Unveiling Job Satisfaction of Teachers through a Blend of Methodologies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article aims to identify the levels of job satisfaction of teachers in a Turkey region, using a mixt methods design, based on the Teacher Satisfaction Scale.

The study provides access to data, having the approval of the Ethics body of the university. 

However, there are some aspects that need to be consistently improved.

The introduction is too long, and will be better to shortly state the problem, the research gap the study address, and to have a separate theoretic framework and literature review. 

The literature review does not manage to provide a sound ground for the research study. In spite of being mentioned that job satisfaction is one of most researched issue, the literature review fails to provide actual level of debate regarding the job satisfaction of teachers. There are mentioned only the aspects producing dissatisfaction, but not the ones producing satisfaction of teachers. Two pages at the beginning discuss about the relation of job satisfaction and engagement of employees in organizations in general, and only some paragraphs discuss about the specificity of job satisfaction of teachers in schools, both private and public. 

No theoretic model, framework, no theory informs the approach. No explanation about the different levels of sasisfaction, how they are differentiated. 

Also, it is needed a context presentation about the situation of teachers in Turkey educational system, and about the educational system. Are the public schools less than the private ones (as far as the sample reunites a much larger number of teachers from private schools without explaining why)? What is the status of private schools and are teachers better paid there, with better status etc? What are the career steps? Did they exist before 2022? And so forth. 

In the methodological part, improvements are needed as well. The instrument needs to be presented into more detailed and to be explained why the chosen variables. For instance, does the literature say that the marital status of teachers have an important impact, or in the Turkish context this aspect is important? 

The instrument was translated into Turkish by authors? What procedures for the cultural adaptation were considered?

Participants should me more detailed described. How many interviews, with whom? How the people were chosen and so forth.

Presentation of the results needs to be revised, as under each table should be a legend. Also, in some tables there are still words in Turkish. Figure 2 needs to be checked, as there are two many lines at each factor, not being clear the difference between them. 

The discussion part is rather short, and the data are less reflected comparing with the international literature. Just one Turkish study is mirrored, in the results part. 

The text as such is to be reviewed, as the same information is repeated several times, both in the methodology part, and in the discussion part. 

The discussions fail to explain to international reader the takes away from this study, and the relevance of data for the international context. 

Are there limitations of the study? 

Please carefully reconsider the theoretic part, reflecting more the researches stating the teacher satisfaction. Also, highlight more the contribution of the study to the international debate. 

The English needs for some revisions. For instance, line 410 should be two different sentences: ... influencing factors, it has... 

Author Response

I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the esteemed reviewer for their invaluable insights and meticulous examination of our research. Their astute observations and constructive feedback have greatly enriched the quality and depth of the work. Thank you. 

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

TITLE:

The results of the research refer to Turkey scholar society. It should also be in the subtitle.

ABSTRACT

The abstract is what attracts (or does not) the attention and interest to the article. So, it should be carefully written.

The authors don´t mentioning that this is a case study in a Turkey schools.

1.       INTRODUCTION

An introduction should be informative and well-worded. Therefore, it is missing:

-     give clues to the discussion of the results (methodology used).

-     present the structure of the article.

In relation to the theme of the “Job Satisfaction”, there are actual references can be inserted. See, for example, the following papers:

Bernarto, I., Bachtiar, D., Sudibjo, N., Suryawan, I. N., Purwanto, A., & Asbari, M. (2020). Effect of transformational leadership, perceived organizational support, job satisfaction toward life satisfaction: Evidences from indonesian teachers.

Pazim, K. H. (2021). Special Education Teachers Job Satisfaction In Malaysia: A Review. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(11), 5329-5332.

Saraiva, M., del Río-Rama, M. C., Cataraga, D., & Álvarez-García, J. (2017). Job satisfaction in higher education: A case study in Spain. In EDULEARN17 Proceedings (pp. 5254-5263). IATED.

Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., & Johansson, S. (2021). Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational review, 73(1), 71-97.

