Examination of appraisal fairness as a mediator in explaining teachers’ performance appraisal in Malaysia
List of Authors
  • Mohd Muslim Md Zalli , Mohd Nadzri Ishak

Keyword
  • performance appraisal, clarity of appraisal criteria, teacher participation, appraisal fairness, motivation to improve performance, performance appraisal effectiveness

Abstract
  • The Teachers Unified Instruments (TUI) is a new performance appraisal instrument to assess the performance of teachers in Malaysia. This research was attended to examine the level of effectiveness of TUI among secondary school teachers in Malaysia. Two characteristics of performance appraisal (clarity of appraisal criteria and teacher participation in the appraisal process) were examined to recognise the relationship with the performance appraisal effectiveness measured based on motivation to improve performance. Appraisal fairness was also included as a mediator in this relationship. A sum of 284 respondents answered the questionnaire made online. The findings revealed that TUI’s effectiveness level was high. Appraisal fairness was found to be the mediating variable that connecting the two evaluation characteristics tested with performance appraisal effectiveness. This study provides definite implications for stakeholders to ensure that the performance appraisal implemented is practised comprehensively, and the practice of appraisal fairness is given great emphasis.

Reference
  • 1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology, pp. 267-299. New York: Academic Press. 2. Al-Jedaia, Y., & Mehrez, A. (2020). The effect of performance appraisal on job performance in governmental sector: The mediating role of motivation. Management Science Letters, 10(9), 2077–2088. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.2.003 3. Arsaythamby, V., & Wirda Hasmin, Z. (2011). Atribut sistem penilaian prestasi dengan kepuasan kerja dalam kalangan guru. International Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 197–216. 4. BPPK. (2016). Manual penilaian bersepadu pegawai perkhidmatan pendidikan. Bahagian Pembangunan dan Penilaian Kompetensi, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 5. BPPK. (2017). Laporan pengurusan PBPPP 2017. Bahagian Pembangunan dan Penilaian Kompetensi, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 6. Dal Corso, L., De Carlo, A., Carluccio, F., Girardi, D., & Falco, A. (2019). An Opportunity to Grow or a Label? Performance Appraisal Justice and Performance Appraisal Satisfaction to Increase Teachers’ Well-Being. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(November), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02361 7. Dandala, S. (2019). Human resource policy and teacher appraisal in Ontario in the era of professional accountability. Management in Education, 33(1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020618783817 8. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press 9. Fornell C & Larcker F David. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. In Journal of Marketing Research (Vol. 18, Issue 1, pp. 39–50). 10. Giles, W. F., & Mossholder, K. W. (1990). Employee reactions to contextual and session components of performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4), 371–377. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.4.371 11. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. 12. Haron, M. Z., Zalli, M. M. M., Othman, M. K., & Awang, M. I. (2021). Examining the teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and learning facilities towards teaching quality. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(1), 1-7. doi:10.11591/ijere.v10i1.20780 13. Idris, A. H., & Assefa, T. H. (2017). Assessment of instructors ’ performance appraisal in Samara University. Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing, 8(6), 441–448. 14. Iqbal, M. Z., Akbar, S., Budhwar, P., & Shah, S. Z. A. (2019). Effectiveness of performance appraisal: Evidence on the utilization criteria. Journal of Business Research, 101(April), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.035 15. Islami, X., Mulolli, E., & Mustafa, N. (2018). Using management by objectives as a performance appraisal tool for employee satisfaction. Future Business Journal, 4(1), 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbj.2018.01.001 16. Kelly, K. O., Ang, S. Y. A., Chong, W. L., & Hu, W. S. (2008). Teacher appraisal and its outcomes in Singapore primary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-09-2016-0047 17. Khurshid, A., Khan, A. K., & Alvi, S. (2017). Performance appraisal challenge at Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). Asian Journal of Management Cases, 14(2), 198–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972820117712304 18. Lira, M., Silva, V. P. G. da, & Viseu, C. (2016). Performance appraisal as a motivational tool in the Portuguese public administration. Portuguese Journal of Finance, Management and Accounting, 19(2), 91–118. 19. Novita, A. & Sudaryan, B. (2021). The analysis of principal academic supervision, pedagogical competence against and its implications for contract teacher performance: Case study in high school indramayu district. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences, 3(1), 84-89. 20. Okoth, A. A., & Florah, O. M. (2019). Influence of performance appraisal on motivation of public secondary school teachers in Gem-Sub County, Kenya. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 9(4), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.30845/aijcr.v9n4p5 21. Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual (6th ed.). Open University Press. 22. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(11), 1451–1458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.06.004 23. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS3.0. Hamburg. http://www.smartplas.com 24. Rubin, E. V., & Edwards, A. (2018). The performance of performance appraisal systems: understanding the linkage between appraisal structure and appraisal discrimination complaints. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5192, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1424015 25. Saad, S. K. (2014). Investigating the effectiveness of the performance appraisal process in the Egyptian tourism companies. Journal of Association of Arab Universities for Toursim and Hospitality, 11(2), 111–121. 26. Saad, S. K., & Elshaer, I. A. (2017). Organizational politics and validity of layoff decisions: mediating role of distributive justice of performance appraisal. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 26(8), 805–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2017.1320257 27. Sánchez, C. R., Díaz-Cabrera, D., & Hernández-Fernaud, E. (2019). Does effectiveness in performance appraisal improve with rater training? PLoS ONE, 14(9), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222694 28. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business, a skill-building approach (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 29. Selvarajan, T. T., Singh, B., & Solansky, S. (2018). Performance appraisal fairness, leader member exchange and motivation to improve performance: A study of US and Mexican employees. Journal of Business Research, 85(April 2016), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.043 30. Wang, Z., Sun, Y., & Wang, B. (2020). Policy cognition is more effective than step tariff in promoting electricity saving behaviour of residents. Energy Policy, 139(December 2018), 111338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111338 31. Yusoff, S. M., Ariffin, T. F. T., & Zalli, M. M. M. (2020). School participation empowerment scale (SPES) adaptation for teachers in malaysia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(5), 1821-1830. doi:10.13189/ujer.2020.080518 32. Zapata-Phelan, C. P., Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & Livingston, B. (2009). Procedural justice, interactional justice, and task performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.08.001