A Study on factors affecting job satisfaction of working women with Karl Pearson’s Chi-Square test

 

Manjula Malik¹, Dr. A. K. Nehra², Dr. B K Saini¹

¹Madhav University, Pindwara (Sirohi), Rajasthan.

²Lecturer at Govt. senior secondary school, Gudamalani (Barmer), Rajasthan.

 

ABSTRACT:

The Present research article is an endeavour to study the factors affecting job satisfaction of working women with Karl Pearson’s Chi-Square test. The chi square test for independence of two variables allows the researcher to determine whether variables are dependent or independent of each other. Two types of questionnaires, self made and on five pre-defined level scale were sent to 200 higher secondary government and private school teachers of Barmer district in Rajasthan out of which 180 were returned by the respondents. The Chi-Square test results indicate that there is a significant difference in job satisfaction of higher secondary school teacher. Research shows that female teachers are less satisfied than male teachers.

 

 

I. INTRODUCTION:

Before independence of India, the status of women was in a deprived state. The major cause of this was the prevalence of male dominance. Improvements came about in their conditions after the independence when they were given rights. Many social reformers such as, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, and Jyotiba Phule had undergone number of challenges and rendered an effective contribution towards enhancing the status of women in Indian society. Improvements were primarily dedicated towards abolishing the practice of sati, promoting widow re-marriage, abolishing child marriage, allowing women right to live, right to education, right to equality, right to property and prohibiting dowry. These acts brought about improvements in the status of women.

 

But with the increase in educational facilities they have gradually started taking employment outside the home. They carry the double burden of job and household work. Majority of the women are employed in industries and social organizations like schools, colleges, banks and hospitals. Their attitude towards employment, marital status and maternal status affect their mental health also.

 

Job satisfaction is one's feelings regarding the nature of their work. Job satisfaction can be influenced by a variety of factors, for example the quality of one's relationship with their supervisor, the quality of the physical environment in which they work; degree of fulfillment in their work, etc.

 

Job satisfaction is a very important attribute which is frequently measured by organizations. Various factors influence job satisfaction and our understanding of the importance of these factors in part from Frederick Hertzberg called elements such as remuneration, working relationships, status, job security and "Hygiene factors" because they concern the framework in which somebody works. Hygiene factors do not in themselves promote job satisfaction, but serve primarily to prevent job dissatisfaction. The second factors of Hertzberg’s theory is motivation contribute to job satisfaction and include achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement, and growth. An absence of job satisfaction can lead to poor motivation, stress, absenteeism, and high labor turnover.

 

In the present research paper, an attempt has been made to examine the nature of work environment that prevails in educational institutes; the psychological environment that prompts people to peak performance, and the important reasons that generally influence the satisfaction level of teachers in schools. Finally, an endeavour has also been made to study the commitment of female teachers in schools.

 

II. LITERATURE REVIEW:

Hawthorne studies (1924-1933) also called Hawthorne Effect found that job satisfaction increase productivity, not from the new conditions, but from the knowledge of being observed. This finding provided strong evidence that “people work for purposes other than pay”, which paved the way for researchers to investigate other factors also in job satisfaction.

 

According to Locke (1976) job satisfaction could be a pleasurable emotional state that results from one’s job experiences. Higher the opportunities for professional development higher will be the job satisfaction of the teachers (Rao, 1986). Higher the attitude towards teaching facilities available in the departments, the higher will be the job satisfaction (Malik and Patel, 1990). Das and Bishnoi (1999) reported that highest satisfied occupational group were doctors and news readers (66.67%) followed by self employed person (60%). It may be due to the pleasure they obtained by serving the humanities, bright future, social prestige and good earning.

 

Marlow (1996) studied the attitude of teachers through survey method and the study found that 44 percent of the teachers occasionally considered leaving the profession. Reason cited included student discipline, students’ lack of motivation and poor attitudes, emotional factors such as lack of fulfillment boredom with the
daily routine stress and frustration, lack of respect from the community, parents, administrators, and/ or students, difficult working condition, and low salaries.

 

According to Salazar et al. (2006), people are able to satisfy with their jobs, satisfactions-dissatisfactions level and arrive at a general conclusion. Creation, innovation and coming up with breakthroughs is closely linked to job satisfaction of employees that helps institutions to rise and change according to market requirements (Shun-Hsing, et al., 2006). So job satisfaction is an important variable that must be given high importance in an organizational set up.