2.       MATERIALS AND METHODS

This chapter shall provide the necessary and sufficient information to assess how the study was conducted in order to allow its reproduction by other.

It would be interesting to put how the study was done (e.g. questionnaire and interview script), so that other researchers replicate the study.

It is not perceived how and when the study is implemented. This point should be improved. I don't also understand what was done. How was it done? Where was it made? Etc. For each methods/data collection tools used.

All this relevant information is missing:

1.                   There is no presentation of the interview script, and it is not known how it was answered. Respondents were online or in person.

2.                   It would be interesting to put the interview script in Appendix, so that other researchers replicate the study.

This point should be improved.

3.       RESULTS

This point should be articulated with the previous one, as the results presented should be supported by the methods.

The results should show the evidence of the study and should be presented according to a logical and informative and perceptible sequence.

Throughout the text did not understand when the interviewees' statements are statements. The authors must put these texts in quotation marks.

It is not understood which methods are used to obtain the results, i.e., explain the methodology that is use.

Table 1 has written text that is not in English.

At this point there are many tables. It is suggested to the authors to add Tables 1 to 9 in a single table, since the data presented refer to ANOVA.

The legend in Figure 2 is incomplete because it does not display all items.

4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The results should be presented in a comprehensive manner, highlighting the most relevant ones and provide a summary of the text. But most of all the originality and relevance of the results presented should be strengthened.

The theoretical implications and possible practical applications should be discussed.

The authors should mention that this is a study based on the Turkey reality.

The limitations of the study were not identified and itself should be presented and discussed here. One limitation of this research is that the study focuses only on Turkey society. There are others that should be mentioned, such as the methodology used, although it is a strong point it can also be a weak point.

5. SUGGESTIONS

This point is future research.

It is suggested that it be included in the previous point, after the limitations.

One suggestion for future research: conduct the same study in other countries/regions of the world.

This study is before the pandemic or not? If not, it would be interesting to conduct the same study regarding what happened in the pandemic or even in the post-pandemic situation.

Author Response

I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the esteemed reviewer for their invaluable insights and meticulous examination of our research. Their astute observations and constructive feedback have greatly enriched the quality and depth of the work.We wholeheartedly appreciate their contributions and are immensely grateful for their role in enhancing the scholarly merit of our work.

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The study addresses a pivotal issue in any organizational context - valid multi-method assessment. This study is thus a timely effort and of potential added value to the journal's readership - however - I enclose a list of comments that I hope will help the authors bring the manuscript to a point where is it more mature and ready for publication. 

1. The abstract needs re-writing. It should start with the need - why would we want or look for such an approach toward teachers' job satisfaction? Ten - explain the benefits of the approach you are proposing. Then try to provide more information about what measures were used (all is said is qualitative and quantitative - which isn't much), and provide a brief summary of the results that support the method's validity in the given context. 

2. The introduction needs significant restructuring:
2.1 Start with the idea you already began with - that generally job satisfaction is a pivotal important concept within the realm of work environments.
2.2 Then describe the importance of understanding job satisfaction among teachers - why is it important especially in the teaching profession? what evidence link satisfaction w9ith major educational outcomes such as student achievement, school climate, teacher turnover, etc?
2.3 Now present the problem your study addresses:
- The concept has numerous, differing definitions and therefore
- only partial, non-exhaustive definitions, measures and therefore - research is lacking

Now present your purpose or goal. 

Then review various definitions of job satisfaction and focus on those especially specific to teachers. there are quite a few of those. Then - tell the reader which definition you followed in your study (if you synthesized your own definition - provide it). 

Only then  provide the research questions. As they stand now - they lack any rationale - based on the literature review and introduction why should the readers expect gender differences, marital status or age related differences in this concept? you have not provided any evidence that supports such directions for investigation? so either provide a rationale and supportive literature for each of your questions OR say that you qwish to explore and validate adjusted, expanded measures of your integrative definition for satisfaction - and then follow the validation protocole:

Content validity
construct validation
and if you have data for it: predictive or external criterion related validity. 

