PROMOTING TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT_P.pdf · what factors hinder and promote the...

Promoting Teachers’ Professional D

evelopment Piety Runhaar

Promoting Teachers’ ProfessionalDevelopment

Piety Runhaar

Because teacher quality has a great influence on pupil attainment, teachers’ professional development recieves a lot of attention in educational policy. This dissertation contains five studies on how teachers’ professional development, in terms of learning at the workplace, can be explained and promoted. The central question in the first part is how Human Resources Management (HRM) can serve as a tool in professional development. We examine what factors hinder and promote the implementation of HRM within schools and how the implementation can be fostered when different HRM roles (administrative expert, strategic partner, change agent, employee champion) are fulfilled within schools. Furthermore, we examine the impact of consensus between management and HRM department about goals and features of HRM policy on the implementation process. In the second part of the dissertation, the central question is what individual and organisational factors explain teachers’ professional development. First, we try to explain professional development in terms of reflection and asking feedback, by perceived self-efficacy, learning goal orientation and transformational leadership. Second, we try to explain professional development in terms of innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, by perceived task and goal interdependence within teams.

Piety Runhaar has been working as a consultant for KPC Group since 2000. KPC Group is a consultancy firm that focusses on improving learning processes, both of students and staff, within schools. Since 2005 she combines consultancy with research and teaching at the Organisational Psychology & HRD Department at Twente University.

Uitnodiging

Voor het bijwonen van de openbare verdediging van mijn

proefschrift

Donderdag 20 november 2008, om 15.45 uur,

In het Amphitheater, Vrijhof,Universiteit Twente,Drienerlolaan 5,

Enschede.

Voorafgaand aan de verdediging, om 15.30 uur,

zal ik een korte toelichting geven op mijn onderzoek.

Na afloop is er een borrel op

dezelfde locatie.

Om18.00 uur sluiten we de dag feestelijk af in de Faculty

Club (UT-terrein).U bent van harte uitgenodigd

deel te nemen aan het buffet dat hier aanwezig is!

Promoting teachers’ professional development

Piety Runhaar

Paranimfen:Hens Runhaar & Pieter Calis

[email protected]@kpcgroep.nl

PROMOTING TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

ISBN: 978-90-365-2751-4

Printed by PrintPartners Ipskamp, Enschede

Illustration cover: Marina Aarts. Paining ‘Sky is the limit’: life is a dynamic process, people put a

meaning on in their own way.

Photograph author: Ronald Baden

© Piety Runhaar, 2008

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, stored or utilized in any

form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including

photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, other than for purpose of

fair use, without written permission from the author.

PROMOTING TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

PROEFSCHRIFT

ter verkrijging van

de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Twente,

op gezag van de rector magnificus,

prof. dr. W.H.M. Zijm,

volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties

in het openbaar te verdedigen

op donderdag 20 november 2008 om 15.45 uur.

door

Pietsje Roelofje Runhaar

geboren op 2 juni 1972

te Alphen aan den Rijn

Promotor: Prof. Dr. K. Sanders

Co-promotor: Dr. H. Yang

Promotie commissie: Prof. Dr. H.W.A.M. Coonen (voorzitter commissie)

Prof. Dr. H.A. Hoekstra (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen)

Prof. Dr. J.W.M. Kessels

Dr. A. Ros (KPC Groep / Fontys Hogescholen)

Prof. Dr. P.J.C. Sleegers

CONTENTS

Chapter 1 General Introduction 1

Part One: Studies on HRM as a tool in teachers’ professional development 13

Chapter 2 The HRM department in schools:

an intermediary between management and teachers? 15

Chapter 3 Implementing HRM within schools: examining the

locus of control of individuals and consensus within a school. 27

Part two: Studies on individual and organisational factors explaining

teachers’ professional development 41

Chapter 4 Breaking down the barriers:

promoting teachers’ reflection and feedback asking 43

Chapter 5 Breaking through the isolation of teachers:

interdependence between teachers as a tool in innovation 61

Chapter 6 General discussion and conclusions 79

References 91

Summary in Dutch 107

Appendices 113

Dankwoord 115

DETAILED CONTENTS

Chapter 1 General Introduction 1

Teachers’ continuous professional development within schools 1

Teachers’ professional development in research 2

Research goals and central question 5

Sector to be studied 7

Overview of the studies 7

Outline of the thesis 10

Part One: Studies on HRM as a tool in teachers’ professional development 13

Chapter 2 The HRM department in schools:

an intermediary between management and teachers? 15

Introduction 16

Study one: What factors impede and promote the implementation of HRM? 17

Study two: Which role can be played by the HRM department in fostering the

implementation of HRM? 22

Discussion 25

Chapter 3 Implementing HRM within schools: examining the

locus of control of individuals and consensus within a school. 27

Introduction 28

Method 31

Results 34

Discussion 38

Part two: Studies on individual and organisational factors explaining

teachers’ professional development 41

Chapter 4 Breaking down the barriers:

promoting teachers’ reflection and feedback asking 43

Introduction 44

Methods 50

Results 53

Discussion 57

Chapter 5 Breaking through the isolation of teachers:

interdependence between teachers as a tool in innovation 61

Introduction 62

Methods 67

Results 70

Discussion 75

Chapter 6 General discussion and conclusions 79

Introduction 79

Summary of findings 80

Main conclusions 84

Limitations and strengths 86

Implications of the study 87

References 91

Summary in Dutch 107

Appendices 113

Dankwoord 115

General introduction

1

CHAPTER 1

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Teachers’ continuous professional development within schools

The continuous professional development of teachers has recently received a lot of attention in research

and in practice for several reasons. First of all, the fact that pupil attainment seems to depend mainly on

teacher quality (Cornet, Huizinga, Minne & Webbink, 2006; Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain, 2005; Scheerens

& Bosker, 1997) makes it reasonable to assume that investing in teacher quality by stimulating

continuous development of teachers will ultimately result in pupil attainment. While this assumption is

taken for granted by most authors, certain confirmation of it is found in research, in that, for example,

collaboration, sharing of ideas, and comparing views between teachers is positively related to pupils’

achievement (Gruenert, 2005; Rosenholtz, 1985; Yasumoto, Uewaka & Bidwell, 2001).

Furthermore, the initial teacher education can not contain all the knowledge and skills needed to

cope with the unexpected, practical, day-to-day problems (Coonen, 2005; Knight, 2002). For example,

teachers can prepare their lessons but will not always be sure of exactly how students will react to it and

why a specific course went well in one group of students and not in a another group. Normal changes, for

instance, when a student presents a problem the teacher has not met before, imply learning (Knight,

2002). In addition, the ongoing technological innovations and continuous changes in pupils’ backgrounds

force teachers to continuously learn new things (European Commission, 2005). Continuous professional

development in terms of learning at work is in this sense an inherent part of a teacher’s duty.

Finally, more fundamental societal changes affecting schools demand continuous professional

development of teachers, as well. Active and self-regulated information gathering has become more

important than memorising information (Kwakman, 2003; European Commission, 2005; Van Eekelen,

2005). Given the importance of lifelong learning skills in the relatively new knowledge economy, schools

need to change their educational processes in such a way that pupils acquire the skills to regulate their

own learning once they go to work (see for example Alejandro, 2001; Centre for American Progress,

2005; TDA, 2006; Dutch Education Council, 2006). Teachers are therefore expected to fulfil other roles

than they are used to (e.g. coach and tutor) and to apply other pedagogical approaches and methods

(Bransford, Berliner, Derry & Hammerness, 2005; Ros, 2007; Hargreaves & Fink, 2000; Putnam &

Borko, 2000; Van Eekelen, 2005).

It seems that change is not incidental but more inherent in schools: schools need to change and

innovate continuously (see for example Coonen, 2005; Gerrichhauzen, 2007; Van den Berg,

Vandenberghe & Sleegers, 1999; Fullan, 2007). Obviously, the role of teachers in change and innovation

processes is of crucial importance (see for example Hall & Hord, 1987; Fullan, 2007; Wikeley, Stoll,

Murillo & De Jong, 2005). Their willingness and ability to bring the expected changes in education into

practice and invent new didactic methods is a key factor (Desimone, 2002; Kwakman, 2003; Snoek,

2004; Van Eekelen, 2005).

