Bivariate Analysis - The Questionnaire Results

Chapter 4: Results

4.1 The Questionnaire Results

4.1.2 Bivariate Analysis

However, these tests have their limitations because, with large sample sizes, it is possible to obtain significant results from small deviations from normality. A significant test does not necessarily determine whether the deviation from normality is sufficient to cause bias in any statistical procedures that are applied to the data.

Therefore, plotting the data is a useful method that can be employed to make an informed decision about the extent of non-normality. The figures are called normal Q- Q plots and are shown in Appendix 3 for all research dependent variables, where the values that are expected to be obtained if the distribution were normal (expected values are a straight diagonal line) are drawn against the values actually seen in the data set (observed values as dots on the chart). Based on examining Q-Q plots, a normality assumption of this research sample was confirmed.

Sex: In this research data, males always have slightly higher means than females for all dependent variables, except in CTS, where the means for males and females are the same (Table 20).

Table 20: Mean, SD, and Sex of Participants

Item Gender n M SD

C Male 288 3.23 0.47

Female 449 3.14 0.42

OC Male 288 3.14 0.53

Female 449 3.04 0.49

CT Male 288 3.32 0.48

Female 449 3.25 0.42

AC Male 288 3.34 0.58

Female 449 3.23 0.55

CC Male 288 2.94 0.68

Female 449 2.90 0.68

NC Male 288 2.98 0.74

Female 449 2.80 0.68

CTP Male 288 3.15 0.61

Female 449 3.04 0.53

CTS Male 288 3.44 0.47

Female 449 3.44 0.43

CTSB Male 288 3.51 0.48

Female 449 3.44 0.48

To test whether the differences found in comparing means are statistically significant and not only as a coincidence of the sample, independent samples t-test is conducted on the means of the various commitments and the sex variable, and the results are shown in Table 21.

Table 21: Independent samples T-test of Sex and the Various Commitment Components

Item t-test df Sig- 2 tailed t-test expression t-test interpretation Effect size cohen’s (D) C 2.51 557 .012* t=2.51, df=557, p < 0.05 Using the t-test, there is

a significant difference between males and females.

0.19 Weak effect

OC 2.63 735 .009** t=2.63, df=735, p < 0.05 Using the t-test, there is a significant difference between males and females.

0.20 Weak effect

CT 2.06 735 .040* t=2.06, df=735, p < 0.05 Using the t-test, there is a significant difference between males and females.

0.15 Weak effect

AC 2.68 735 .008** t=2.68, df=735, p < 0.05 Using the t-test, there is a significant difference between males and females.

0.20 Weak effect

CC 0.71 735 .481 - - -

NC 3.33 735 .001** t=3.33, df=735, p < 0.05 Using the t-test, there is a significant difference between males and females.

0.25

Modest effect CTP 2.5 555 .013* t=2.50, df=555, p < 0.05 Using the t-test, there is

a significant difference between males and females.

0.19 Weak effect

CTS -0.01 735 .995 - - -

CTS B

1.91 735 .056 - - -

p < 0.05*

p < 0.01**

Note. C = Commitment, OC = Teachers’ organizational Commitment, CT = Teachers’ Commitment to Teaching, AC = Affective Commitment, CC = Continuance Commitment, NC = Normative Commitment, CTP = Commitment to Teaching Profession, CTS = Commitment to Teaching Students, CTSB = Commitment to Teaching Subject. Cut-off points for cohen’s (D): weak effect 0 - 0.2; modest effect 0.21 - 0.50; moderate effect 0.51 - 1.00; strong effect more than 1.00

The difference between the two groups of male and female teachers in the sample is statistically significant when it is less than 0.05 (p < 0.05). The t-test shows that there is a significant difference between male and female teachers in the sample

for all commitment dependent variables, excluding CC, CTS and CTSB where there is no significant difference between the two groups of teachers.

Referring to Table 10, the number of male teachers in the sample is n = 288 (39.1%), while the number of female teachers in the sample is n = 449 (60.9%).