 

According to Briones et al., (2010) students are one of the important assets of any society. Well-being of society depends upon its students because these are the people who will take the responsibility of the success of the society in future and in achieving this goal teacher’s role is extremely important. Affect theory, Dispositional theory, Motivation-Hygiene theory and Job characteristics model are some of the theories that are found in the literature of job satisfaction. There have been several studies into job satisfaction which investigate the impact of demographic characteristics such as age, gender, tenure, cadre and education but the evidence tends to be mixed, with positive and negative relationships sometimes identified for the interactions between the same variables (Habib Ahmad 2010).

 

Job satisfaction results from an evaluation of the job’s characteristics as feeling of people about different aspects of their jobs (Hedge and Borman, 2012). Job satisfaction is the extent to which people like or dislike their jobs and the degree to which they feel positively or negatively about various aspects of their jobs.

 

Job satisfaction has been defined as a pleasurable emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job; an effective reaction to one’s job; and an attitude towards one’s job. Weiss (2002) has argued that job satisfaction is an attitude but points out that researchers should clearly distinguish the objects of cognitive
evaluation which are affect (emotion), beliefs and behaviors. This definition suggests that we form attitudes towards our jobs by taking into account our feelings, our beliefs, and our behaviors.

 

Nur Iman and Widhi Lestari (2019) reveal that the leadership has effect on job satisfaction, work motivation and performance of employees.

 

Yeni Absah et al., (2020) found that Quality of work life has a positive and significant effect on employee performance through job satisfaction.

 

Job satisfaction for working women is a great importance to the family, society and employer. It helps the appreciable changes in the mindset of working women and the employer to change its policy for consequent productivity and enhances job satisfaction. As emotional instability is more irritating the government and non-government agencies should review the existing policies and practices to enhance job satisfaction. The present study was undertaken to investigate job satisfaction of employed women in organized sectors (Government and private educational institutes).

Based on the above review, the suitable methodology and procedure for the present investigation are given in detailed in this research paper.

 

III. METHODOLOGY:

The methodology employed in attaining information about job satisfaction in secondary schools through a survey. The survey questionnaire is designed and distributed to targeted respondents. Questionnaire is designed into two parts. First part is taking consideration in demographical factor of respondents as shown in figure 1and table 2. The second part of the questionnaire is required the respondents to rate various factors that affects job satisfaction into five pre-defined level scale as shown in table 1. These scales are as follows: 1= Strongly dissatisfied, 2 = Dissatisfied, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Satisfied, 5 = Strongly satisfied. Opinion of the respondents (teachers, N=180) is shown in table 1

 

Table 1. Factors affecting job satisfaction on five pre-defined level scale

S.No.	Factors effecting job satisfaction	1	2	3	4	5
1	Nature of work
2	Promotional opportunity
3	Relationship with colleagues
4	Relationship with superiors
5	Decision making authority
6	Level of freedom or authority
7	Salary
8	Work environment
9	Recreational activities
10	Reward system

 

Characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity, location, education, employment, marital status, household composition, and so on, are some of the examples of demographics typically used in surveys. Demographic questions are particularly useful if researcher is looking to gather some background information about his/her respondent.

 

Fig. 1. Schematic view of factors affecting job satisfaction

 

Table 2. Demographic profile (Personal profile) of the respondents (N=180)

S.No.	Profile	Frequency	%	Cumulative percentage
1.	Gender Male Female	116 64	64.4 35.6	64.4 100
2.	Marital status Married Unmarried Widowed Divorced	50 48 44 38	27.77 26.66 24.44 21.13	27.77 54.43 78.87 100
3.	Age  25-35 36-45 46-55 56-above	49 55 40 36	27.22 30.56 22.22 20	27.22 57.78 80 100
4.	Education Secondary (10th) Senior secondary (12th) Graduation Post Graduation Ph.D.	61 42   33 27 17	33.9 23.3   18.3 15.0 9.5	33.9 57.2   75.5 90.5 100
5.	Salary per month (Rs) up to 30,000 30,001-40,000 40,001-50,000 Above 50,000	48 55 42 35	26.67 30.56 23.33 19.44	26.67 57.23 80.56 100