Chapter 1

2

Although the necessity for continuous professional development in schools is universally

acknowledged, it seems hard to organize in many countries (Centre for American Progress, 2005; NWO,

2007; OECD, 2005; TDA, 2006). This is also true for The Netherlands (see Dutch Ministry of Education,

Culture and Science, 2005). Since the end of the last century, different attempts have been made to

implement Human Resources Management (HRM) as a means to professionalize schools (see Meesters,

2003 for an overview). To give a few examples: attention has been paid to the introduction of a personnel

policy that encourages teachers to act and interact as professionals with each other and with the

management (Van Es Committee, 1993); the Dutch Education Professions Act urges schools to attend to

the continuous professional development of teachers to ensure that the teaching staff will always meet the

competence requirements (SBL, 2001); in the last decades, the salary system has been changed several

times to attract more and better teachers (Van Rijn Committee, 2002; Teacher Committee, 2007); and the

government and school boards have been trying to implement so called Integrated Personnel Policy since

the beginning of this century (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2007). The primary

goals of this personnel policy are the promotion of the professional development of teachers in line with

school development and the integration of various instruments, such as payment, development, and

assessment (Moerkamp, Vedder & Vos, 2005; SBO, 2005). Despite the many investments, acts, and

promises, the implementation of this integrated personnel policy in schools still lags behind expectations

(Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2004; Dutch Education Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch Ministry of Education,

Culture and Science, 2005; Teachers Committe, 2007). Studies have suggested several reasons for this:

insufficient alignment between different personnel instruments, lack of a link between personnel policy

and other policy domains, ineffective use of some aspects of personnel policy, such as assessment and

reward systems; and short term rather than long term focus in schools (see for more Van der Linden,

Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2005).

Teachers’ professional development in research

Not only does teachers’ professional development receive a lot of attention in educational policy, but it is

a recurring theme in academic research, as well (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Kwakman, 1999). Many

studies on teachers’ professional development1 (or teachers’ learning, as it is often called) exist and a

variety of different concepts have been used. More specifically, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999)

distinguish between three conceptions of teacher learning, which are based on the way the relationship

between knowledge and practice is understood: The first conception is the knowledge-for-practice

approach, which leads to the definition of teacher learning as the gathering of all the knowledge that is

needed to teach well from sources outside the school, such as from experts, courses or handbooks; The

second conception is the knowledge-in-practice approach, which leads to the definition of teacher

1 In literature on professional development and adult learning, it is assumed that professionals are continuously

striving for quality imporvement (Houle, 1980) and hence that professionals have to keep learning during their

career (Eraut, 1994; Kwakman, 1999). Professional development in this sence implies learning. We consider the

terms ‘teachers’ professional development’ and ‘teacher learning’ as interchangeable and in the dissertation, both

terms will be used.


3

learning as the finding out of ‘what works’ by reflection on day-to-day practice; and the third conception

is the knowledge-of-practice approach, in which teacher learning is defined as the collaborative search for

‘what works’ by studying literature, experimenting and innovating in the classroom, and building the

needed ‘body of knowledge’ together. Because this categorization is comprehensive and well-known, we

use it here to describe how teachers’ professional development, in terms of teacher learning, has been

studied.

Within the knowledge-for-practice perspective, teacher learning is aimed at obtaining what is

already known and has been found by people outside the classroom. Courses, handbooks, and other

formal learning tools primarily shape professional development. In this so called “deficit-mastery

approach” (Guskey, 1986), professional development is an activity outside of the teachers’ workplace

(Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Sleegers, Bolhuis & Geijsel, 2005). The effects of this form of

professional development – also known as ‘formal learning’ (Kwakman, 1999) - appear disappointing

(Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Richardson & Placier, 2001). In particular, the inadequate link between

theory and practice and the insufficient link between supply (i.e. theory and training programs) and

demand (i.e. learning needs of teachers) have been mentioned (see for example Joyce, Calhoun, Fullan, &

Stiegelbauer,1991; Lovitt & Clarke, 1988). As a consequence, learning and change is no longer

considered an activity in which teachers are relatively passive participants, but a complex process in

which teachers actively learn and construct meaning.

Within the knowledge-in-practice conception, teacher learning is defined as making use of the

more or less implicit knowledge about what works in teaching by reflecting on what is going on in the

classroom. Following Schön (1983, 1987, see also Cochran-Smith, 1999), it is assumed that the

knowledge that teachers need is embedded in the experiences, practices, and actions of the teachers

themselves. This knowledge comes from reflection on practice, either individually or in dyadic situations

(e.g. colleagues giving each other feedback). Professional development activities are aimed at questioning

own assumptions and reconsidering the bases for actions or beliefs. This approach is in line with research

on adult learning (e.g. Eraut, Alderton, Cole & Senker, 1998; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Marsick & Watkins,

2001) and views the workplace of teachers as an important potential learning situation.

The knowledge-of-practice conception assumes that the knowledge teachers need emanates from

systematic inquiries made by the teachers themselves concerning teaching, learning, students, subject

matters, etc. (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). Professional development from this perspective envisions

teachers collaboratively researching for ‘what works’ by studying literature, experimenting and

innovating in the classroom, and building the needed ‘body of knowledge’. For example, much attention

is paid to ‘communities of practice’ as a tool for school reform, where teachers learn in interaction with

each other, face-to- face or virtually, by studying practical problems and experimenting with new

practices (e.g. Bruining, 2007; Gerrichhauzen, 2007; Stoll, Bolam, McMahon, Wallace & Thomas, 2006;

Verbiest, 2004). Attention is also paid to professional development schools, where teacher education

takes place within schools. Institutes for teacher education and schools work together as partners, which

leads to better learning results for individual teachers and their colleagues, and ultimately leads to renewal

Chapter 1

4

within the schools and within the teacher-education programs (see for example, Roelofs, 2005; 2007;

Shroyer, Yahnke, Bennett & Dunn, 2007). In contrast to the first conception, knowledge is not gathered

from outside the classroom or school, but constructed by teachers themselves in local or broader

communities. And in contrast to the second conception, reflection on practice is not only used to improve

one’s own teaching, but also to construct meaningful local knowledge as a part of larger efforts to

transform teaching.

Reflection, feedback, innovative behaviour, and knowledge sharing

Given the proven inadequacy of formal education methods for the purpose of continuous teacher learning

(Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Richardson & Placier, 2001), and the fact that the learning of

professionals (Watkins & Callahan, 1998), teachers, in particular (Van Eekelen, 2005), takes place mostly

unintentionally and during work, we align ourselves with the knowledge-in-practice and knowledge-of

practice conceptions (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999) and focus on professional development as learning

at the workplace.

More specifically, we have operationalized the learning in the knowledge-in-practice conception

as reflection and asking for feedback, as these activities are assumed to play an important role in learning

from practice (see for example Hopkins, 2001; Imants, 2001; Korthagen, 2001; Vandenberghe &

Kelchtermans, 2002; Zwart, 2007). More specifically, studies on peer coaching stress the importance of

the exploration of thinking underlying practice via reflection (Garmston, Linder & Whitaker 1993) and

the exchange of feedback (Kohler & Ezell, 1999). Reflection is aimed at the assessment of assumptions

implicit in beliefs about how to solve problems (Schön, 1983; Van Woerkom, 2004). Feedback asking

can be seen as a way to reflect, as it stimulates employees to look critically at their own behaviour and at

the underlying assumptions they hold (Reynolds, 1998; Vince, 2002; Van Woerkom, 2004).

Furthermore, we have operationalized the learning in the knowledge-of-practice conception as

innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, as these behaviours are considered important employee

behaviours in organisations that are continuously confronted with changes in their environment (see for

example Amabile, 1997; De Jong & Den Hartog, 2005; Janssen, 2000; Van der Vegt and Janssen, 2003;

Van Woerkom, 2004; West, 2000). Referring to the work of West and Farr (1989), Janssen (2000), Scott

and Bruce (1994) and Van der Vegt and Janssen (2003), we have defined innovative behaviour as a

combination of three types of behaviour: it involves the generalisation of new ideas and concepts, the

signalling of chances and needs of clients in the environment; the promotion of new ideas in the team of

organisation and the obtaining of support for these ideas; and the application of new ideas in practice by

experimenting and prototyping. Apart from this more individual behaviour, organisations’ capacity for

change also relies on employees’ ability to process, understand, and apply knowledge in interaction with

each other. By sharing knowledge and ideas with colleagues, new knowledge can be produced (see for

example Van Woerkom, 2004; Verloop & Kessels, 2006). Sharing knowledge also stimulates discussion

on the theories-in-use (Schön, 1983) because assumptions and opinions that underlie practices and

methods are made overt and can be reflected upon (Annett, 1969; Ashford, Blatt, and VandeWalle, 2003).


