Abstract
The quality of human model represented by every teacher is closely connected and determined by the teacher’s implicit axiological system, deeply rooted in his character structure, which he explicitly manifests in action, through his entire conduct. Both forms of manifestations are essentially determined by the education received.The aim of our study was to develop an axiological model for the set of values that express high-school teachers' pedagogical ethos.The research uses the questionnaire-based inquiry method. The research group comprises 300 high-school teachers, representing two counties of Romania, Bacău and Prahova. To achieve its purpose, there was applied a double comparative analysis: 1st order comparative analysis, interregional comparative study between the axiomatic sets identified for each subgroup of teachers to establish the relations between the values identified for the two groups of teachers; elaboration of the axiological model for the set of values that express the high-school teachers' pedagogical ethos; 2nd order comparative analysis, educational intra-system comparative study on the axiological system of secondary-school teachers (highlighted by us in a previous study) and that of highschool teachers (to see if there are significant differences between the values shared by teachers at the two stages of the pre-university educational system).
Keywords: Valueaxiological systemhigh-school teachersinitial and continuous training
1.Introduction -The high-school teacher and the values he/she holds – between parallel mirrors
Whenever we try to analyse the axiological stance of a teacher, especially of high-school teachers
(because he finds himself face-to-face with a young teenager who is tormented, curious, undecided on the
doorstep of choices, who may become anything but does not know yet exactly what to become!), our
representation resembles a huge room with parallel mirrors. These mediate the relation between teacher
and world, teacher and students, teacher and culture, teacher and himself. Fascinated by the fervour of the
values he holds, by the light poured by the mirrors and the universes that are set into motion at the
protagonists’ meeting, he forgets the impact that his own axiological anchors have upon his students. But,
“only the teacher who possesses a strong life-purpose basis is capable to focus learners on searching
meaning of life while working with them” (Salikhova, 2016). Thus, any moment of awareness, analysis
and reflection on his own system of values can only be beneficial. The transition of values (known –
unknown, conscious - unconscious, assumed - not assumed) from teacher to his students, may be
correlatively approached from two perspectives: explicit (direct, deliberate, organized) and implicit
(indirect, unintentional, unorganized). The former perspective involves training (teaching-learning) and
education, knowledge, strategy, design, implementation, and, if possible, a bit of pedagogical calling,
talent, persuasion. The latter perspective is only about education, transfer of values, simple formative
impact that occurs in teaching. In any of these (explicit curriculum and implicit curriculum), the transfer is
values-laden (Brady, 2011) in a manner that combines the personal with the social dimension in a way
that differs from one teacher to another. The interesting and complementary analyses developed by Albu
(2016), Mogonea&Mogonea (2015), Çelebi, (2014), Harecker (2012), Panti&Wubbels (2012), Collinson
(2012), Brady (2011), Tirri (2011), Sirin&all (2009), Lovat ( 2008), Slater (2008), Kohn, A. (1997) cover
the various facets of the issue of teachers’ axiological universe, also revealing, simultaneously, its
complexity and depth.
2.Research Methodology
2.1.Aim, Research Questions, Objectives
The conducted ascertaining-comparative research aims to verify the existence of a proper set of
values supporting and orienting the high-school teaching process, as well as itsrelations with the specific
set of values of middle-school teachers.
teachers from Bacău County confirmed when the sample is doubled by adding a group of 150 high-school
teachers from Prahova County?
teachers have common elements with the axiological profile of middle-school teachers?
O1: Comparative analysis (high-school teachers from Bacau – HST-B versus teachers from
Prahova County – HST-P) on the first three values guiding the activity of high-school teachers (items
1,4,5,8); O2: Comparative Analysis (HST-B versus HST-P) on the central value for the activity of high-
school teachers (items 2,3,7); O3: Comparative analysis (HST-B versus HST-P) on the model of the
axiological profile of high-school teachers; O4 - Elaborating a final model of the axiological profile of
high-school teachers; O5: The comparative analysis of the axiological profile of middle-school teachers
with that of high-school teachers.