 

Table 3. Opinion of the respondents (teachers, N=180)

S.No.	Factors effecting job satisfaction	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Total
1	Gender Male Female	4 12	6 8	8 12	30 14	68 18	116 64
2	Marital status Married Unmarried Widowed Divorced	4 6 4 5	6 3 8 4	4 7 4 14	25 14 12 5	11 18 16 10	50 48 44 38
3	Age 25-35 36-45 46-55 56-above	3 9 5 4	8 5 6 14	4 21 5 4	13 7 12 5	21 13 12 9	49 55 40 36
4	Education Secondary (10th) Senior secondary (12th) Graduation Post graduation Ph.D.	3 4   4 5 6	5 4   5 2 3	5 7   4 4 2	15 19   14 10 4	33 8   6 6 2	61 42   33 27 17
5	Salary per month (Rs) up to 30,000 30,001-40,000 40,001-50,000 Above 50,000	7 8 5 4	8 5 6 11	5 21 7 9	9 8 16 5	19 13 8 6	48 52 42 35

 

Testing of Hypotheses:

1. To find out the relationship between gender and job satisfaction.

2. To find out the relationship between marital status and job satisfaction.

3. To find out the relationship between age and job satisfaction.

4. To find out the relationship between education and job satisfaction.

5. To find out the relationship between salary and job satisfaction.

 

Null Hypothesis (H0)

Hypothesis-1 There is no relationship between gender of the respondents and job satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-2 There is no relationship between marital statuses of the respondents and job Satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-3 There is no relationship between age of the respondents and job satisfaction

 

Hypothesis-4 There is no relationship between education of the respondents and job Satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-5. There is no relationship between salary of the respondents and job satisfaction.

 

Alternative Hypothesis (Ha):

1. There is a relation between gender of the respondents and job satisfaction.

2. There is a relation between marital status of the respondents and job satisfaction.

3. There is a relation between age of the respondents and job satisfaction.

4. There is a relation between education of the respondents and job satisfaction.

5. There is a relation between salary of the respondents and job satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-1 for gender:

 

Table 4. Contingency table for Gender profile of the respondents (N=180)

S. No.	Factors effecting  job satisfaction	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Row Total
1	Gender  Male Female	4 12	6 8	8 12	30 14	68 18	116 64
	Column Total	16	14	20	44	86	N=180

 

Assumptions about Expected frequency (Ei):

1. No expected case Ei should be less than 1. No more than 20% of the cells should have less than 5 expected cases.

2. The sum of the Oi − Ei column is 0. This is because the differences between the observed and expected numbers of cases are sometimes positive and sometimes negative, but these positives and negatives cancel if the calculations are correct.

 

Table 5. Expected Contingency table for Gender profile of the respondents

Observed frequency (Oi)	Expected frequency (Ei)	Oi - Ei	(Oi-Ei)2	χ2 = (Oi-Ei)2/Ei
4	10.3	-6.3	39.69	3.853398
6	9.02	-3.02	9.1204	1.011131
8	12.9	-4.9	24.01	1.86124
30	28.4	1.6	2.56	0.090141
68	55.4	12.6	158.76	2.865704
12	5.69	6.31	39.8161	6.997557
8	4.98	3.02	9.1204	1.831406
12	7.11	4.89	23.9121	3.363165
14	15.6	-1.6	2.56	0.164103
18	30.6	-12.6	158.76	5.188235
Total		0.0		27.2

Degree of freedom = (R-1) (C-1) = (2-1) (5-1) = 1x4 = 4

χ² calculated value = 27.2 (shown in table 5)

χ² Tabulated value (critical value) = 14.860 (At α = 0.005 level of significance from the chi square table in Appendix 1.1

Since χ² = calculated value (27.2) > tabulated value (14.860)

 

Therefore, the null hypothesis (H₀₁) of no relationship between the two variables can be rejected. Hence Alternative Hypothesis (H_a1) is accepted i.e. there is a relation between the gender of the respondents and the job satisfaction.