5

Research goals and central question

In line with our focus on the knowledge-in-practice and knowledge-of-practice conceptions of learning,

two approaches can be distinguished in research (cf Beijaard, 2002; Kwakman, 2003; Van Eekelen,

2005). First, there is the individual teacher approach, which results in research with a focus on describing

the learning processes of individual teachers in terms of reflection and learning by collaboration (e.g.

McLaughlin, 1997; Hopkins, 2001; Meijerink, 2007). Cognitive and social psychological theories

dominate within this line of study. Examples of this direction of research are: describing changes in

cognitions in teachers during learning (Zwart, 2007) or exploring the emotions teachers experience during

change processes (Van Veen, 2006). Second, there is the organisational approach, which focuses on how

learning processes of individual teachers and groups of teachers should look and how they ought to be

organized and stimulated. Attention is paid to the organisational environment as a ‘learning environment’

in which teachers are stimulated to learn from each other (see for example Rosenholtz, 1985; Fullan,

2007). Within this line of research, theories on adult learning are applied to prescribe how learning should

take place. Furthermore, organisational theories are used to explain teacher learning, for example, by

examining how task characteristics influence teachers’ learning (Kwakman, 1999) and the effects of

transformational leadership on teachers’ organizational citizenship behaviour (Nguni, Sleegers &

Denissen, 2006).

Systematic research examining both psychological and organizational antecedents of teachers’

professional development in combination is, however, missing (Kwakman, 2003; Smylie, 1988; Smylie,

Lazarus, & Brownlee-Conyers, 1996). To increase our understanding of teachers’ professional

development as a professional learning activity embedded in schools, more research focussing on the

interplay between psychological factors and organizational conditions is needed (Richardson & Placier,

2001; Smylie, 1988). The studies described in this thesis aim to make a contribution to this line of

research by examining the relative importance of teachers’ psychological states and organizational

conditions in explaining variation between and within teachers’ professional development.

Studies focussing on the organisational conditions that foster professional development of

teachers appear to neglect to a great extent the insights gained from the human resources management

science (HRM) (see also Gerrichhauzen, 2007). As has already been mentioned, HRM2 is allotted

considerable attention in educational policy, as it is seen as a means to stimulate the professional

development of teachers. This fact makes the apparent HRM gap in research remarkable. The HRM

implementation process has been intensively monitored (see for example Berger & Klein, 2002; Van

Wonderen, 2005) and some research has been done on the way in which the implementation stagnates.

However, research on why the implementation of HRM policy lags behind expectations and how it can be

fostered are scarce. Our study aims at contributing to further understanding how HRM can serve as a

means to promote teachers’ professional development.

2 As mentioned, the HRM in schools is called Integrated Personnel Policy. We choose to use the more known term

human resources management because the features of both kinds of personnel policy are more or less the same.

Chapter 1

6

The two central questions in the thesis are the following: ‘How can HRM serve as a tool in

professional development?’ and ‘Can professional development of teachers be explained by the interplay

between individual and organisational factors?’

Sector to be studied

To answer this question and the research questions deriving from it, five different studies were conducted.

They were all executed within schools for secondary vocational education and training (VET College).

This sector has not yet received a lot of attention from researchers who focus on the professional

development of teachers, although there are fundamental educational changes going on precisely here

(NWO, 2007). The changes concern the implementation of competence-based education, which implies

an integration of different subjects within courses and an integration of theory and practice (Debats, 2004;

Ritzen, 2004). Moreover, school boards within this sector have been busy with the introduction of more

or less autonomous teacher teams. One of the motives for this is that working in teams makes professional

development and innovation easier (Pelkmans & Smit, 1999; Venne, Felix & Vermeulen, 2001). The

devolvement of responsibilities from the level of central government to the level of schools as

autonomous and professional organisations started earlier in this sector than in other sectors (Dutch

Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005), making the outcomes of these studies valuable for

other schools, as well.

Overview of the studies

As the central question already revealed, we studied teachers’ professional development from two

perspectives: first, from the HRM perspective and second, from the perspective of teacher learning. To

assure a clear organization of studies, the thesis is divided in two parts: Part One contains three studies on

HRM as a tool in teachers’ professional development and Part Two contains two studies on individual

and organisational factors explaining teachers’ professional development.

Part One: Studies on HRM as a tool in teachers’ professional development

The first three studies examine Human Resources Management (HRM) and contribute to the

understanding of the complexity of implementing HRM in schools.

Despite the investments of the Dutch government over the past years and the efforts of school

boards, school leaders, and HRM departments, the implementation of Integral Personnel Policy (IPP) in

schools is still lagging (Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2004; Dutch Education Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch

Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). The implementation of HRM in schools can be seen

as a relatively high impact organisational change. Until recently, school leaders did not have to occupy

themselves with personnel policy and hence, did not make much use of professional HRM instruments.

The same is true for the teachers (Van der Linden, Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2005; Van der Bolt,

Studulski, Van der Vegt & Bontje, 2006). As a result, the use of HRM instruments - such as feedback

instruments and personal development plans - can be seen as something new for school leaders and


7

teachers alike. As organisational changes largely depend on the way people adapt to the changes and their

willingness to go along with such changes (see for instance Lawrence, 1958; Tichy, 1982; Miller,

Johnson & Grau, 1994; Millward, 2005), we propose in our first study that implementation problems are

more related to social and psychological processes in school organisations (‘soft’ factors) than to aspects

such as time, money, or means (‘hard’ factors).

In order to confirm this proposition, we interviewed policymakers and executives of HRM in five out

of the 42 Dutch VET Colleges. We interviewed six persons from each of the five VET Colleges (N=30):

one board member and the HRM manager (policymakers), two unit managers and their HRM officers

(policy executives). The results are described in chapter two.

In the second study, we attend to the different roles that the HRM department can play in schools. In

HRM literature, much focus is placed on the development of HRM as a pure administrative department,

serving the department that operates at a strategic level (see for example Baron & Kreps, 1999; Biemans,

2001). A well-known model of different HRM roles and outcomes is that of Ulrich (1998). Ulrich’s

model contains the following four HRM roles: The administrative expert is, in fact, the most ‘traditional’

role of HRM. This role involves creating effective and efficient administrative processes related to HRM

activities, such as employment, pay, training, performance evaluation; When HRM takes on the role of

strategic partner, it takes part in articulating the organisational strategy. HRM translates the

organisational strategy into HRM activities. As a change agent, HRM can help implement changes

needed to realise the organisation’s strategy. Finally, by fulfilling the role of employee champion, HRM

connects the desires and needs of employees to the organisation goals. HRM aims at increasing the

commitment and productivity of employees by meeting their needs. Ulrich (1998) stated that HRM is

most effective when it fulfils all of these roles within an organisation. In the second study described in

chapter two, we want to acquire an impression of the way HRM staff perceives their actual and desired

roles by using a questionnaire based on the four roles described by Ulrich (1998). The questionnaire was

filled in by 46 representatives from the HRM departments of all Dutch VET Colleges.

In the third study of this first part of the dissertation, the implementation process of HRM is

examined from the perspective of the ‘signalling function’ of HRM (Sonnenberg, 2006), which means

that HRM practices are viewed as communications from the employer to the employees about what

attitudes and behaviours are expected and rewarded (cf. Guzzo & Noonan, 1994). Consensus between

message senders – that is policymakers and executives – about the purpose and features of HRM leads to

a situation in which these messages are interpreted similarly among employees (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004;

Fiske & Taylor, 1991). Given its relative novelty in schools, HRM implies a change in the way in which

management and HRM staff think about personnel policy and their own role in it. For people to alter their

way of thinking, they need to see the added value of the planned change. The tendency to see the added

value of changes can, in turn, be assumed to be dependent on people’s personality, more specifically,

their locus of control (Rotter, 1966). Taking the importance of consensus as a starting point in the third

study described in chapter three, we examine how consensus influences the relationship between

individual locus of control and perceived added value of HRM. A mix of qualitative and quantitative

Chapter 1

8

methods, namely, questionnaires, interviews and document analyses (HRM policy plans), was used to

answer the research question in this study.