According to the t-test (Table 21) results, male and female commitment of teachers (C) level shows a significant difference between them as t = 2.51, df = 557, p = 0.012, p< 0.05. While teachers’ organizational commitment (OC) level shows a significant difference where t = 2.63, df = 735, p = 0.009, p < 0.05, and commitment to teaching CT level shows a significant difference between them, as t = 2.06, df = 735, p = 0.040, p < 0.05.

For OC, both AC and NC levels show a significant level of differences for male and female teachers. They can be expressed by t = 2.68, df = 735, p = 0.008, p < 0.05 for AC, and by t = 3.33, df = 735, p = 0.001, p < 0.05 for NC. However, CC shows no significant differences based on the sex of the teacher.

The CT components show a similar pattern to OC ones, with questionnaire items showing a mixture of responses, both significant and non-significant, based on the sex of the teacher. CTP shows a significant level of differences between male and female teachers. The CTP can be expressed with t = 2.50, df = 555, p = 0.013, p <0.05.

However, CTS and CTSB show no significant differences based on the sex of the teacher.

From calculating the effect size of the t-test, Cohen’s (D) was used, for all statistically significant commitments components, with cut-off points being: weak effect 0 - 0.2; modest effect 0.21 - 0.50; moderate effect 0.51 - 1.00; strong effect more than 1.00, as it is suggested by Cohen (Muijs, 2004). The significant difference

between male and female teachers shown for this sample in Table 21, suggests weak effects for all commitment components except for NC where it expressed a modest effect.

Age: In order to determine whether commitment differed, based on the age of the teacher, an one-way ANOVA test was conducted. It demonstrated a significant difference only between age and AC at the 0.05 level, while C and other commitment components it demonstrates no significant difference between age and C (p < 0.05).

(Table 25). Tukey HSD (honestly significant difference) test is used to determine the source of the difference. For AC, the sum of squares that can be explained between the age groups’ factor is 2.746, while the F value was the variation between age groups divided by the within the age group and is equal to 2.927.

Table 22: One-way ANOVA test: Age and Commitments Components

Item Sum of

Squares df

Mean Square

F Sig.

C Between Groups 0.542 3 0.181 0.941 .420 Within Groups 140.737 733 0.192

Total 141.279 736

OC Between Groups 1.099 3 0.366 1.428 .233 Within Groups 187.963 733 0.256

Total 189.062 736

CT Between Groups 0.710 3 0.237 1.183 .315 Within Groups 146.574 733 0.200

Total 147.284 736

AC Between Groups 2.746 3 0.915 2.927 .033*

Within Groups 229.202 733 0.313

Total 231.948 736

CC Between Groups 2.172 3 0.724 1.564 .197 Within Groups 339.336 733 0.463

Total 341.508 736

NC Between Groups 2.279 3 0.760 1.511 .210 Within Groups 368.597 733 0.503

Total 370.877 736

CTP Between Groups 2.384 3 0.795 2.491 .059 Within Groups 233.847 733 0.319

Total 236.230 736

CTS Between Groups 0.709 3 0.236 1.189 .313 Within Groups 145.699 733 0.199

Total 146.408 736

CTSB Between Groups 0.550 3 0.183 0.793 .498 Within Groups 169.435 733 0.231

Total 169.985 736

p < 0.05*

p < 0.01**

Teachers were divided into four age groups (a: 20-30 years old, n= 60, 8.1%;

b: 31-40 years old, n= 308, 41.8%; c: 41-50 years old, n= 263, 35.7%; d: 50 years old and above, n= 106, 14.4%) (Table 10). According to the one-way ANOVA post hoc results (Table 23), there were some meaningful differences among commitment subcomponents. AC is the only commitment subcomponent that shows significant

differences from all commitment subcomponents. Moreover, results in Table 23 in general show that the 50 years old and above (d) group is the most committed group of teachers, while the least committed group of teachers is 20-30 years old (a).

Table 23: One-way ANOVA and Post Hoc: Age and AC items

Item (a) 20-30

(n=60)

(b) 31-40 (n=308)

(d) 50 and above (n=106)

Sig.

groups having differences

M SD M SD M SD M SD Tukey test

AC 3.16 0.54 3.24 0.55 3.29 0.56 3.40 0.58 2.927 .033* (a-d)

Q1. I would be happy to spend the rest

of my career at this school.