This will make more sense. Remember that the world enjoys quite a few existing measures of teachers' job satisfaction, and numerous qualitative studies address the issue in various contexts as well - so what is the purpose of your effort? you do not say that but I am guessing  - because you feel the existing approaches are lacking - explain what is lacking and what in your proposed method makes up for that. It is crucial to make your added value clear to the readers. 

3. Methods:
Please re-arrange your methods chapter to follow the acceptable format:

3.1 Settings: where was the study conducted, in what education system in which context. 

3.2 Sample description and demographics. 

3.3 Measures used: each measure should be described including sources (if there any) and info re its reliability and validity (or trustwothiness for qualitative tools). 

3.4 Procedure, including who approved the ethical aspects of this study. 

4. Results: 

Currently the results do not help the reader understand what is going on in this study and why these results are interesting beyond reporting the job satisfaction of a single sample of teachers in an undisclosed region. If you go ahead an validate a measure: choose your analyses, and provide rationale for each - do we expect teachers in public schools to be more satisfied than their peers in private schools? why? if so - your findings validate the measure. Same goes for gender, age etc.  - the authors must put the results in context otherwise these are just haphazard pieces of information that will not mean much to the journal's audience.

The results do not clarify what the data adds or solves beyond just running a well known measure of satisfaction in a given sample of teachers. 

The qualitative data is more interesting because it seems to explore the participants' conceptions of satisfaction and what shapes it for them. 

5. Based on my comments above I expect the analyses to change and of course the discussion. 

Generally acceptable

Author Response

We extend our sincere gratitude to the esteemed reviewer for their invaluable insights and meticulous examination of our research. Their astute observations and constructive feedback have greatly enriched the quality and depth of our work.We wholeheartedly appreciate their contributions and are immensely grateful for their role in enhancing the scholarly merit of our work.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

First of all, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to read your interesting paper entitled “Unveiling Job Satisfaction of Teachers through a Blend of Methodologies.” I think you are tackling a timely and relevant topic that deserves attention in the scholarly debate. This is the exciting and well-conceived study of an important construct, i.e., job satisfaction. The research was conducted within public and private schools using mixed methods study design. Although the paper focuses on essential concepts and their relationship, a few concerns deserve attention. I list here to offer some suggestions for improving the manuscript.

Based on the evidence presented, it appears that the arguments related to the gap in the study are weak. The reason for this is a lack of clear and convincing evidence to support the need for further research. Furthermore, the authors cannot adequately demonstrate the relevance and importance of the research questions. In order to strengthen the arguments related to the gap in the study, additional studies should be included to provide more compelling evidence and demonstrate the study's potential impact on educational management in the education setting.

It is not very clear why authors chose gender, age, marital status, type of school, level of school they teach, experience, tenure in the institution, graduation status etc, for group differences concerning job satisfaction. I believe that the contribution of this study would be more significant if the authors presented convincing arguments regarding why they chose these constructs and not others.

The literature review is unsatisfactory; hence, more works seem necessary to bring it up to date. The authors may consider adding some specific research hypotheses based on their literature review to increase the theoretical contribution of this work.

Theoretical perspectives explaining the relationships are missing. Theoretical perspectives are essential to the research process and should be incorporated into manuscripts whenever possible. They provide structure and coherence to the research, help contextualize the findings, and enable the researcher to communicate their research effectively.

Can you describe how participants were recruited? More information is needed on questionnaire design and sample size selection. Participants and procedures should need to be elaborated on in more detail.

Please check the data normality, multicollinearity, and autocorrelations.

Please ensure your paper's discussion section is well-linked with the relevant literature. Your discussion should be grounded in the existing research and demonstrate how your study adds to the current knowledge on the topic. By linking your discussion with the literature, you will provide readers with a clear understanding of the context and significance of your findings. This will help to strengthen the overall credibility and impact of your work.