Part two: Studies on individual and organisational factors explaining teachers’ professional

development

The studies in the second part of this thesis concentrate on the aim of HRM: promoting the continuous

professional development of teachers (Moerkamp, Vedder & Vos, 2005). As already mentioned, we align

ourselves with the knowledge-in-practice and knowledge-of-practice conceptions of teacher learning

(Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1999). Within these conceptions, we focus on four types of activities:

reflection and asking for feedback, on the one hand, and innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, on

the other hand. Individual and organisational factors are taken into account in explaining these

professional development activities.

Reflection and asking for feedback are primarily aimed at improving one’s own teaching, whereas

innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing are also aimed at improving the teaching of others. More

than that, the latter two are aimed at changing one’s own teaching and that of the broader community –

i.e. department or school. And whereas reflection and asking for feedback are primarily initiated by the

teachers themselves, innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing are regulated by the surroundings of

teachers. Therefore, the importance of either individual or situational factors in explaining these

behaviours is assumed to be different, too. In explaining reflection and asking for feedback, we focus on

individual variables, while controlling for situational factors. In explaining innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, we focus on situational factors, while controlling for individual factors.

In the first study of the second part of the thesis – described in chapter four – we examine how

teachers’ professional development in terms of reflection and asking for feedback can be explained. Both

behaviours involve people taking a certain amount of risk. In fact, a person can be confronted with

information that can affect his or her self-image (Van Woerkom, 2004). As a consequence, people often

feel hesitant to engage in these learning activities (Schön, 1983; Argyris, 1991). People with high self-

confidence are more easily able to take that ‘risk’ than people who lack self-confidence (Van Woerkom,

2004). A well-known psychological construct that is strongly related to self-confidence is self-efficacy

(Bandura, 1977), which refers to the belief in one’s capability to mobilize the resources needed to meet

situational demands. Self-efficacy has often been studied in the context of educational improvements and

teacher learning (e.g. Ross, 1995; Soodak & Podell, 1996; Tschannen-Moran, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001)

and is assumed to play a role in predicting reflection and feedback asking. Another personality trait that is

assumed to encourage teachers to take the risk of receiving disconfirming information is learning goal

orientation (Dweck & Legett, 1988), which refers to peoples’ motivation to improve their competencies

through learning and training new skills, as well as through learning to complete new and more complex

tasks. People with a strong learning goal orientation tend to view feedback – positive and negative – as

diagnostically relevant information that helps them to increase their skills and capabilities (VandeWalle,

2001; Tuckey, Brewer & Williamson, 2002). Apart from these direct relationships, we expect that


9

learning goal orientation mediates the relationship between self-efficacy, on the one hand, and reflection

and feedback asking, on the other hand. Furthermore, a considerable amount of literature on teacher

learning is dedicated to transformational leadership as an inducement to professional development

activities (Lam, 2002; Nguni, Sleegers & Denissen, 2006; Ross & Grey, 2006). The term transformational

leadership refers to a leadership style that is characterized by: initiating and identifying a vision for the

school’s future; providing individual support; and providing intellectual stimulation (Geijsel, Sleegers,

Leithwood, Jantzi, 2003; Leithwood, Jantzi, & Steinbach, 1999; Leithwood & Sleegers, 2006).

Transformational leadership is also seen to predict reflection and feedback asking, as well. Finally, we

expect the relationship between transformational leadership and reflection and feedback asking will be

strongest for teachers with relatively low learning goal orientations.

We used a quantitative method, namely, a survey, to examine whether the reflection and feedback

asking of teachers can be explained by their self-efficacy, their learning goal orientation, and their

perception of transformational leadership. The teaching staff of a Dutch VET College participated in this

study. 456 respondents filled out the total questionnaire (a response rate of 38%).

The second study in this part of the thesis – described in chapter five – focuses on innovative

behaviour and knowledge sharing. Attention is paid to the organisational environment as a ‘learning

environment’ wherein teachers are stimulated to learn from each other (see for example Rosenholtz,

1985; Fullan, 2007) and to learn and innovate collaboratively (Meijrink, 2007; Zwart, 2007). Increasing

the interdependence between teachers is viewed as a way to increase the interaction between teachers, and

hence to increase the opportunities to learn in interaction (Gerrichhauzen, 2007). Therefore, teachers’

perceptions of task- and goal interdependence within their team is assumed to predict innovative

behaviour and knowledge sharing. Task interdependence is defined as the work flowing from one team

member to another in such a way that the task performance of one team member depends on the task

performance of the other (Brass, 1981; Kiggundu, 1981; Van de Vegt, Emans & van der Vliert, 1998).

Goal interdependence refers to the extent to which team members believe that their personal benefits and

costs depend on successful goal attainment by other members (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978; Deutsch, 1980;

Van der Vegt et al, 1998). We hypothesize that both forms of interdependence predict innovative

behaviour and knowledge sharing, as does the interaction between these two. To test our hypotheses, we

used a quantitative method, namely, a questionnaire consisting of existing scales that have been proven

reliable in prior studies.

The hypotheses of study four and five are summarized in Table 1.

Chapter 1

10

Table 1. Summary of hypothesised relationships between independent and dependent variables (studies

one and two, Part Two).

Dependent variables

Independent variables

Reflection Asking

Feedback

Innovative

behaviour

Knowledge

sharing

Self-efficacy (SE)

+

+

Learning goal orientation (LGO)

Mediating function of LGO

+

+

+

+

Stu

dy

1, fo

cus

on

in

div

idu

al

fact

ors

Transformational leadership (TL)

Interaction TL * LGO

+

-

+

-

Task interdependence (TI)

+

+

Goal interdependence (GI)

+

+

Stu

dy

2, fo

cus

on

org

anis

atio

nal

fac

tors

Interaction TI * GI

+

+

In order to answer our central questions - ‘How can HRM serve as a tool in professional development?’

and ‘Can professional development of teachers be explained by the interplay between individual and

organisational factors?’ - the following research questions have to be answered:

1. What factors impede and promote the implementation of HRM in schools? (Chapter two)

2. What role can the HRM department play in fostering the implementation of HRM? (Chapter two)

3. Can the degree to which HR policymakers and executives perceive added value in the

implementation of HRM be explained by their locus of control, as well as by the consensus

between them about the goals of HRM? (Chapter three)

4. Can the professional development of teachers, in terms of reflection and feedback asking, be

explained by self-efficacy, learning goal orientation, and perceptions of transformational

leadership? (Chapter four)

5. Can the professional development of teachers, in terms of innovative behaviour and knowledge

sharing, be explained by perceived task and goal interdependence? (Chapter five)

Outline of the thesis

The empirical studies are presented in Chapters two to five. The general conclusions, limitations of the

different studies, and the practical and scientific implications of the different studies are discussed in

Chapter six. The chapters do not contain a reference list. Instead, the total reference list can be found after


11

Chapter six. The appendixes contain summaries in Dutch and English and the scales and items used. As

has already been mentioned, the studies are linked to each other. We wanted to be sure that every chapter

can nevertheless be read and understood independent of the other chapters. This independence has

resulted in some overlap in certain aspects, such as in the introduction and method sections.

13

Part One

Studies on HRM as a tool in teachers’

professional development

HRM department as intermediary

15

CHAPTER 2

THE HRM DEPARTMENT IN SCHOOLS:

AN INTERMEDIARY BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND TEACHERS? 3

3 This chapter was presented as a paper: Runhaar, P.R. & K. Sanders. The HRM department in schools: an

intermediary between management and teachers? at the fifth Dutch HRM Conference, 9 and 10 November 2007,

Tilburg University; has been published as Runhaar, P.R. & K. Sanders (2007). The HRM department as

intermediary between management and teachers? (P&O als intermediair tussen management en leraren?) Tijdschrift

voor HRM, 10, 54-77; and is currently under review as Runhaar, P.R. & K. Sanders, The HRM department in

schools: an intermediary between management and teachers?