2.78 0.92 2.97 0.85 3.06 0.89 3.27 0.81 5.015 .002** (a-d), (b-d)

Q3. I feel as if this school’s problems are my own.

3.02 0.70 2.98 0.78 3.15 0.68 3.26 0.77 4.918 .002** (b-c), (b-d)

Q3. I feel as if this school’s problems are my own.

3.02 0.70 2.98 0.78 3.15 0.68 3.26 0.77 4.918 .002** (b-c), (b-d)

p < 0.05*

p < 0.01**

Note. AC = Affective Commitment.

For the item, I would be happy to spend the rest of my career at this school, Group d teachers (50 years old and above) expressed their highest level of AC, while Group a teachers (20-30 years old) expressed the least AC, where (a: M= 2.78, SD 0.92; d: M= 3.27, SD 0.81).

The findings also showing that the item, I feel as if this school’s problems are my own, Group d teachers (50 years old and above) to be the most affectively committed, while Group b (31-40 years old) was the least affectively committed where (b: M = 2.98, SD = 0.78; d: M = 3.26, SD = 0.77).

Nationality: One-way ANOVA test shows a significant difference with all commitment component and subcomponents at the 0.05 level (p < 0.05) except between nationality and CTS (Table 24). Therefore, CTS is the only commitment subcomponent that did not show a statistically significant difference based on the nationality of teachers.

Table 24: One-way ANOVA test of Nationality

Item Sum of

Squares df Mean

Square F Sig.

C Between Groups 13.993 2 6.996 40.344 .000**

Within Groups 127.287 734 0.173

Total 141.279 736

OC Between Groups 31.884 2 15.942 74.446 .000**

Within Groups 157.178 734 0.214

Total 189.062 736

CT Between Groups 7.079 2 3.540 18.530 .000**

Within Groups 140.205 734 0.191

Total 147.284 736

AC Between Groups 24.297 2 12.149 42.943 .000**

Within Groups 207.650 734 0.283

Total 231.948 736

CC Between Groups 39.694 2 19.847 48.266 .000**

Within Groups 301.814 734 0.411

Total 341.508 736

NC Between Groups 50.843 2 25.422 58.305 .000**

Within Groups 320.033 734 0.436

Total 370.877 736

CTP Between Groups 15.677 2 7.839 26.087 .000**

Within Groups 220.553 734 0.300

Total 236.230 736

CTS Between Groups 1.015 2 0.507 2.561 .078

Within Groups 145.394 734 0.198

Total 146.408 736

CTSB Between Groups 6.831 2 3.415 15.365 .000**

Within Groups 163.154 734 0.222

Total 169.985 736

p < 0.05*

p < 0.01**

Teachers were divided into three nationality groups (a: UAE, n = 260, 35.3%;

b: Arabs, n = 267, 36.2%; and c: Others, n = 210, 28.5%) (Table 10). Moreover, post hoc multiple comparisons results and Tukey HSD test were used (Table 25). These tests demonstrate meaningful significant differences between the two groups, Group a (UAE teachers) and Group b (Arab teachers), and this is repeated for all commitment components, except CC. The Arab teachers show a higher commitment mean

compared to all other groups for all commitment components except for CC. However, for the CC, the differences are seen between Group c (other nationality teachers) and the two groups of Group a (UAE teachers) and Group b (Arab teachers); where Group a (for UAE teachers) shows the highest CC mean and Group c (other nationality teachers) shows the lowest CC mean. For C, post hoc test shows significant results (p

< 0.05). it is found that the two groups of a (UAE teachers) and b (Arab teachers) having differences with group c (other nationality).

Furthermore, post hoc multiple comparisons results and Tukey HSD test results that are shown in (Table 25) revealed other clusters of groups that present meaningful significant differences. It is between Group a (UAE teachers) and Group c (other nationality teachers) where it is repeated for all commitment components, excluding CT and CTP, while Group b (Arab teachers) shows the highest mean and group c (other nationality teachers) shows the lowest mean.

