Page 155 of 464
fe ale. ‘espo de ts age a d teaching experience was averagely 45 years and 15 years respectively. Five percent have diploma degrees, 90 have bachelor degrees and the
remaining 5 have master degrees.
3.2 Instruments
A quantitative questionnaire using a 5-point Likert-type scale was administrated to the respondents who were instructed to refer to their current school to fill out the questionnaire
that asked a range of questions about their perceptions and feelings on their profession, school commitment, procedural justice and distributive justice.
3.3 Measurements
3.3.1 Professional Commitment
To easu e tea he s p ofessio al o it e t, e adapted Lodahl a d Kej e s [37]
questionnaire, which was specifically adjusted to suit the educational setting context. This instrument consists of 14
ite s a d fo uses o tea he s i ol e e t i the p ese t jo a d o the i po ta e of the o k as a tea he i ge e al. “a ple ite s i lude: I feel
dep essed he I fail at so ethi g o e ted ith p ofessio as a tea he a d I a
very much involv ed pe so all i
tea hi g p ofessio . The elia ilit le el of alpha as .85. The respondents used a 5-point Likert-type scale to indicate their agreement 1 =
strongly disagree, 3 = neither disagree nor agree, and 5 = strongly agree with each of the items in the scale. The scale was measured by the mean response to the 14 items.
3.3.2 Procedural Justice.
“i ite s of the p o edu al justi e easu e α = . de eloped Col uitt [18] were used to
assess perceptions of procedural fairness. Sample items include Procedures designed by the school to collect accurate information necessary for making decisions and Procedures
designed by the school have all sides affected by the decision represented. The respondents used a 5-point Likert-type scale to indicate their agreement 1 = strongly disagree, 3 =
neither disagree nor agree, and 5 = strongly agree with each of the items in the scale. Table 1:
Descriptive statistics and correlations No.
Variable Mean
s.d 1
2 3
1 Procedural Justice
3.88 0.50
1.00 .546
.297 2
Distributive Justice 3.76
0.60 1.00
.268 3
Tea he s P ofessio al o it e t
3.99 0.43
1.00 p .01
Multiple regression analysis was employed to identify the influence of procedural justice a d dist i uti e justi e to tea he s p ofessio al o
it e t see Ta le . Ta le sho s that two predictor variables, procedural justice and distributive justice were statistically
sig ifi a t p edi to s of tea he s p ofessio al o it e t a d e plai ed
. of its variance F
343
=19.924, p .01.
Page 156 of 464
Table 2: Regression coefficients value for procedural justice and distributive justice to teach
e s professional commitment.
Variable B
SE β
t Procedural
Justice Distributive
Justice .429
.303 .122
.122 .215
.151 3.518
2.474 R= .323, R
2
= .104, F = 19.924, p .01,p .05 3.3.3
Distributive Justice. Five items of the distributive justice meas
u e α = . de eloped Col uitt [18] were
used to assess perceptions of outcome fairness. Sample items include Principal awards me for the work I have done well and Principal awards me for the stresses and strains of my
job. The respondents used a 5-point Likert-type scale to indicate their agreement 1 = strongly disagree, 3 = neither disagree nor agree, and 5 = strongly agree with each of the
items in the scale.
4. Result
Means, standard deviations and inter-correlations for the research variables are shown in Table 1. An examination of the means of teachers professional commitment that received
the highest scores were status M = 3.99. The lowest average score was ascribed to distributive justice M = 3.76. The Pearson correlation matrix revealed that procedural
justice r = .297 and distributive justice r = .268 were significant p .01 and positively correlated with teachers professional commitment. In addition, the correlation between
procedural justice and distributive justice was positive and significant r = .546.
5. Discussion
The fi di gs ega di g the ea s of p o edu al justi e, dist i uti e justi e a d tea he s professional commitment appear to be consistent with previous studies. Spreitzer Mishra
[38] for example, found that procedural justice M = 3.61; s.d = 1.30, in the present study, we found very similar results procedural justice M = 3.88; s.d = 0.50. Zeinabadia Salehib
[36] found that distributive justice M = 3.86; s.d = 0.74 amongst teachers, in the present study, we found very similar results for distributive justice M = 3.76; s.d = 0.60. A study by
Bogler Somech [39]
fou d tea he s p ofessio al o it e t M = . ; s.d = .
; i the p ese t stud , e fou d e si ila esults fo tea he s p ofessio al commitment M =
3.99; s.d = 0.43. Ta le sho that the p edi ti e a ia les togethe o elate sig ifi a tl ith tea he s
professional commitment scores R = 0.323, R
2
= 0.104, p 0.01. It also shows that the predictive variables together account fo
. of the total a ia e i tea he s
Page 157 of 464
professional commitment. Results of this study therefore show that procedural justice and dist i uti e justi e sig ifi a tl p edi ted tea he s p ofessio al o