Abstract

Since the beginning of this century, Dutch schools have been implementing Human Resources Management (HRM)

policies as a means to stimulate continuous professional development of teachers in line with the organisation goals

(e.g. educational innovations). For many schools, the implementation of this new policy is a complex and slow

process. The focus of this chapter is on how the HRM department can foster the implementation of HRM. In the

first study, we examined what factors hinder and promote the implementation process. Because this new policy

brings with it new expectations for managers (e.g. asking and giving feedback, coaching) and for teachers (e.g.

cooperating, asking and giving feedback), its implementation will demand significant changes of people in schools.

It was expected that ‘soft factors’, referring to social processes such as the difficulty that people have in adapting to

the changes that are implied by the HRM policy, play a more important role than aspects such as time and money

(‘hard factors’). Pre-structured interviews with policymakers (board member and HRM manager) and policy

executives (unit managers and their HRM officers) from five VET Colleges (N=30) indeed showed that ‘making

policy and instruments is easy, but getting people to use them is very difficult’ and that interaction with teachers is

necessary to make the connection between the policy and the various expectations, worries, and desires of teachers

clear. Given this gap between policy and practice, HRM departments could play a crucial role in bridging the gap, in

particular, by executing the roles of ‘Employee Champion’ and ‘Change Agent’. In the second study, a

representative group of HRM managers from the VET Colleges participated (N=46). A survey was used to uncover

current and desired roles of HRM departments. Results revealed the existence of high aspirations to fulfil the roles

Strategic Partner and Change Agent, and low aspirations to fulfil the role of Employee Champion. We argue that the

HRM department can become a Strategic Partner by fulfilling the roles of Employee Champion and Change Agent,

which involves becoming an intermediary between management and teachers.

Chapter 2

16

Introduction

Teachers’ professional development is presently receiving a lot of attention in The Netherlands. As in

many countries all over the world, education is seen as one of the most crucial factors in international

competitiveness (see for example Center for American Progess, 2005; TDA, 2006; Dutch Education

Council, 2006). As pupil attainment seems to depend on teacher quality to a great extent (Rivkin,

Hanushek & Kain, 2005; Scheerens & Bosker, 1997), it is logical that different governments invest in

teacher training and learning. In addition, teachers are increasingly called upon to help young people

become fully autonomous learners by acquiring key skills, rather than memorising information (European

Commission, 2005). This leads to new teacher roles, which in turn means that teachers have to learn the

skills required to fulfil these new roles (Bransford, Berliner, Derry & Hammerness, 2005). The fact that

classrooms now contain a more heterogeneous mix of young people from different backgrounds and with

different levels of ability than ever before results once again in the need for continuous training for

teachers. (European Commission, 2005). In addition to this, Dutch schools are confronted with enormous

teacher shortages. The hope is that, by investing in professional development, the teacher’s job will

become more attractive (Meesters, 2003).

Although the necessity for continuous professional development in schools is universally

acknowledged, it seems hard to organize in many countries (OECD, 2005; NWO, 2007). This is also true

for The Netherlands. Dutch government and school boards have been trying to implement Human

Resources Management (HRM)4 since the beginning of this century (Dutch Ministry of Education,

Culture and Science, 2007). The primary goals of this new policy are the stimulation of individual

professional development of teachers in line with organisational development and the integration of

various HRM instruments (Moerkamp, Vedder & Vos, 2005; SBO, 2005). Three forms of integration can

characterize the new policy, which can be compared with terms described in HRM literature (see for

instance Delery & Doty, 1996; Baron & Kreps, 1999; Delery, 1998; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). First, the

vertical integration stresses the importance of the alignment between the goals of a school and the goals

and development of the teachers. Second, the horizontal integration stresses the linkage between the

different HRM practices, such as recruitment and selection, performance appraisal, training in terms of

feedback instruments and personal development plans, and reward systems. And third, the functional

integration emphasizes the importance of the consensus of the different actors - namely, the (line)

management, HR managers, and teachers themselves - about the importance of teachers’ professional

development.

The Dutch government has obligated school boards to implement HRM in their schools by adding

it as a regulation in the collective labour agreement. In addition, school boards have received money to

implement the new policy and a special office was founded for the development of different HR-

4 Officially, this HRM is called Integrated Personnel Policy. In the rest of the chapter we will use the more known

term Human Resources Management (HRM) because the features of both kinds of personnel policy are more or less

the same.


17

instruments that could be applied by schools, such as personal development plans and competence

profiles (Lubberman & Klein, 2003).

Despite the investments of the Dutch government over the past years and the efforts of school

boards, school leaders, and HRM departments, the implementation of IPP in schools is still lagging

behind expectations (Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2004; Dutch Education Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch Ministry

of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). The implementation process has been intensively monitored

(see for example Van Wonderen, 2005). Research has also been done to explore the ways in which the

implementation process stagnates. Such research has revealed the following: There is not enough

alignment between different personnel instruments (Sonntag, Vermeulen, Wiersma & Van Wolput,

2001); Personnel policy is not sufficiently linked to other policy domains (Teurlings & Vermeulen,

2004); Some aspects of personnel policy – such as assessment and reward systems – are not structurally

applied yet (Vermeulen, Wiersma, Van Hienen & Den Hartog, 2003); The focus in schools is on the short

term and not enough on the long term (Dutch Education Inspectorate, 2005). Less research has been done

on exploring the underlying causes for this stagnation. Consequently, the focus of this chapter is on the

reasons why the implementation process goes slowly and what can be done to foster it. The first research

question is: ‘What factors impede and promote the implementation of HRM according to policymakers

and executives of HRM policy?’ This question will be answered using qualitative research methods. The

second research question is: ‘Which role can be played by the HRM department in fostering the

implementation of HRM?’. This question will be answered using quantitative research methods.

STUDY ONE: What factors impede and promote the implementation of HRM?

The implementation of HRM in schools can be seen as a relatively high impact organisational change.

Until recently, school leaders didn’t have to think about it much, and didn’t make much use for

professional HRM instruments. Neither did the teachers (Van der Linden, Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2005;

Van der Bolt, Studulski, Van der Vegt & Bontje, 2006). As a result, the use of HRM instruments - such as

feedback instruments and personal development plans - can be seen as something new for school leaders

and teachers alike.

More specifically, there appear to be two aspects of the new policy that make the change substantial.

First, the new policy brings with it an understanding of the teacher profession that is not necessarily

shared by all teachers. Research has shown that teachers differ from each other in terms of whether or not

they adhere to a more restricted understanding of their profession (i.e. focus on their own lessons and

classes) or a more extended understanding (i.e. focus on both their own tasks and school wide tasks) (see

for example Hoyle, 1989; Witziers, 1992; Kwakman, 1999; Van Veen, 2003). HRM is geared towards the

extended understanding of the teacher profession – the alignment between teacher’s professional

development and school development - so it is to be expected that part of the teaching staff may resist the

new policy. Second, HRM has consequences for the organisational culture. The implementation of HRM

is intended to stimulate reflection and feedback-seeking behaviour in teachers (SBO, 2005). In other

words, teachers are being asked to behave more like so-called ‘reflective practitioners’ (Schön, 1983).

Chapter 2

18

Behaving in this way assumes an organisational culture characterized by open communication,

cooperation and an environment where one feels safe to make mistakes (Van Woerkom, 2004). Such a

culture does not necessarily exist in schools. Different authors have noticed that the relatively

autonomous position of teachers in schools makes cooperation and learning from each other more

difficult (Hanson, 1996; DeCaluwé & Vermaak, 2005).

Organisational changes largely depend on the way people adapt to the changes and their willingness

to go along with such changes (see for instance Lawrence, 1958; Tichy, 1982; Miller, Johnson & Grau,

1994; Millward, 2005). We therefore expect that implementation problems are more related to social and

psychological processes in school organisations than to aspects such as time, money, or means. Moreover,

we believe that, given the fact that the introduction of HRM policy and HRM instruments in schools has

been sponsored intensively by government in the past years (Teacher Committee, 2007), such aspects will

play a less critical role than social factors in understanding the implementation problems.

Method

In this study, we are interested in how policymakers and executives perceive the implementation process

and what factors they perceive as impeding and fostering this process. Qualitative research is a suitable

way to inquire about experiences and the way people make sense of them (Merriam, 1998). We used pre-

structured interviews as the research tool (Swanborn, 1987).