 

Method of Calculation of Expected frequency (Ei)

Variable	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Row Total
Category 1	A1	A2	A3	A4	A5	A1+A2+A3+A4+A5
Category 2	B1	B2	B3	B4	B5	B1+B2+B3+B4+B5
Column Total	A1+B1	A2+B2	A3+B3	A4+B4	A5+B5	N=A1+A2+A3+A4+A5 +B1+B2+B3+B4+B5

 

Now we need to calculate the expected frequency (E_i) for each cell in the table and we can do that using the row total times the column total divided by the grand total (N). For example, for cell A₁ the expected frequency (E_i) would be (A₁+A₂+A₃+A₄+A₅) (B₁+B₂+B₃+B₄+B₅)/N

e.g. for cell A₁ expected value is given by

E_i = (Row Total) (Column Total)/N

A₁ = (A₁+A₂+A₃+A₄+A₅) (A₁+B₁)/N

In Table 4 for variable gender, expected frequency (E_i) for case male HD (4) is given as

E_i = (Row Total) (Column Total)/N

 = (116) (16) /180 = 10.4

Expected frequency (E_i) for case female HS (18) is given as

E_i = (Row Total) (Column Total)/N

 = (64) (86) /180 = 30.6

Similarly expected frequency (E_i) for other cells can be calculated.

 

Hypothesis-2 for marital status

Table 6. Contingency table for marital status of the respondents (N=180)

S.No.	Factors effecting job satisfaction	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Row Total
2	Marital status Married  Unmarried  Widowed  Divorced	4 6 4 5	6 3 8 4	4 7 4 14	25 14 12 5	11 18 16 10	50 48 44 38
	Column Total	19	21	29	56	55	N= 180

 

Table 7. Expected Contingency table for marital status of the respondents

Observed frequency (Oi)	Expected frequency (Ei)	Oi - Ei	(Oi-Ei)2	χ2 = (Oi-Ei)2/Ei
4	5.28	-4.06	16.4836	2.045112
6	5.83	9.4	88.36	5.664103
4	8.06	-4.3	18.49	1.208497
25	15.6	0.93	0.8649	0.170592
11	15.3	-2.6	6.76	1.207143
6	5.07	-0.73	0.5329	0.068939
3	5.60	-0.9	0.81	0.054362
7	7.73	3.3	10.89	0.740816
14	14.9	-0.64	0.4096	0.088276
18	14.7	2.87	8.2369	1.605634
4	4.64	-3.09	9.5481	1.3467
8	5.13	-1.7	2.89	0.210949
4	7.09	2.6	6.76	0.504478
12	13.7	0.99	0.9801	0.244414
16	13.4	-0.43	0.1849	0.041738
5	4.01	7.88	62.0944	10.14614
4	4.43	-6.8	46.24	3.918644
14	6.12	-1.6	2.56	0.22069
5	11.8	-4.06	16.4836	2.045112
10	11.6	9.4	88.36	5.664103
Total		0.01		29.9

Degree of freedom = (R-1) (C-1) = (4-1) (5-1) = 3x4 = 12

χ² calculated value = 29.9 (shown in table 7)

χ² Tabulated value (critical value) = 28.300 (At α = 0.005 level of significance from the chi square table in Appendix 1.1

Since χ² = calculated value (29.9) > tabulated value (28.300)

 

Therefore, the null hypothesis (H₀₂) of no relationship between the two variables can be rejected. Hence Alternative Hypothesis (H_a2) is accepted i.e. there is a relation between the marital status of the respondents and the job satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-3 for Age

Table 8. Contingency table for age of the respondents (N=180)

S. No.	Factors effecting job satisfaction	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Row Total
3	Age 25-35  36-45  46-55  56-above	3 9 5 4	8 5 6 14	4 21 5 4	13 7 12 5	21 13 12 9	49 55 40 36
	Column Total	21	33	34	37	55	N= 180

 