A meaningful significant difference was found between the two groups of Group b (Arab teachers) and Group c (other nationality teachers), where it is repeated for all commitment components, excluding CTSB, with Group b (Arab teachers) demonstrating the highest mean and Group c (other nationality teachers) demonstrating the lowest mean.

Table 25: One-way ANOVA and Post-hoc Test of the Nationality and Commitments

Items

(a) UAE (n=260)

(b) Arab ( n=267)

F Sig.

Groups having differences

M SD M SD M SD Tukey test

C 3.16 0.45 3.34 0.40 3.00 0.40 40.344 .000* (a-b),(a-c),(b-c) OC 3.13 0.47 3.27 0.44 2.76 0.48 74.446 .000** (a-b),(a-c),(b-c) CT 3.19 0.49 3.41 0.42 3.23 0.39 18.530 .000** (a-b),(b-c) AC 3.28 0.53 3.47 0.51 3.02 0.56 42.943 .000** (a-b),(a-c),(b-c) CC 3.07 0.64 3.06 0.57 2.55 0.73 48.266 .000** (a-c),(b-c) NC 2.86 0.70 3.16 0.65 2.50 0.63 58.305 .000** (a-b),(a-c),(b-c) CTP 2.97 0.58 3.28 0.53 2.98 0.52 26.087 .000** (a-b),(b-c)

CTS 3.41 0.49 3.49 0.42 3.40 0.42 2.561 .078 -

CTSB 3.34 0.55 3.56 0.43 3.51 0.42 15.365 .000** (a-b),(a-c) p < 0.05*

p < 0.01**

Qualifications and education level: Conducting one-way ANOVA test on teachers’ qualifications and education level demonstrated meaningful significant differences at the 0.05 level for the overall C, OC and all of its subcomponents, but not for CT. The F-value demonstrates a higher value for NC followed by CC then AC.

The CT presented with no statistically significant difference between teachers’

qualification and education level, excluding only CTP where it shows a statistically significant difference (Table 26).

Table 26: One-way ANOVA test of Teachers’ Qualification and Commitment

Item Sum of

Squares df Mean

Square F Sig.

C Between Groups 4.275 3 1.425 7.624 .000**

Within Groups 137.005 733 0.187

Total 141.279 736

OC Between Groups 9.111 3 3.037 12.370 .000**

Within Groups 179.952 733 0.246

Total 189.062 736

CT Between Groups 1.418 3 0.473 2.376 .069

Within Groups 145.866 733 0.199

Total 147.284 736

AC Between Groups 5.051 3 1.684 5.439 .001**

Within Groups 226.897 733 0.310

Total 231.948 736

CC Between Groups 12.935 3 4.312 9.619 .000**

Within Groups 328.572 733 0.448

Total 341.508 736

NC Between Groups 15.068 3 5.023 10.347 .000**

Within Groups 355.808 733 0.485

Total 370.877 736

CTP Between Groups 6.291 3 2.097 6.685 .000**

Within Groups 229.939 733 0.314

Total 236.230 736

CTS Between Groups 0.352 3 0.117 0.588 .623

Within Groups 146.057 733 0.199

Total 146.408 736

CTSB Between Groups 1.043 3 0.348 1.508 .211

Within Groups 168.942 733 0.230

Total 169.985 736

p < 0.05*

p < 0.01**

The source of the difference between teachers’ education levels and commitment of teachers (C) at the 0.05 level was examined using Tukey HSD test (Table 27). Teachers were divided into four groups (a: diploma, n = 12, 1.6%; b:

bachelor, n = 574, 77.9%; c: master, n = 139, 18.9%; d: doctorate, n = 12, 1.6%) (Table 10). Moreover, post hoc multiple comparisons results in Table 27 show that the difference between bachelor’s and master’s degrees are high and causing the significance in all commitment components as well as for C, where the bachelor’s degree holders group (Group b) is always having higher commitment mean than the master’s holders group (Group c). Furthermore, diploma holders group (Group a) had a higher mean score for commitment than the master’s degree holders group (Group c), but their mean score was lower than the bachelor’s degree holders group (Group

Dalam dokumen AL AIN CITY (Halaman 189-200)