2.2.Methods
The questionnaire was applied July 2015 - March 2016, on 2x150 high-school teachers from the
counties of Bacău, respectively Prahova. The groups were established by random sampling. The data
collection tool was a questionnaire with 8 open-ended items. For the items that required a hierarchization
of the options, the score of each value was as follows: 3 points for the first position, 2 points for the
second position; 1 point for the third position.The syntagm teachers’ values was used (like in our previous
studies on this topic, since 2012) to refer to general values, purpose-values, namely what teachers cherish,
regard as worthy, relevant, desirable at a higher level.
3.Presentation and Analysis of Results
To achieve
are...”; I4:“I believe that, nowadays, the most dangerous counter-values are...”; I5:“I believe that the
fundamental values which pre-university education should inculcate to students nowadays are...”; I8:“The
future society needs the following three values...” Table
the collected data (B means HST-B, P means HST-P):
Data from Table
of the data obtained from the 2 groups of teachers and we have identified only one, not three, values that
guide the activity of high-school teachers:
high importance given to fairness, amplifying this value from two options given by HST-B to the 3
options, the possible maximum; 3. We appreciate, as in the previous analysis (Cojocariu, 2016) as
extremely interesting and relevant the obsessive predominance of the value of fairness as moral value for
the axiological universe of teachers in Romania; 4. The fact that the rank I, II and III value is the same,
felt by the world of teachers, students and parents alike.
To achieve
most is...”; I3:“I believe that the most important value for a teacher’s activity is...”; I7:“I believe that the
value which will always preserve (save) humankind is....”Table
representation of the collected data (B means HST-B, P means HST-P):
The data from Table
value for the activity of high-school teachers selected by the 2 groups of teachers; 2. This value is
confirms and strengthens the data obtained in the first study on the values of high-school teachers, where,
as a central value, fairness gathered 38 options (25.33%) from the group of 150 teachers from Bacău
County (Cojocariu, 2016); 4. The value obtained is not only in line with the value obtained from previous
items integrated in O1, but is actually the same; 5. It is obvious that the 300 high-school teachers from the
two counties share the axis of their value systems, namely the value of fairness; 6. Although it is a central
rank II, respectively rank III value, faith in God obtains the same score in both groups, 13 options
(4.33%), which illustrates that, in an equal proportion, although reduced, the high-school teachers from
the two groups keep the religious value alive;7. Other values that obtained the appreciation of teachers in
this context are: education (6.33%) (at the B group) (rank I central value) and 4.00% also at them, as rank
III central value; love for people (4.66%) (atP) (rank I central value); love for people (5.00%) (atB) (rank
II central value); responsibility and competence, each with 3.33% (at P) (rank III central value); 8.From
the 18 values with only one nomination (0.33%) of those received from the HST-B, we regard as
interesting the following: freedom, creativity, transparency, cooperation, trust, modesty. Of the 12 values
with one nomination received from the HST-P, we mention: dignity, common sense, generosity,
humanism, peace. Within certain limits, we believe that given the one option only for these values, it may
be possible that they are represented less and less in the axiological system of teachers and, why not, on
the brink of extinction. Which would be extremely dangerous!
I6 –“If tomorrow were my last meeting with my students, I would address them, as a final
message, the idea…” yielded a great diversity and heterogeneity of answers, making it difficult to analyse
and compare data qualitatively. The first value directions indicated by the messages of high-school
teachers are the following: 1.
and 35 (11.66%) for HST-P, a total of 61 (20.33%). There are messages that support the need to learn,
propelling it towards the level of training: Learn so that you may become worthy people! The more you
learn, the more you’ll have! Learn to become worthy people! 2.
HST-B and11messages (3.66%) at HST-P, a total of 27 (9.00%) – Life is a battle, therefore fight!, Do not
allow yourselves to be defeated by hardships on your road to success! Every victory will make you better,
every defeat will make you prepare better!; 3.
(3.00%) HST-P;
future!;4. There are statements that highlight unique values:
cherish most!;
giving you will receive! at HST-B;
depending on the profile of each teacher, reconfirming our previous findings on the prevalence (relatively
natural!) of moral values in the axiological universe of teachers in general.
To achieve
a.
the Total row in Table
(159p); rank II -
I –
representation of these values for HST-Band HST-P.

