles
9. Perception of quality teaching
10. Positive perception of the teaching
profession
11. Negative perception of the teaching
profession
12. Teaching disadvantages
13. Teaching advantages
14. PTs self perception (Personal and
professional characteristics)
15. PTs perception of themselves as
teachers (teaching style)
16. Commitment to teaching
8.1 Provide knowledge PTs’ beliefs about teacher’s roles
8.2 Provide advising/counseling (i.e., emotional growth for
students)
8.3 Provide social and moral growth for students
9.1 Interactive style PTs perceptions of quality teaching and the effective
9.2 Relevance teachers
10.1 Value the teaching profession (e.g., important, noble How teaching profession is perceived by the PTs (positive
profession) perception)
10.2 Positive social perception of teaching (e.g., society and
others value the teaching profession)
10.3 High social status
10.4 High financial status
11.1 Not value the teaching profession (e.g., teaching is not How teaching is perceived by the PTs (negative perception)
important)
11.2 Negative social perception of teaching (e.g., society and
others do not value the teaching profession)
11.3 Low social status
11.4 Low financial status
12.1. Students’ misbehavior Disadvantages of being a teacher, such as students’
12.2. Unfavorable public perception of teachers misbehavior and discipline problems in class; unfavorable
12.3 Salary public perception of teachers, low salary, lack of power
12.4 Lack of power (e.g., because of bureaucracy, adminis-
tration etc)
13.1 Student’s progress Advantages of teaching (either perceived as internal or
13.2 Recognition external motivation or perception of teaching profession).
13.3 Links to other fields
14.1 Caring for student/empathy PTs’ self-perceptions (personal and professional
14.2 Sociable characteristics)
14.3 Patience
14.4 Confident
14.5 Creative
15.1 Knowledgeable (PCK) PTs’ perception of themselves as teachers (their teaching
15.2 Disciplinarian style)
15.3 Friendly
15.4 Engaging
15.5 Lifelong learners
16.1 Early committed to teaching Perception of their commitment to the teaching career
16.2 Committed to teaching for a life
16.3 Committed temporarily to teaching

Appendix B. Sample interview questions
1. Please tell me a little bit about yourself and your career plans.
2. I’m principally interested in this study, as you know, in
exploring students’ motivation and beliefs about teaching.
Please tell me, in your case, what particular factors have
influenced your decision to become a teacher? How did you
come to this choice?
3. Thinking back to your school years, how would you describe
your K-12 school experience? (Probe: your experience as
a student, the schooling style, and school atmosphere)
4. How do you see yourself as a teacher?
5. How would you describe your instructional style as a future
teacher and your philosophy of teaching?
6. What is quality teaching in your opinion and how would you
describe an effective teacher?
7. When thinking of you as a teacher, what kind of emotions
(feelings) you associate with this experience?
8. In general, what do you think about the teaching profession?
9. What advantages and disadvantages do you think the teaching
career has?
10. How do you see yourself and your life, ten years from now?
References
Abangma, M. A. (1981). A study of primary teachers’ attitudes toward ruralisation of
school curriculum in English speaking Cameroon. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, University of London, UK.
Bastick, T. A. (1999). A motivation model describing the career choice of teacher
trainees in Jamaica. Paper presented at the Biennial Conference of the Interna-
tional Study Association on Teachers’ and Teaching, Dublin.
Berger, J.-L., & D’Ascoli, Y., (2011). Motivational profiles of Swiss VET teachers and
trainers using the FIT-Choice Framework. Paper presented at the European
Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) International
Conference, Exeter, UK.
Book, C. L., & Freeman, D. J. (1986). Differences in entry characteristics of elementary
and secondary teacher candidates. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 47e51.
Braten, I., & Olaussen, B. (2005). Profiling individual differences in student moti-
vation: a longitudinal cluster-analytic study in different academic contexts.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 359e396.
Brookhart, S. M., & Freeman, D. J. (1992). Characteristics of entering teacher
candidates. Review of Educational Research, 62(1), 37e60.
Brunetti, G. (2001). Why do they teach? A study of job satisfaction among long-
term high-school teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28, 49e74.
