The design process of a questionnaire measuring teachers’ innovative behavior

References

• American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014) . Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Author, [submitted]. Framing teachers’ innovative behavior: A systematic review.
   Google Scholar
• Bland, J. M. (2000). Sample size in guidelines trials. Family Practice, 17(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/17.suppl_1.s17
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS basic concepts, applications, and programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Casper, W. C., Edwards, B. D., Wallace, J. C., Landis, R. S., & Fife, D. A. (2020). Selecting response anchors with equal intervals for summated rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(4), 390–409. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000444
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelijns, J., Koster, B., & Vermeulen, M. (2009). Vitaliteit in Processen Van Collectief Leren: Samen Kennis Creëren in Basisscholen en Lerarenopleidingen [vitality in processes of collective learning: Creating knowledge together in primary schools and teacher training colleges]. Garant.
   Google Scholar
• Castelijns, J., Vermeulen, M., & Kools, Q. (2013). Collective learning in primary schools and teacher education institutes. Journal of Educational Change, 14(3), 373–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-013-9209-6
   Google Scholar
• Cha, E. S., Kim, K. H., & Erlen, J. A. (2007). Translation of scales in cross‐cultural research:issues and techniques. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(4), 386–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04242.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(3), 98–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783
   Google Scholar
• De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2010). Measuring innovative work behavior creativity and innovative Management. Journal of Management, 19(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x
   Google Scholar
• De Jong, J. P. J., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2005). Determinanten Van Innovatief Gedrag: Een Onderzoek Onder Kenniswerkers in Het MKB. [Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Survey of Knowledge Workers in SMEs.]. Gedrag & Organisatie, 18(5), 235–259. https://doi.org/10.5117/2005.018.005.001
   Google Scholar
• Eisinga R, Grotenhuis M te and Pelzer B. (2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown?. Int J Public Health, 58(4), 637–642. 10.1007/s00038-012-0416-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garavan, T. N., McGuire, D., & Lee, M. (2015). Reclaiming the “D” in HRD: A typology of development conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Human Resource Development Review, 14(4), 359–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F1534484315607053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerlak, A. K., & Heikkila, T. (2011). Building a theory of learning in collaboratives: Evidence from the Everglades Restoration Program. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(4), 619–644. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goretzko, D., Pham, T. T. H., & Bühner, M. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3510–3521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00300-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But …. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heck, R. H., & Thomas, S. L. (2009). An introduction to multilevel modeling techniques. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The jamovi project. (2021). Jamovi. (Version 2.0) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org.
   Google Scholar
• Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative workbehaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317900167038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective and social Conditions for innovation in organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 169–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-7506-9749-1.50010-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelchtermans, G. (2021, July). Onderwijsvernieuwing en schoolontwikkeling: terugblik en vooruitblik op onderzoek en theorievorming [Educational innovation and school development: looking back and ahead to research and theory building] [invited symposium]. Proceedings of the Onderwijs Research Dagen (ORD) 2021 conference, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Kenny, D. A., Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). The statistical analysis of data from small groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirwin, C. (2018). Pulling oneself up by the hair: Understanding Nietzsche on freedom. Inquiry, 61(1), 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2017.1371829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambriex-Schmitz, P., Van der Klink, M. R., Beausaert, S., Bijker, M., & Segers, M. (2020). Towards successful innovations in education: Development and validation of a multi-dimensional innovative work behavior instrument. Vocations & Learning, 13(2), 313–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-020-09242-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M. (2001). A refusal to define HRD. Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678860110059348
   Google Scholar
• Lin, C. H., & Sanders, K. (2017). HRM and innovation: A multi‐level organizational learningperspective. Human Resource Management Journal, 27(2), 300–317. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1990). Informal and incidental learning in the workplace. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Messmann, G., & Mulder, R. H. (2012). Development of a measurement instrument for innovative work behavior as a dynamic and context-bound construct. Human Resource Development International, 15(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2011.646894
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. (2021). Trend report labor market teachers primary education, secondary education and vocational education 2021 [Trendrapportage arbeidsmarkt leraren PO, VO en mbo]. Rijksoverheid.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. (2020). Professional collaboration as a key support for teachers working in challenging environments. Teaching in Focus, 34. https://doi.org/10.1787/c699389b-en
   Google Scholar
• Revelle, W. (2019). Psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. [R Package]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych.
   Google Scholar
• Robitzsch, A. (2020). Why ordinal variables can (almost) always be treated as continuous variables: Clarifying assumptions of robust continuous and ordinal factor analysis estimation Methods. Frontiers in Education, 5, 589965. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.589965
   Google Scholar
• Runhaar, P. (2008). Promoting Teachers’ Professional Development. Dissertation, University of Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607. https://doi.org/10.5465/256701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shieh, G. (2016). Choosing the best index for the average score intraclass correlation coefficient. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 994–1003. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0623-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simons, P. R. J., Ruijters, M. C. P., & P, M. C. (2001). Work related learning: Elaborate, expand, externalize. In L. Nieuwenhuis (Ed.), Dynamics and stability in VET and HRD (p. 2001). Twente University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sorensen, N. (2017). Improvisation and teacher expertise: Implications for the professional development of outstanding teachers. Professional Development in Education, 43(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2015.1127854
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, D. M., Fernald, D. H., & Mold, J. W. (2012). Intraclass correlation coefficients typical of cluster-randomized studies: Estimates from the Robert Wood Johnson Prescription for Health projects. The Annals of Family Medicine, 10(3), 235–240. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1347
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thurlings, M., Evers, A. T., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behavior. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430–471. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314557949
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velicer W F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41(3), 321–327. 10.1007/BF02293557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vermeulen, M. (2016). Leren Organiseren. Een Rijke Leeromgeving Voor Leraren En Scholen [learning to organise a rich learning environment for teachers and schools]. Open University.
   Google Scholar
• Voogt, J., & Pareja Roblin, N. (2010). 21st Century skills. University of Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, M. W. (2018). Exploratory factor analysis: A guide to best practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 44(3), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798418771807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar