How times change: Secondary teachers' job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in 1962 and 2007
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article we explore the level of job satisfaction and the sources of job dissatisfaction for 210 secondary school teachers in southwest England and compare our results with the results from a similar study published in 1962. Using anonymous questionnaires, we asked 210 secondary teachers in southwest England (63% female) to rate their level of job satisfaction and to rate 16 sources of job dissatisfaction that we adapted from the study. Teachers in 2007 rated their job satisfaction significantly lower and ordered the sources of job dissatisfaction significantly differently than did teachers in 1962. Whereas teachers in 1962 were most concerned with external sources of job dissatisfaction (e.g. salary, condition of buildings and equipment and poor human relations), teachers in 2007 expressed the most concern about factors relating to teaching itself (e.g. time demands and pupils' behaviour). The changes in sources of dissatisfaction hold true for male and female teachers, with no difference in rankings according to years of teaching experience.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it