We appreciate as interesting the reversal of the first 2 anchor values, respect and fairness, in the
profiles of both categories of teachers, however with quite different scores and the identification of the
same rank III value, fairness. For our comparative analysis, it is very important that we have found the
same values, even if on different positions and with different percentages (which is, in fact, a sign of
normality).
b. The second dimension - O2 - a central value for the activity of high-school teachers - is found
on the row Total in Table
central value is the same –
To achieve
representation from Figure

What appeared for the first time in the studies we have conducted since 2012 on the values shared
by teachers from the entire education system (preschool, primary, secondary, university, including
students who train for the teaching career) is the full overlapping between the 3 anchor-values (fairness)
and, subsequently, placing it as the central value. Virtually, the axiological universe of high-school
teachers is dominated by, and merges with this value.
To achieve
developed by us in a previous study (Cojocariu, 2015). The data obtained are presented comparatively in Table 3.

deal of fairness. Although mathematically and graphically the models do not overlap explicitly on any of
their segments (anchor-values, central value), in reality (in the educational-instructional activities in
which middle-school and high-school teachers operate with the values they cerish on a daily basis) the
two models are complementary.
4.Conclusions
Our entire teaching and research activity relies on the assumption that the teacher’s socio-moral
worth is given by the set of values in which he believes, that he applies in every moment of his activity
and that he turns into both beliefs and action vectors for himself and for his students alike. Although in
Romania Values Education is not an established domain like in other educational systems (e.g. Australia),
it is achieved, like many other segments of Romanian contemporary education, implicitly. There is no
denying that with the content of the school subjects taught and with his whole conduct in the classroom,
the teacher transfers values: work, respect, tenacity, love of people, truth, professionalism, empathy,
generosity, tolerance. School is not free of values or a social engagement and educational area that is
axiologically neutral (Lovat, 2008). It results that the teacher’s role in the personal, social and
professional development of students is growing, a fact increasingly recognized and confirmed by the
results of specialized studies (idem). On this basis, the teacher leads his students into going beyond
superficial learning, in order to reach learning “that engages the whole person in depth of cognition,
social and emotional maturity, and self-knowledge” (idem).The conclusions drawn from our approach
are:
1.
teachers fromBacău (HST-B) versus those from Prahova County (HST-P) on the first three values
guiding the activity of high-school teachers. This highlighted, as shown in Table
similarity between the anchor-values cherished by them. The values of respect and fairness are combined,
with different positions and shares, in their axiological profile; O2: There was performed a comparative
analysis (HST-B versus HST-P) on the central value for the activity of high-school teachers. It led to the
establishment of a common core value, fairness (Table
analysis (HST-B versus HST-P) on a model of the axiological profile of high-school teachers. The results
revealed that the two models elaborated for the 2 groups of high-school teachers do not have significant
differences, being convergent on the values of respect and fairness, as anchor-values, Figure
value of fairness as central value, Table
axiological profile of high-school teachers, Figure
the axiological profile of middle-school teachers and that of high-school teachers, Table 3. The results
indicate a significant difference between the 2 value reports of these categories of teachers. Whereas for
the middle-school teachers there are 3/4 anchor-values (respect, hard work, respect and education) and
another central value (professionalism), for high-school teachers there is only one value, 3 times an
anchor-value but, simultaneously, also central value, namely fairness.2.
