AbstractThe current research aims to determine the level of elementary school teachers' quality of work life (QWL) to predict work alienation. The study was designed using the relational survey model. The research population consisted of 1096 teachers employed at 25 elementary schools within the city of Van in the academic year 2010- 2011, and 346 teachers were used for the sampling. The group (cluster) sampling method, a probability-based sampling method, was used in the current study. The scales of Quality of Work Life and Work Alienation were used as data collection tools. The data was analyzed through frequency, percentage, standard deviation, t-test, ANOVA, and regression analysis. Teachers who participated in the sub-dimension of QWL, mostly at medium levels, stated that the level of work alienation was low. Female teachers stated that their total area of lv ife was better than that of males, but female teachers more often felt powerless, meaningless, and isolated at schools. Married teachers stated that their total area of life was better than that of single teachers. Classroom teachers stated that they received less appropriate and fair compensation compared with subject-matter teachers. Teachers from the 6 to 10 year seniority group agreed the least that the working capacity at schools was developed, compared to teachers from the 11 to 15 yearand 16+ year seniority groups. It was found that the sub- dimensions of QWL were significant predictors of total area of life, democratic environment, social integration, healthy and safe working conditions, and appropriate and fair compensation. Also, the sub-dimensions of work alienation were significant predictors of powerlessness, meaninglessness, isolation, and alienation from school.Key WordsAlienation from School, Elementary School, Quality of Work Life (QWL), Teacher, Work Alienation.Quality of Work Life (QWL)The development of QWL in this literature is based on Trist et al.'s research on work, man and technology at the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London (Cummings & Worley, 1997). Trist et al. developed the socio-technical system of understanding which combines developing technology and the social system together (Cummings, 1977). The socio- technical system aims to provide harmony between technology and an employee's social interaction in order for the organization to efficiently meet its goals (Balci, 2005).A complete consensus on the concept of QWL cannot be achieved. According to authors such as Coch and French (1948), Morse and Reiver (1956), and French and Israel (1960), QWL means democracy in the work environment (as cited in Cummings, 1977; Bragg & Andrews, 1973). This points to more participation by the employees in the decision making process. Margolis and Kroes (1974), House (1974), Kasl (1974), and Thomas (1974), on the other hand, view QWL as initiating change in order to provide more humane and healthier conditions as well as equity in sharing income sources. Many view QWL as a comprehensive approach to make work more humane and provide greater job satisfaction (Balci, 1995; Travis, 1995). The concept of QWL often refers to the physical and psychological welfare in the work environment with regard to an employee's integration in their total area of life (Bilgin, 1995). Despite various views, basic conceptual QWL categories may be listed as follows (Beach, 1980; Cummings & Worley, 1997; Walton, 1972):Total Area of Life: Total area of life includes all work related and non-work-related areas of life because both work and non-work related life influence each other (BartolomeL Travis, 1995).Safe and Healthy Work Conditions: The physical and health conditions at school play a significant role in increasing the QWL. Temperature, light, colors, cleanliness, classrooms, number of students, and overall safety are all considered to be factors affecting education employees (Basar, 1998; Fletcher, 1983; Hathaway, 1995; Johnson, 2001; Ling, Chik, & Pang, 2006; Uludag & Odaci, 2002; White, 1990). …