Teachers with Multiple Jobs: A Preliminary Typology on the Basis of Estonian Teachers’ Life Stories
pp. 111-122 | Published Online: June 2019 | DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2019.82.2
Lianne Teder, Rain Mikser
In many fields, the percentage of professionals having one or more jobs in addition to their full-time primary job is increasing worldwide. With numerous members earning relatively modest salaries, teachers are a professional group among the most affected by this tendency. Traditionally, “moonlighting” (the commonly used term for having an additional job) is considered to be highly problematic in terms of a teacher’s ability to fulfil their teaching responsibilities. However, little attention has been paid to the potential that “teacher-moonlighters” could have in contributing to school life by using their out-of-school work experience. This article introduces a small-scale narrative study with teachers from Estonia and proposes a preliminary typology of teachers having multiple jobs. Providing examples from narrative life history interviews, it is argued that certain types of teachers have the potential to enrich school life. Two dimensions appeared to be most indicative for categorizing teachers with multiple jobs: “permanence” and “self-actualization through multiple jobs.” The researchers argue that these dimensions are promising for further discussion of teacher career patterns in which multiple jobs can be seen not as obstructive, but as contributing to teachers’ professionalism.
Keywords: Estonian teachers, multiple jobs, life storiesReferences
Alboher, M. (2012). One person. Multiple Careers. The original guide to the Slash Career. New York: A HeyMarci.com Production.
Averett, S. (2001). Moonlighting: multiple motives and gender differences. Applied Economics, 33(11), 1391-1410.
Ballou, D. (1995). Causes and Consequences of Teacher Moonlighting. Education Economics, 3(1), 3-18.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Cerych, L. (1999). General report on the symposium “Educational reforms in Central and Eastern Europe: Processes and outcomes”. European Education, 31(2), 5-38.
Dickey, H., Watson, V., & Zangelidis, A. (2010). Is it all about money? An examination of the motives behind moonlighting. Applied Economics, 43(26), 3767-3774.
Ernst & Young Baltic AS. (2016). Study on teachers’ working time allocation and additional remuneration practices. Final report. Tallinn, Estonia: Estonian Ministry of Education and Research.
Erss, M., Mikser, R., Löfström, E., Ugaste, A., Rõuk, V., & Jaani, J. (2014). Teachers’ Views of Curriculum Policy: The Case of Estonia. British Journal of Educational Studies, 62(4), 393-411.
Goodson, I. F. (2010). Times of educational change: towards an understanding of patterns of historical and cultural refraction. Journal of Education Policy, 25(6), 767-775.
Goodson, I. F. (2013). Developing Narrative Theory. Life histories and personal representation. New York: Routledge.
Goodson, I. F., & Gill, S. R. (2011). Narrative pedagogy: Life history and learning. New York: Peter Lang.
Guthrie, H. W. (1969). Teachers in the moonlight. Monthly Labor Review, 92(2), 28-31.
Kimmel, J., & Conway, K. S. (2001). Who Moonlights and Why? Evidence from SIPP. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 40, 89-120.
Lillemägi, M. (2018). Today’s Teacher Laur. Quarterly Bulletin of Statistics Estonia. Statistics Estonia, 1/2018. Tallinn, Estonia: Statistics Estonia.
McAlpine, L. (2016). Why might you use narrative methodology? A story about narrative. Estonian Journal of Education, 4(1), 32-57.
McGinley, L. D. (1979). Outside Jobs for Teachers May Affect Effective Performance in the Classroom. Updating School Board Policies, 10(12), 1-3.
Mikser, R., & Goodson, I. F. (2017). The concept of refraction and the narrative approach to exploring multi-level social reform initiatives. Conceptual and methodological issues. In P. Vihalemm, A. Masso, & S. Opermann (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of European Social Transformations (pp. 84-97). London: Routledge
Mikser, R., Kärner, A., & Krull, E. (2016). Enhancing teachers’ curriculum ownership via teacher engagement in state-based curriculum-making: the Estonian case. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(6), 833-855.
NationMaster. (2018). Education > Pupil-teacher ratio, primary: Countries Compared. Retrieved from http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Education/Pupil--teacher-ratio%2C-primary.
Pearson, L. C., Carroll, D., & Hall, B. W. (1994). Analysis of Demographic, Perceptual, and Work-Related Factors in Teacher Moonlighting. Journal of Educational Research, 87(5), 304-308.
Raffel, J. A., & Groff, L. R. (1990). Shedding Light on the Dark Side of Teacher Moonlighting. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(4), 403-414.
Serbak, K. (2017). Teachers’ wage increase. 5 strengths of Estonian education. Annual analyses of Estonian Ministry Education and Research.
Timothy, V. L., & Nkwama, S. (2017). Moonlighting among teachers in urban Tanzania: A survey of public primary schools in Ilala District. Cogent Education, 4(1).
Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing and Health Sciences, 15(3), 398-405.
Winters, J. V. (2010). Teacher moonlighting: evidence from the US Current Population Survey. Applied Economics letters, 17(11), 1111-1114.
Wisniewski, R., & Kleine, P. (1984). Teacher moonlighting: An unstudied phenomenon. The Phi Delta Kappan, 65(8), 553-555.