Respondents

Five schools for secondary vocational education and training (VET) participated in this study. Schools

from this sector were chosen because this sector has not yet received a lot of attention from researchers

focussing on professional development of teachers, even though there are fundamental educational

changes going on here (NWO, 2007). Furthermore, the devolvement of responsibilities from the level of

central government to the level of schools as autonomous and professional organisations started earlier

here than in other sectors (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). The outcomes of this

study are likely valuable for other schools, as well. In The Netherlands, there are 42 VET Colleges,

divided into the units Technique, Economics, Service and Welfare, with the number of employees varying

between 850 and 2,500. Each college has various locations, with a maximum of 60 (VET Council, 2006).

We chose five colleges of different size and from different locations and interviewed six

policymakers and executives of HRM policy from each of the five colleges: one board member, the HRM

manager, two unit managers and their HRM officers (N=30). Because VET Colleges are often large

organisations with many units, it is likely that subcultures exist (Van der Krogt & Vroom, 1988). This can

result in people who are thinking quite differently about HRM policy. To control for the effects of

subcultures, we chose managers and HRM officers from technical and welfare units. We interviewed 18

women and 12 men. The mean age of the respondents is 48.2 (SD=8.1). All had received higher

education. 57 % has a length of service of at least 10 years; 20% between four and ten years; 13 %

between one and four years and 10% less than one year.


19

Researchers

Two researchers conducted the research. To improve reliability, two test interviews were carried out. The

first six interviews were carried out together.

Questions and clustering of answers

The interviews were based on three questions: ‘How did the implementation process go?’; ‘Which factors

impeded the process according to you?’ and ‘Which factors do you think promoted the process?’ All

interviews were taped and transcribed, except for one conducted with an HRM policy officer who did not

want to be recorded. After reading all transcriptions, the answers to the first question were clustered into

two groups of allied answers. To cluster the answers to the second and third question, the classification of

Abdall-Haqq (1992) was adopted, namely ‘soft’ factors (referring to social processes in organisations)

and ‘hard’ factors (referring to concrete factors such as time and money). Within the two clusters, similar

answers were grouped together. The clustering of the answers was done by two researchers separately,

which resulted in 90% agreement. For the remaining 10%, agreement was reached after deliberation. The

grouping of answers within the clusters was done by one researcher.

Results

How did the implementation process go?

The 25 persons who could answer this question responded in two ways.

Which factors impeded the process according to you?

1. Writing the policies and instruments is easy, but getting people to act in line with them is difficult.

Respondents report that there is still a big difference between what is written in policy plans and what is done in

practice. Influencing the behaviour of teachers and managers – such as encouraging feedback-seeking behaviour -

appears to be hard.

2. The change appeared more complex than expected.

Seven respondents report that the implementation of integrated personnel policy is complex because it affects other

aspects of organisational policy, such as recent fusion processes and educational innovations.

Soft factors

1. Teachers experience little practical utility.

Eleven respondents report that the added value of the policy and the instruments is unsatisfactory to most teachers.

‘…everything teachers do must contribute directly to the learning process. All the rest is seen as ‘extra’ . .. ’,

according to a HRM officer.

2. Resistance to the many changes that are taking place in schools

The fact that teachers get tired of the many changes in national policy and in schools is reported by six respondents.

A HRM officer: ‘..teachers don’t have confidence in the sustainability of the change…’.

3. Organisational culture

Five respondents report that people are not used to giving and asking feedback in the current culture. As one board

member points out: ’. . .. . people don’t find it easy to criticise each other without putting each others back to the

wall, let alone being able to receive negative feedback. . . .’.

Chapter 2

20

22 of the 28 respondents who could answer this question (two HRM officers were not involved in the

implementation process) named one or more soft factors.

Eleven respondents named ‘hard’ factors (six of them also name a ‘soft’ factor).

Which factors do you think promoted the process?

Of the 25 respondents able to answer the question, 23 named soft factors.

Seven respondents named hard factors. Five of those seven also noticed soft factors.

Control variables

No significant relationships were found between the personal characteristics of respondents and their

answers. There were, however, some significant relationships between answers and function. The

impeding factor ‘incompetent managers’ was only mentioned by HRM directors (three out of five) and

welfare unit managers (two out of five). The fostering factor ‘communication’ was mentioned

predominantly by welfare unit managers and by none of the technical unit managers.

Hard factors

1. Incompetent managers

Five respondents don’t think their managers are capable of encouraging teachers to reflect and give feedback to each

other. One HRM director states: ‘. . .we used to think that good teachers would be good leaders. That proved to be

wrong. .. . ‘

2. Insufficient means

Six respondents refer to different types of means they lack: time, money, the way the participation council is

structured, the solid legal status of teachers.

Soft factors

1. Communication

Eleven respondents report that it proved helpful to talk frequently with teachers and managers about the goals and

methods of the policy. As one unit manager points out: ‘…I started with a little group of enthusiastic teachers. Then

you can show results to others. .. ‘

2. Create a sense of urgency

Ten respondents report that people only start showing interest for personnel policy and instruments after realizing

that it is necessary. For example, one of the unit managers states: ‘. . . .after a negative appraisal of an external

quality control, the whole team accepted the fact that we would start holding performance interviews periodically

with every team member. . . ‘

3. Making the connection to the educational process explicit

One of the four people who offer this kind of answer is a unit manager, who states: “. .. teachers have become

teachers because they chose to work with young people. . .. . . when one connects interventions to what motives

them, you can realise every big change you can imagine.. . ‘

Hard factors

Seven respondents name the fostering effect of different types of supports, such as the availability of personnel

instruments, a professional personnel department, and moving to a new bigger building.


21

Conclusions

This study primarily explored the factors that impede or promote the implementation of HRM in schools.

The study was based on the assumption that it would be soft factors, referring to the difficulty that people

have in adapting to changes, that would be the main obstacle, and that hard factors such as time and

money, would play a minor role.

The results show that most policymakers and executives of HRM policy in VET Colleges do indeed

report that there is a gap between policy in theory and in practice. Some of them refer to hard factors, but

most of them refer to social processes in the organisations (soft factors) that impede the implementation

process. The intentions, written down in policy plans, are not sufficiently put into effect mainly because

the ‘users’ of the policy (teachers) do not recognize the added value of the policy or are tired of the

continual changes in national or school policy. Furthermore, the new policy doesn’t seem to fit well

enough to the current organizational culture, in which people aren’t used to working and learning

together. Communicating about the goals of the new policy, making the necessity of this policy explicit,

and linking the policy to what motivates teachers most (which is student learning) seems to promote the

implementation process.

An explanation for the gap between policy and practice could lie in the nature of school

organisations. Schools have often been described as what Minzberg (1983) calls professional

bureaucracies (see for example Hooge, 1998; Boerman, 1998). In professional bureaucracies, managers

and employees operate in separate ‘zones’. Teachers occupy the professional zone, their classroom,

carrying the responsibility for pupils’ learning processes and performances. Managers operate in their

own zone in which they are responsible for personnel policy, as well as for public relations, finances etc.

Because the members in both zones need autonomy and space to function well, the link between the

zones is often weak. And while managers are focussed on controlling processes, teachers are dealing with

uncertainty and need the opportunity to improvise (Hanson, 1996). Here then lies a challenge: finding

ways to increase the overlap between these two zones.

It is interesting to note that resistance at the individual and organisational level is seen as an

impeding factor and less as a goal as such. By labelling resistance as an impeding factor, respondents are

saying that something about the attitude and behaviour of teachers has to change, both individually and

collectively, before HRM can be a success. Another strategy would be to find out exactly why teachers

are resisting, and then work towards revising the policy and practices. Yet another strategy could be to

make change one of the policy goals. By exploring what motivates teachers to develop themselves and

connecting this development to organisational goals instead of trying to ‘sell’ instruments, the gap

between policy and teacher concerns and needs could be effectively bridged. In the second study, we will

focus more on this ‘intermediary’ role of the HRM department.

Chapter 2

22

STUDY TWO: Which role can be played by the HRM department in fostering the implementation

of HRM?

The central question in this study is what role the HRM department can play in fostering the

implementation of integrated personnel policy in schools. The fact that there is such a discrepancy

between policy and practice makes the investigation of how the HRM department can reduce this gap and

what role(s) the HRM staff of VET Colleges would like to play of particular interest.