Table 9. Expected Contingency table for age of the respondents

Observed frequency (Oi)	Expected frequency (Ei)	Oi - Ei	(Oi-Ei)2	χ2 = (Oi-Ei)2/Ei
3	5.72	-2.72	7.3984	1.293427
8	8.98	-0.98	0.9604	0.106949
4	9.26	-5.26	27.6676	2.987862
13	10.1	2.9	8.41	0.832673
21	15.0	6	36	2.4
9	6.42	2.58	6.6564	1.036822
5	10.1	-5.1	26.01	2.575248
21	10.4	10.6	112.36	10.80385
7	11.3	-4.3	18.49	1.636283
13	16.8	-3.8	14.44	0.859524
5	4.67	0.33	0.1089	0.023319
6	7.33	-1.33	1.7689	0.241323
5	7.56	-2.56	6.5536	0.866878
12	8.22	3.78	14.2884	1.738248
12	12.2	-0.2	0.04	0.003279
4	4.20	-0.2	0.04	0.009524
14	6.60	7.4	54.76	8.29697
4	6.80	-2.8	7.84	1.152941
5	7.40	-2.4	5.76	0.778378
9	11.0	-2	4	0.363636
Total		-0.06		38.1

Degree of freedom = (R-1) (C-1) = (4-1) (5-1) = 3x4 = 12

χ² calculated value = 38.1 (shown in table 9)

χ² Tabulated value (critical value) = 28.300 (At α = 0.005 level of significance from the chi square table in Appendix 1.1

Since χ2 = calculated value (38.1) > tabulated value (28.300)

 

Therefore, the null hypothesis (H₀₃) of no relationship between the two variables can be rejected. Hence Alternative Hypothesis (H_a3) is accepted i.e. there is a relation between the age of the respondents and the job satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-4 for Education:

 

Table 10. Contingency table for education of the respondents (N=180)

S.No.	Factors effecting job satisfaction	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Row Total
4	Education Secondary (10th) S. Secondary (12th) Graduation Post graduation Ph.D.	3 4 4 5 6	5 4 5 2 3	5 7 4 4 2	15 19 14 10 4	33 8 6 6 2	61 42 33 27 17
	Column Total	22	19	22	62	55	N= 180

 

Table 11. Expected Contingency table for education of the respondents

Observed frequency (Oi)	Expected frequency (Ei)	Oi - Ei	(Oi-Ei)2	χ2 = (Oi-Ei)2/ Ei
3	7.46	-4.46	19.8916	2.666434
5	6.44	-1.44	2.0736	0.321988
5	7.46	-2.46	6.0516	0.811206
15	21.0	-6	36	1.714286
33	18.6	14.4	207.36	11.14839
4	5.13	-1.13	1.2769	0.248908
4	4.43	-0.43	0.1849	0.041738
7	5.13	1.87	3.4969	0.681657
19	14.5	4.5	20.25	1.396552
8	12.8	-4.8	23.04	1.8
4	4.03	-0.03	0.0009	0.000223
5	3.48	1.52	2.3104	0.663908
4	4.03	-0.03	0.0009	0.000223
14	11.4	2.6	6.76	0.592982
6	10.1	-4.1	16.81	1.664356
5	3.30	1.7	2.89	0.875758
2	2.85	-0.85	0.7225	0.253509
4	3.30	0.7	0.49	0.148485
10	9.30	0.7	0.49	0.052688
6	8.25	-2.25	5.0625	0.613636
6	2.08	3.92	15.3664	7.387692
3	1.79	1.21	1.4641	0.817933
2	2.08	-0.08	0.0064	0.003077
4	5.86	-1.86	3.4596	0.590375
2	5.19	-3.19	10.1761	1.960713
Total		0.01		36.4

Degree of freedom = (R-1) (C-1) = (5-1) (5-1) = 4x4 = 16

χ² calculated value = 36.4 (shown in table 11)

χ² Tabulated value (critical value) = 34.267 (At α = 0.005 level of significance from the chi square table in Appendix 1.1

Since χ² = calculated value (36.4) > tabulated value (34.267)

 

Therefore, the null hypothesis (H₀₄) of no relationship between the two variables can be rejected. Hence Alternative Hypothesis (H_a4) is accepted i.e. there is a relation between the education of the respondents and the job satisfaction.