Furthermore, it is observed that there is no theoretical and managerial implication, limitations and future direction, and conclusion section. These sections of a research paper are vital components since they enable the writers to repeat their research questions and objectives and summarize the outcomes of their investigation.

As several flaws can be retrieved throughout the manuscript, further proofreading of the paper is warmly recommended.

It is suggested that the authors incorporate recent and more context-related articles related to variables.

I want my recommendations to help the authors improve their work. I hope the authors will benefit from these suggestions and make the necessary amendments to strengthen the manuscript for later submission.

As several flaws can be retrieved throughout the manuscript, further proofreading of the paper is warmly recommended.

Author Response

We extend our sincere gratitude to the esteemed reviewer for their invaluable insights and meticulous examination of our research. Their astute observations and constructive feedback have greatly enriched the quality and depth of our work.We wholeheartedly appreciate their contributions and are immensely grateful for their role in enhancing the scholarly merit of our work.

Thank you very much. Regards, 

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed the suggestions for revision in a convincing manner. 

At the acknowledgements please revise deciding on the plural/ singular, number of authors.

The authors addressed the suggestions with caution, and the article might be accepted for publication. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I sincerely thank you for dedicating your time and effort to evaluate my article. Your valuable insights and feedback have greatly contributed to enhancing the quality of my paper. I am well aware of how important such contributions are in improving our scientific endeavors, and therefore, I am grateful for your assistance.

In the meantime, the expression in the acknowledgment section has been corrected and rewritten as follows from a grammatical perspective: "The author would like to express her gratitude to Nesibe Ayça Elmaç for her valuable contributions to data curation, as well as to all individuals and institutions who provided valuable insights and support during the development of this manuscript"

Thank you very much,

Best Regards,

Reviewer 2 Report

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I sincerely thank you for dedicating your time and effort to evaluate my article. Your valuable insights and feedback have greatly contributed to enhancing the quality of my paper. I am well aware of how important such contributions are in improving our scientific endeavors, and therefore, I am grateful for your assistance. 

Thank you very much, 

Best Regards

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript is indeed improved, both in terms of clearer rationale and a better description of the methods and measures used. I am still worried about the following (not too major issues) and leave it to the editors to make a final decision. Personally I think these issues merit another round of minor revisions:

- My main worry is the use of the measures of satisfaction to determine "teacher satisfaction level" - I have not seen any clarification on this - are there national or global norms for the levels of satisfaction using this specific tool? The measure itself is not a clinical diagnostic tool. It is OK to talk about group differences and what associates with levels of satisfaction but to determine that satisfaction is generally this or that - a bit "iffy". 

- I still have not seen a good working definition of teacher job satisfaction at the beginning of the intro or the lit review. The authors refer to Locke's definition which is definitely OK but please explain more - a single sentence to account for the meaning of the main DV in this study?

- Toward the end of the discussion I would like to see a more comprehensive integration of the results  -  what do we learn here that goes beyond the ample anecdotal evidence about factors determining teacher work satisfaction? what is the added value here?

I believe these points can be easily addressed and than the manuscript can be ready for publication

- 

See above

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I sincerely thank you for dedicating your time and effort to evaluate my article. Your valuable insights and feedback have greatly contributed to enhancing the quality of my paper. I am well aware of how important such contributions are in improving our scientific endeavors, and therefore, I am grateful for your assistance. Thank you very much.

Please see the attachment.

Best Regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Author, I carefully re-evaluated your paper, finding it substantially improved with respect to the version. The revised version is much better organized and has higher scientific quality. Therefore, I recommended it for publication. Thank you

The English language has to be edited somewhat by the author to guarantee clarity and fluency.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I sincerely thank you for dedicating your time and effort to evaluate my article. Your valuable insights and feedback have greatly contributed to enhancing the quality of my paper. I am well aware of how important such contributions are in improving our scientific endeavors, and therefore, I am grateful for your assistance.

The article has been reviewed once again for language. Thank you once more, and best regards.