The development of HRM as a pure administrative department to a department that plays a role at a

strategic level has received considerable attention in HRM literature (see for example Baron & Kreps,

1999; Biemans, 2001). Different HR-roles have already been described. Ulrich’s classification of HRM

roles (Ulrich, 1998) is a well known model to describe the different ways in which HRM can contribute to

the goals of an organisation. Four quadrants (roles) arise by distinguishing two dimensions, namely the

strategic-operational-dimension and the processes-people-dimension. See the following illustration:

Figure 1. Four HRM roles, Ulrich (1998)

The administrative expert is, in fact, the most ‘traditional’ role of HRM. It involves creating effective and

efficient administrative processes related to HRM activities, such as employment, pay, training,

performance evaluation, etc. As a strategic partner, HRM takes part in articulating the organisational

strategy. HRM translates the strategy into HRM activities. By playing the role of change agent, HRM can

help implement changes needed to realise the organisation’s strategy. By fulfilling the role of employee

champion, HRM connects the desires and needs of employees to the organisation goals. HRM aims at

increasing the commitment of employees and their productivity by meeting their wishes where possible.

Ulrich (1998) states that HRM is most effective when all roles are fulfilled in coherence with each

other. Since our first study pointed out that the implementation of integrated personnel policy in VET

Colleges is difficult mainly because the policy and instruments do not seem to fit to the personnel’s

interests and concerns, the role of employee champion seems an appropriate one. Furthermore, given the

fact that the implementation of HRM involves a rather fundamental organisational change, the

implementation of it could also be fostered by playing the role of change agent. The question is whether

HR staff has the same opinion. Research shows that people in organisations have different perceptions

Future / strategic focus

Day-to-day / operational focus

Processes People

Administrative

Expert

Strategic

Partner

Change

Agent

Employee

Champion


23

concerning the preferred and practiced HRM roles (Biemans, 2001; Sanders & Van de Ven, 2004). HR

staff tends to prefer the strategic roles, whereas management and employees prefer the operational roles.

This leads us to the expectation that the HRM Staff of VET Colleges prefer the strategic roles more than

the operational ones.

Method

To get an impression of the way HRM staff perceives their actual and desired role fulfilment, we used a

questionnaire which was used in earlier research and proved to be reliable (Sanders & Van de Ven, 2004).

The questionnaire consists of 19 items, each corresponding to one of the four roles. Examples of items

are: ‘HRM helps in increasing the output of our College’(Administrative Expert); ‘HRM helps in

increasing the commitment of employees’ (Employee Champion); ‘HRM contributes to long term

planning issues’(Strategic Partner); ‘HRM helps in realising changes in the organisational culture’

(Change Agent). A five point Likert scale was used (1 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree) and the items

were answered for both the actual and desired situation.

Respondents

The questionnaire was filled in by 46 representatives from the HRM departments of all Dutch VET

Colleges, including HRM managers (28), HRM policy advisors (12) and HRM officers (6). The 46

representatives were approached during regional periodical meetings of HRM managers, organised by the

national VET Council.

Results

Table 1 shows the mean scores and standard deviations for the different roles. The administrative expert

was executed most often (3,73), followed by the strategic partner (3,25), the change agent (3,05) and the

employee champion (2,98). The most desired role was the strategic partner (4,38), followed by the

change agent (4,27), the administrative expert (4,02) and the employee champion (3,48).

Table 1. Mean scores and standard deviations for each role, in actual and desired situations, total response

group

Roles Actual Desired

Mean Sd Mean Sd

Administrative Expert 3,73 0,59 4,02 0,50

Emloyee Champion 2,98 0,67 3,48 0,71

Strategic Partner 3,25 0,86 4,38 0,55

Change Agent 3,05 0,71 4,27 0,65

Chapter 2

24

On average, all desired roles received higher scores than the actual roles. As expected, the highest

aspirations concerned the strategic roles, namely the strategic partner and the change agent. Least

discrepancy was found between the actual and the desired role of administrative expert. The role of

employee champion received the lowest score in both the actual and desired situation. In figure 1, the

results are presented visually.

Figure 1. Visual presentation of scores on actual and desired roles

Control variables.

Gender and age didn’t relate significantly to the outcomes, whereas job title related significantly to the

scores on employee champion. HRM managers tend to score highest on the actual fulfilment of the role

employee champion and lowest on the desired fulfilment of that role. HRM policy advisors tend to score

lowest on actual role fulfilment of employee champion and highest on desired fulfilment of that role.

These results are presented in table 2.

Table 2: Mean scores total response group and job functions

* significant differences Employee Champion Actual and Desired: F(2,43)= 3.55; p<.05 resp. F(2,42)=3.03, p=.059

Response group

Roles

HRM managers HRM policy

employees

HRM officers

Actual Desired Actual Desired Actual Desired

Administrative Expert 3,8 4,6 3,7 4,0 3,6 3,8

Employee Champion* 3,2 3,3 2,6 3,8 3,0 3,6

Strategic Partner 3,4 4,3 3,1 4,6 2,6 4,1

Change Agent 3,2 4,2 2,9 4,4 2,8 4,1

Strategic Partner Change Agent

Administrative Expert Employee Champion

5

45

5

54

4

4

Desired

Actual

3

2

1

321

1

2

3

3 2 1


25

Conclusion

The aim of this second study was to investigate how the HRM department in VET Colleges can foster the

implementation of integrated personnel policy. By means of the four HRM roles described by Ulrich

(1998), the actual and desired HRM roles of the personnel in VET Colleges were made explicit. The

administrative expert seems to be fulfilled most and the difference between actual and desired role

fulfilment is small. This was to be expected, since this is the most ‘traditional’ role of HRM (Biemans,

2001). The biggest differences between actual and desired role fulfilment concern the roles strategic

partner and change agent, which seems also to be the case in other organisations (Biemans, 2001; Buyens

& De Vos). The employee champion is fulfilled least and the difference between actual and desired role

fulfilment is minimal. Given the staring point of this second study, namely finding the missing link

between HRM policy and personnel needs and interests, this outcome is surprising.

Based on these results, we can make the following recommendations. As we had mentioned earlier,

taking on the role of employee champion can be a way to bridge the gap between organisational policy

and individual interests and concerns. By fulfilling this role, the HRM department can collect important

information for management. One of the biggest present concerns of school management is the realisation

of educational innovations, which depend largely on the dedication, capability, and motivation of

teachers. In fact, playing the employee champion can even be seen as an important strategy when taking

on the role of strategic partner. In organisations in general, HRM managers and officers have to do their

best to convince management about the added value of HRM policy and practices (Biemans, 2001;

Buyens & De Vos, 2001). If HRM can show management how teachers can be motivated to contribute to

the changes and show teachers how they can thereby develop themselves – in other words, play the role

of change agent too – then the HRM department can make the added value of the new policy clear.

Discussion

In this chapter, the focus has been on HRM as a way to stimulate teachers’ professional development.

Since the implementation of HRM in schools lags behind expectations, we examined the reasons why the

implementation process is progressing so slowly and what can be done to foster it. We consequently

conducted two studies and attained more insight into the complexity of the implementation process of

HRM in schools and the ways in which the HRM department can foster this process.

There are, however, some limitations to these studies which we want to mention. The first

limitation concerns the qualitative research method used in the first study. Interpreting things people say

in interviews is always a subjective matter. By allowing two researchers to interpret results separately, the

reliability was increased. The second limitation concerns the number of respondents in the first study. We

included five colleges, which was 12% of the Dutch VET colleges. The results are therefore not

representative and cannot be generalized to all VET Colleges. However, we expect other VET Colleges -

and schools in other sectors, as well - to recognize the processes described in this chapter and to profit

from the suggestions made concerning the ways to foster the implementation processes of HRM in their

own schools. The third limitation refers to the quantitative data used in study two. The differences

Chapter 2

26

between the desired HRM roles and the actual fulfilment of these roles also cannot be generalized to all

schools in other sectors. They can, however, be used by HRM and line managers in all sectors to reflect

on their own role fulfilment.