 

Hypothesis-5 for Salary:

 

Table 12. Contingency table for salary of the respondents (N=180)

S.No.	Factors effecting job satisfaction	1 HD	2 D	3 N	4 S	5 HS	Row Total
5	Salary per month up to 30,000 (Rs) 30,001-40,000  40,001-50,000  Above 50,000	7   8 5 4	8   5 6 11	5   21 7 9	9   8 16 5	19   13 8 6	48   55 42 35
	Column Total	24	30	42	38	46	N = 180

 

Table 13. Expected Contingency table for salary of the respondents

Observed frequency (Oi)	Expected frequency (Ei)	Oi - Ei	(Oi-Ei)2	χ2 = (Oi-Ei)2/Ei
7	6.40	0.6	0.36	0.05625
8	8.00	0	0	0
5	11.2	-6.2	38.44	3.432143
9	10.1	-1.1	1.21	0.119802
19	12.3	6.7	44.89	3.649593
8	7.33	0.67	0.4489	0.061241
5	9.17	-4.17	17.3889	1.896281
21	12.8	8.2	67.24	5.253125
8	11.6	-3.6	12.96	1.117241
13	14.1	-1.1	1.21	0.085816
5	5.60	-0.6	0.36	0.064286
6	7.00	-1	1	0.142857
7	9.80	-2.8	7.84	0.8
16	8.87	7.13	50.8369	5.73133
8	10.7	-2.7	7.29	0.681308
4	4.67	-0.67	0.4489	0.096124
11	5.83	5.17	26.7289	4.584717
9	8.17	0.83	0.6889	0.084321
5	7.39	-2.39	5.7121	0.77295
6	8.94	-2.94	8.6436	0.966846
Total		0.03		29.6

 

Degree of freedom = (R-1) (C-1) = (4-1) (5-1) = 3x4 = 12

χ² calculated value = 29.6 (shown in table 13)

χ² Tabulated value (critical value) = 28.300 (At α = 0.005 level of significance from the chi square table in Appendix 1.1

Since χ² = calculated value (29.6) > tabulated value (28.300)

 

Therefore, the null hypothesis (H₀₅) of no relationship between the two variables can be rejected. Hence Alternative Hypothesis (H_a5) is accepted i.e. there is a relation between the salary of the respondents and the job satisfaction.

 

Table 14. Tabular comparison of various factors effecting job satisfaction of the respondents using Chi- square (χ²) test

S. No.	Factors effecting  job satisfaction	Chi- square (χ2) value		DF	Result Significant at	Null Hypothesis
		calculated	Tabulated at α = 0.005
1	Gender	27.2	14.860	4	P<0.005	Rejected
2	Marital status	29.9	28.300	12	P<0.005	Rejected
3	Age	38.1	28.300	12	P<0.005	Rejected
4	Education	36.4	34.267	16	P<0.005	Rejected
5	Salary	29.6	28.300	12	P<0.005	Rejected

DF = Degree of freedom

 

Fig. 2. Graphical comparison of Chi-Square (χ²) value of various factors affecting job satisfaction

 

IV. RESULTS:

This research focuses on the factors affecting teacher’s job satisfaction in higher secondary schools. The primary descriptive results for each factor are as follows:

In general the results are positive. Most of the teachers (above 75%) tend to be satisfied with their job.

The factors that lead to highest satisfaction are working condition, job security and relationship with co-workers and pay.

The factors that lead to lowest satisfaction are freedom, relationship with immediate supervisor and promotion.

The factor that has least affect on job satisfaction is gender and highest affect is salary.

 

V. FINDINGS AND SUGGESTIONS:

Findings:

Majority of respondents rejoices and satisfies with the current educational policy.

Female teachers are less satisfied (only 69%) with comparative to male teachers (more than 90%) shown in table 4.

Divorced (27 %) followed by widowed (23%) are highly dissatisfied comparative to married and unmarried teachers. Maybe they have seen all ups and downs of life and now desperate to fulfill desires shown in table 6.

25-35 age group teachers are highly satisfied may be due to young and above 56 age are least satisfied shown in table 8.

Research reveals that teachers having Ph.D. degree and teaching at high school level are highly dissatisfied (above 35%) shown in table 10.

Teachers those getting salary between up to 30,000 Rs per month are highly satisfied than those getting above 50,000 may be salary is not according to their higher educational qualification (Ph.D.) shown in table 12.

Figure 2 shows that gender has least effect on job satisfaction.

 

Sugession:

Minimize the negative types of motivation.

Increase slightly their existing allowances to reduce teacher stress and absenteeism.

It is suggested to provide effective training to the teachers working in the schools.

Most of the teachers suggested that organization should motivate the teachers.