Chivore, B. S. (1998). A review of factors that determine the attractiveness of teaching
profession in Zimbabwe. International Review of Education, 34(1), 59e77.
Clark, C., & Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),
Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255e296). New York: Macmillan.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, M. (2005). Studying teacher education. The report of
the AERA panel on research and teacher education. Published for the American
Educational Research Association by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Corbell, K. A., Reiman, A. J., & Nietfeld, J. L. (2008). The perceptions of success
inventory for beginning teachers: Measuring its psychometric properties.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1551e1563.
Covington, M. V., & Mueller, K. J. (2001). Intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation:
an approach/avoidance reformulation. Educational Psychology Review, 13,
157e176.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Darling Hammond, L., LaFors, J., & Snyder, J. (2001). Educating teachers for Cal-
ifornia’s future. Teacher Education Quarterly, 23, 9e55.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: a national teacher supply policy
for education: the right way to meet the “Highly Qualified Teacher” challenge.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33).
 M.M. Thomson et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 28 (2012) 324e335
Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of contingent and non-contingent rewards and controls on
intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8, 217e229.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychology Inquiry, 11, 227e268.
Fieman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: designing a continuum
to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013e1055.
Feiman-Nemser, S., McDiarmid, G. W., Melnick, S., & Parker, M. (1989). Changing
beginning teachers’ conceptions: A study of an introductory teacher education
course. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education,
Michigan State University.
File, N., & Gullo, D. F. (2002). A comparison of early childhood and elementary
education students’ beliefs about primary classroom teaching practices. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 126e137.
Fokkens-Bruisma, M., & Canrinus, E. (2011). Motivation to become a teacher in
a Dutch university-based teacher training programme. Paper presented at the
European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) Interna-
tional Conference, Exeter, UK.
Guarino, C., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention:
a review of the recent empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 76,
173e208.
Hancock, E. S., & Gallard, A. J. (2004). Preservice science teachers’ beliefs about
teaching and learning: the influence of K-12 field experiences. Journal of Science
Teacher Education, 15(4), 281e291.
Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach.
American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 160e189.
Ingresoll, R. M., & Smith, T. M. (2004). Do teaching induction and mentoring matter?
NASSP Bulletin, 88(638), 28e40.
Johnson, S. M., & Birkeland, S. E. (2003). Pursuing a “sense of success”: new teachers
explain their career decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3),
581e617.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Be careful what you wish for: Optimal functioning
and the relative attainment of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. In P. Schmuck, &
K. Sheldon (Eds.), Life goals and well-being. Gottingen: Hogrefe.
Kauffman, D., Johnson, S. M., Kardos, S. M., Liu, E., & Peske, H. G. (2002). “Lost at
Sea”: new teachers’ experiences with curriculum and assessment. Teachers
College Record, 104(2), 273e300.
Kieschke, U., & Schaarschmidt, U. (2008). Professional commitment and health
among teachers in Germany: a typological approach. Learning and Instruction,
18(5), 429e437.
Kyriacou, C., & Coulthard, M. (2000). Undergraduates’ views of teaching as a career
choice. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26, 117e126.
Kyriacou, C., Hultgren, A., & Stephens, P. (1999). Student teacher motivation to
become a secondary school teacher in England and Norway. Teacher Develop-
ment, 3, 373e381.
Lauermann, F., & Karabenick, S. (2011). Beliefs about teaching: motives for teaching,
sense of responsibility and approaching to instruction. Paper presented at the
European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) Interna-
tional Conference, Exeter, UK.
Liu, E., Kardos, S. M., Kauffman, D., Preske, H. G., & Johnson, S. M. (2000). Barely
breaking even: Incentives, rewards, and the high costs of choosing to teach.
Cambridge: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chi-
cago Press.
Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction.
Cognitive Science, 5(4), 333e369.
Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: a taxonomy of intrinsic
motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and
instruction: III. Conative and affective process analyses (pp. 223e253). Hilsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Manuel, J., & Hughes, J. (2006). “It has always been my dream”: exploring pre-service
teachers’ motivations for choosing to teach. Teacher Development, 10, 5e24.