of high-school teachers from Bacăucountyhas been confirmed when adding a group of 150 high-school
teachers from Prahova county to the research group. There was formulated a negative answer to the
axiological profile of middle-school teachers.3. The axiological profile of high-school teachers is
structured in a very interesting way, around a single value,
exciting milestones in continuing our efforts to develop a general axiological model of teachers at the
level of our educational system. All our future comparative analyses will consider the absolutely specific
case of high-school teachers, deeply quartered into one single value, fairness.5. All the data gathered
during the 5 years of studies on the axiological universe of teachers in Romania reconfirms the need for a
solid axiological component in the initial and continuous training of teachers. This may be a course onthe
axiology of education (but not necessarily) or training for meta reflection. Teachers rarely make the effort
to self-evaluate the values in which they believe/that they give/receive and how the learning contents
correlate with the axiological universe. Perhaps if they did it more often, they would be surprised to find
how many significant values are hidden in everyday school contents. They just need to be identified,
highlighted and processed through the prism of the teacher’s own values and offered to students for
cultivation.6. Other practical consequences that can be developed based on this study are: to identify the
axiological differences between students and teachers at the various stages of the educational system; to
identify the main axiological obstacles between generations; to establish correlations between the
axiological option and addressing conflicts in education; the transfer of values from students to teachers;
the development and implementation of optional subjects in the domain of axiology, based on the
suggestions collected from pupils/students: Values education; My axiological system; Values and non-
values in art; The kitsch and the authentic values; Classic and modern (Mogonea&Mogonea, 2015). Such
themes could also be the basis for various debates, workshops, meetings with scientists, artists, engineers,
athletes.
References
- Albu, G. (2016). The Values of secundary Education Tearchers trained before and after 1990, when the
- political and legal System in Romania has changed. Case Study, Psiworld, 6th Edition, 23-25 octombrie, 2015, published in Romanian Journal of Experimental Applied Psychology (RJEAP), vol. 7, Special Issue, 1, pp. 26-30.
- Brady, L. (2011). Teacher Values and Relationship: Factors in Values Education, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 55-66.
- Çelebi, N. (2014). Examining Teachers’ Value Perceptions According toDifferent Variables, Anthropologist, 18, 3, 1005-1018.
- Cojocariu V.-M. (2016). Reflections on a Possible Axiological Universe of High-School Teachers,
- Proceeding of the 7thLUMEN International Conference - MEPDEV 2015 Multidimensional Education and Professional Development. Ethical Values 12-14 November, 2015 – Târgoviște (România), Editografica, Italy, 135-140.
- Cojocariu, V.-M. (2015). Is There a Set of Nucleus-values Characteristic of Teachers from Middle Education? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 203, pp. 84-89.
- Collinson, V. (2012).Sources of Teachers’ Values and Attitudes, Teacher Development, 16:3, 321-344. Findingsfrom Islamic and public schools, Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24, 463–473.
- Harecker, G. (2012). Teaching Values at School: a Way to Reach a Better Understanding in Our World, in Conference Proceedings New perspectives in Science Education, Florence, Italy: Pixel, University Press.
- Journal of Educational Research, 50, 159–165.
- Kohn, A. (1997). How Not to Teach Values - A Critical Look at Character Education, Phi Delta Kapan,
- 429-439.
- Lovat, T. (2008). Values Education And Teachers’ Work:A Quality Teaching Perspective, New Horizons
- in Education, 112, 36-46.
- Mogonea, F.-R., Mogonea, F. (2015). Catching-Up Axiological Education: Charting the Present
- Educational System, Revista de ŞtiinţePolitice/Revue des Sciences Politiques, 46, 152-164.
- Panti, N., Wubbels, T. (2012).Teachers’ moral values and their interpersonal relationships with students
- andcultural competence, Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 451- 460.
- Salikhova,N. R. ( 2016). Types of Meaningfulness of Life and Values of Future Teachers, International
- Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11, 8, 1943-1950.
- Sirin, S. R., Ryce,P.,Mir, M. (2009). How teachers’ values affect their evaluation of children of
- immigrants: Slater, R. (2008).American Teachers- What values do they hold?,Education Next, 8, 1.
- Tirri, K. (2011). Holistic school pedagogy and values: Finnish teachers’ and students’ perspectives, International
Copyright information
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
Publication Date
25 May 2017
Article Doi
eBook ISBN
978-1-80296-022-8
Publisher
Future Academy
Volume
23
Print ISBN (optional)
-
Edition Number
1st Edition
Pages
1-2032
Subjects
Educational strategies, educational policy, organization of education, management of education, teacher, teacher training
Cite this article as:
Cojocariu, V. (2017). Axiological Options of High-School Teachers – a Comparative Analysis. In E. Soare, & C. Langa (Eds.), Education Facing Contemporary World Issues, vol 23. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 663-671). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2017.05.02.81