Merits and good performance should always be encouraged by way of appreciation letters, rewards, promotion, and special increments.

The headmaster of the high school should provide opportunity to the teachers to share their valuable suggestions.

 

VI. LIMITATIONS:

1. For conducting the study self-report questionnaires are used.

2. The area covered for the present study was only from one district of Rajasthan i.e. Barmer. The results would fairly be generalised if more number of districts were included in study.

3. The participants were from rural area of Barmer district.

4. The study not included equal number of male and female teacher participants.

 

VII. FUTURE STUDIES:

1 -A detailed study can be conducted with more districts of Rajasthan and other states. It will help to give more insight into the findings.

2 -The study can be conducted with equal number of male and female teacher participants to get more insight in understanding the role of gender.

 

 

VIII. REFERENCES:

1       Oyebamiji Florence Funmilola, K. T. (2013). Impact of Job Satisfaction Dimensions on Job Performance in a Small and Medium Enterprises in Ibadan, South Western, Nigeria. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(11), 509-521.

2       Poipoi, L. C. (2010). Perceived factors influencing public secondary school teachers' job satisfaction in Busia District, Kenya. International Research Journals, 1(11), 659-665.

3       Abiodun, A. (2012). Job Satisfaction Statu of Primary School Teachers in OTA, Nigeria. European Journal of Educational Studies, 4(1), 11-18.

4       Habib Ahmad, K. A. (2010). Relationship between Job Satisfaction, Job Performance, Attitude towards Work and Organizational Commitment. European Journal of Social Sciences, 18(2), 257-267.

5       Locke, E. (1976). Nature and causes of Job Satisfaction. Handbook of Industrial and organizational psychology.

6       Briones, E. T. (2010). Job Satisfaction of Secondary School Teachers: Effect of Demographic and Psycho-Social Factors. The Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid, 26(2), 115-122.

 

Appendix1.1

 

Df	0.995	0.99	0.975	0.95	0.90	0.10	0.05	0.025	0.01	0.005
1	0.000	0.000	0.001	0.004	0.0016	2.706	3.841	5.024	6.635	7.879
2	20.010	0.020	0.051	0.103	0.211	4.605	5.991	7.378	9.210	10.597
3	0.072	0.115	0.216	0.352	0.584	6.251	7.815	9.348	11.345	12.838
4	0.207	0.297	0.484	0.711	1.064	7.779	9.488	11.143	13.277	14.860
5	0.412	0.554	0.831	1.145	1.610	9.236	11.070	12.833	15.086	16.750
6	0.676	0.872	1.237	1.635	2.204	10.645	12.592	14.449	16.812	18.548
7	0.989	1.239	1.690	2.167	2.833	12.017	14.067	16.013	18.475	20.278
8	1.344	1.646	2.180	2.733	3.490	13.362	15.507	17.535	20.090	21.955
9	1.735	2.088	2.700	3.325	4.168	14.684	16.919	19.023	21.666	23.589
10	2.156	2.558	3.247	3.940	4.865	15.987	18.307	20.483	23.209	25.188
11	2.603	3.053	3.816	4.575	5.578	17.275	19.675	21.920	24.725	26.757
12	3.074	3.571	4.404	5.226	6.304	18.549	21.026	23.337	26.217	28.300
13	3.565	4.107	5.009	5.892	7.042	19.812	22.362	24.736	27.688	29.819
14	4.075	4.660	5.629	6.571	7.790	21.064	23.685	26.119	29.141	31.319
15	4.601	5.229	6.262	7.261	8.547	22.307	24.996	27.488	30.578	32.801
16	5.142	5.812	6.908	7.962	9.312	23.542	26.296	28.845	32.000	34.267
17	5.697	6.408	7.564	8.672	10.085	24.769	27.587	30.191	33.409	35.718
18	6.265	7.015	8.231	9.390	10.865	25.989	28.869	31.526	34.805	37.156
19	6.844	7.633	8.907	10.117	11.651	27.204	30.144	32.852	36.191	38.582
20	7.434	8.260	9.591	10.851	12.443	28.412	31.410	34.170	37.566	37.997

 

 

Received on 18.11.2020         Modified on 19.01.2021

Accepted on 17.04.2021   ©AandV Publications All right reserved