Mau, W.-C. J., Ellsworth, R., & Hawley, D. (2008). Job satisfaction and career
persistence of beginning teachers. International Journal of Educational
Management, 22(1), 48e61.
Milligan, G. W., & Cooper, M. C. (1987). Methodology review: clustering methods.
Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 329e354.
Nieto, S. (2005). Why we teach. Columbia University, NY: Teachers College Press.
Minor, L., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Witcher, A., & James, T. (2002). Preservice teachers’
educational beliefs and their perceptions of characteristics of effective teachers.
The Journal of Educational Research, 96(2), 116e127.
335
Papanastasiou, C., & Papanastasiou, E. (1998). What influences students to choose
the elementary education major: the case of Cyprus. Mediterranean Journal of
Educational Studies, 3, 35e45.
Pajares, F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy
construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307e332.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education. Theory, research, and
applications. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Pop, M., & Turner, J. E. (2009). To be or not to be.a teacher? Exploring Levels of
Commitment Related to Perception of Teaching among Students Enrolled in
a Teacher Education Program. Teachers and Teaching Theory and Practice, 15(6),
683e700.
Pop, M. (2010). Beliefs about Teaching and Learning in the Context of Motivation for
Teaching: An Analysis of Metaphorical Images of Schooling Expressed by Prospec-
tive Teachers, paper presented at the American Educational Research Associa-
tion (AERA) International Conference, Denver, CO.
Reiman, A. J., & Paramore, B. (1994). First-year teachers’ assignments, expectations,
and development. In M. O’Hair, & S. Odell (Eds.), Partnership in education (pp.
120e134). New York: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich.
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2005). I’ve decided to become a teacher’:
influences on career change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 475e489.
Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. M. G. (2006). Who chooses teaching and why?
Profiling characteristics and motivations across three Australian universities.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 27e56.
Roehrig, A. D., Guidry, L. O., Bodur, Y., Guan, Q., Guo, Y., & Pop, M. (2008). Guided
Field Observations: Variables Related to Preservice Teachers' Knowledge about
Effective Primary Reading Instruction. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47,
76e98.
Saban, A. (2003). A Turkish profile of prospective elementary school teachers and
their views of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 829e846.
Salisbury-Glennon, J. D., & Stevens, R. J. (1999). Addressing preservice teachers’
conceptions of motivation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 741e752.
Schutz, P. A., Crowder, K. C., & White, V. E. (2001). The development of a goal to
become a teacher. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 229e308.
Shen, J., & Hsieh, C. (1999). Improving the professional status of teaching:
perspectives of future teachers, current teachers, and education professors.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 315e323.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Taimalu, M., Luik, P., Voltri, O., & Kalk, K. (2011). Teaching motivations among
teacher trainees and first-year teachers in Estonia. Paper presented at the
European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) Interna-
tional Conference, Exeter, UK.
Torff, B., & Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Understanding and teaching the intuitive mind:
Student and teacher learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Yong, B. C. (1995). Teachers’ motives for entering into a teaching career in Brunei
Darussalam. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 275e280.
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2007). Motivational factors influencing teaching
as a career choice: development and validation of the FIT-Choice Scale. The
Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3), 167e202.
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Motivations, perceptions and aspirations
concerning teaching as a career for different types of beginning teachers.
Learning and Instruction, 18, 408e428.
Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. W. (2011). Teachers’ profiles of professional
engagement and career development in Australia and the U.S. Paper presented
at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI)
International Conference, Exeter, UK.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.
Psychological Review, 92(4), 548e573.
Wilke, R., & Losh, S. (2008). Beyond beliefs: preservice teachers’ planned instruc-
tional strategies. Action in Teacher Education, 30(3), 64e73.
Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Murphy, P. K. (2000). Teaching educational psychology to the
implicit mind. In B. Torff, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Understanding and teaching the
intuitive mind: Student and teacher learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Wubbels, T. (1992). Taking account of student teachers’ preconceptions. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 8(2), 137e149.
Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. E. (2002). Development and validation of
the epistemic belief inventory. In B. K. Hofer, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal
epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp.
103e118). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.