The results from both studies suggest directions for further research. With respect to the first

study, the results show a gap between policy and teacher’s concerns, but the exact concerns of the

teachers remain vague. It would be very interesting to include teacher’s own perceptions of the new HRM

policy. In addition, the question concerning how teacher’s professional development is fostered and

matched to organisational goals (the problem that lies behind the implementation of HRM) deserves

further attention. Concerning study two, the results obtained offer more insight into the role of the HRM

department in fostering the implementation of HRM. It would, however, be useful here to include other

people’s perceptions, as well: management and teachers. The fact that the employee champion is the least

desired role for HRM representatives does not mean that the representatives underestimate the added

value of that role. HRM representatives likely believe that others or other departments are better suited for

taking on the role, such as managers, for example. Indeed the role of the direct line manager in executing

HRM policy has been receiving more and more attention in recent HRM literature (Biemans, 2008). More

specifically, the quality of actual and perceived HRM is being related to the quality of the implementation

and the quality and competence of the line manager (Nehles, Van Riemsdijk, Kok en Looise, 2006).

Consensus within schools

27

CHAPTER 3

IMPLEMENTING HRM WITHIN SCHOOLS:

EXAMINING THE LOCUS OF CONTROL OF INDIVIDUALS AND CONSENSUS WITHIN A

SCHOOL.

Abstract

HRM can be viewed as a means to communicate to teachers about what attitudes and behaviours are expected and

rewarded. In this study the consensus between ‘message senders’ – i.e. management and HRM staff – about goals

and features of the new policy is examined. Given the relative novelty of HRM in schools, HRM implies a change

in the way in which management and HRM staff think about personnel policy and their own role in it. For people to

alter their way of thinking, they need to see the added value of it. Personality, more specifically, locus of control,

also plays a role in the way people adapt to changes. In this study, the relationship between the individual locus of

control of the HRM message senders in schools and the degree to which they perceive the added value of the new

HRM policy is examined. Furthermore, the moderating role of consensus between message senders on this

relationship is examined. Five institutions for secondary vocational education and training (VET Colleges)

participated in this study. Respondents included one board member, the HR-manager, the managers of two units and

their HRM officers (N=30). A questionnaire was used to measure locus of control and added value. We used

interviews and a document analysis to measure consensus. The data partly confirm our expectation that the more

internal the locus of control of message senders is, the more they perceive an added value in the new HRM policy.

The data also partly support the expectation that the relationship between locus of control and perceived added value

is weaker in situations where consensus exists – i.e. where policymakers and executives agree on the goals and

features of HRM – than in situations where no consensus exists. Practical implications are mentioned and

limitations of the study and suggestions for further research are discussed.

Chapter 3

28

Introduction

The Dutch government views Human Resources Management (HRM) as an important tool to stimulate

teachers’ professional development (SBO, 2005). Professional development refers to the process of

continuous development throughout a career (Moerkamp, Vedder & Vos, 2005). Investing in teachers’

professional development is important for at least three reasons. First, teachers play a major role in pupil

achievement (Cornet, Huizinga, Minne & Webbink, 2006; Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain, 2005; Scheerens &

Bosker, 1997). What this means is that in order to improve the achievements of the pupils the quality of

teachers should be improved. Second, new educational insights have led to new didactic and pedagogical

concepts (see for example Kwakman, 2003; Van Eekelen, 2005). Teachers are increasingly called upon to

help young people become fully autonomous learners by acquiring key skills, rather than memorising

information (European Commission, 2005), which requires additional teacher roles, such as coach or tutor

(Van Eekelen, 2005). This, in turn, means that teachers have to learn skills required to fulfil these new

roles (Bransford, Derry, Berliner & Hammerness, 2005). Third, given the teacher shortages schools are

confronted with (Teacher Committee, 2007), investing in professional development is seen as a way to

make the teacher profession more attractive (Meesters, 2003).

As in other countries (Centre for American Progess, 2005; TDA, 2006; Runhaar, 2007), Dutch

government and school boards have invested a lot of money and effort in the stimulation of teachers’

professional development (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). Since the beginning

of this century, schools have been implementing so-called “Integrated Personnel Policy” to stimulate this

development (Meesters, 2003, Van Wonderen, 2005). Three forms of integration can characterize the new

policy. These forms of integration can be compared with terms described in HRM literature, as well (see

for instance Delery & Doty, 1996; Baron & Kreps, 1999; Delery, 1998; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). First,

vertical integration stresses the importance of the alignment between the goals of a school and the goals

and development of the teachers. Second, horizontal integration stresses the linkage between the different

HRM practices, such as recruitment and selection, performance appraisal, training in terms of feedback

instruments and personal development plans, and reward systems. And third, functional integration

emphasizes the importance of the consensus between the different actors - namely, the (line)

management, HR managers, and teachers themselves - about the importance of teachers’ professional

development.

Although the necessity for continuous professional development in schools is unquestioned, the

implementation of HRM in schools still lags behind (Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2004; Education

Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). The implementation

process has been intensively monitored (see for example Van Wonderen, 2005) and some research has

been done concerning the way in which the implementation stagnates. These studies show that there is not

enough alignment between different personnel instruments; personnel policy is not linked closely enough

to other policy domains; some aspects of personnel policy – such as assessment and reward systems – are

not yet being used effectively; and the focus in schools is on the short term and not enough on the long

term (see for more Van der Linden, Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2005). However, research on the question


29

why implementation of the HRM policy lags behind and how it can be fostered are scarce. In this chapter

we want to answer these questions.

Until recently school leaders did not have to occupy themselves much with personnel policy. They did not

make much use of professional HRM instruments and neither did the teachers (Van der Linden et al,

2005; Van der Bolt, Studulski, Van der Vegt & Bontje, 2006). The implementation of HRM therefore

implies a change in the way management, HRM, and teachers have to pay attention to goals and purposes

of personnel policy and to their role in it. Different authors notice that people tend to hold on to existing

views and behaviours (see for example Schein, 1985; Argyris, 1999) and that a positive attitude towards

change, or, in other words, a belief in the added value of it, is needed for people to alter their way of

thinking or behaviour (Kotter, 1996; Caluwé & Vermaak, 2002). Indeed, the study we have done on

factors that promote and impede the implementation process of HRM in schools described in chapter two

show that not all teachers see the added value of personnel instruments, like personal development plans,

and therefore do not make much use of those instruments. ‘Making policy plans and personnel

instruments is quite easy, but getting people to use them is difficult’.

The importance of consensus on the added value of a particular policy within an organization is also

often stressed in HRM literature (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). HRM practices can be viewed as

communications from the employer to the employees about what attitudes and behaviours are expected

and rewarded (Guzzo & Noonan, 1994). HRM is most effective when these messages are interpreted

similarly among employees (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). This so-called ‘signalling function of HRM’

(Sonnenberg, 2006) will only lead to shared perceptions among employees about expectancies when

HRM staff and line management agree about the purpose and features of HRM (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). In

other words, the ‘message senders’ have to agree about the added value of the HRM policy for a

consistent message to be sent.

In this chapter, the focus is on the extent to which the message senders of HRM in schools, namely,

the board, HRM management, line management and HRM officers, perceive the added value of the new

HRM policy themselves. Such a focus includes both the individual and the school level. First, we try to

explain the perceived added value of the new HRM policy by looking at personality. Research on

organizational change shows that personality factors play an important role in the way people adapt to

changes (see for example Spector, 1982; Judge, Thoresen, Pucik, Welbourne, 1999). One of those factors

is locus of control, which refers to the perception of the individual of his or her ability to exercise control

over the environment (Rotter, 1966). In line with theory and empirical evidence, we examine the

relationship between people’s perception of their ability to exercise control over the environment

(internal locus of control) and their judgement concerning the added value of the new HRM. Second, we

examine whether the situation can moderate this relationship. More specifically, following the reasoning

of situation and climate strength research (Mischel, 1973; Schneider, Salvaggio, & Subrirats, 2002) and

the locus of control theory, we expect that, in situations where consensus between message senders exists

Chapter 3

30

about goals and features of the new HRM policy, the effect of the locus of control on perceived added

value of HRM is less strong than in situations where no consensus exists.

Individual level: Locus of control and perceived added value

Since mental models – such as a way of thinking about personnel policy and one’s role in it - function as

ways to make (organisational) reality understandable, predictable and thus safe, changing them can lead

to feelings of anxiety (Griffin, Shaw & Stacey, 1998). The extent to which people feel anxiety when

confronted with change will partly depend on their personality. Personality refers to a person’s general

style of interacting with the world – to situations or to other people - and has been studied by many

psychologists from different perspectives (Gray, 1999). General trait theorists, like Cattell (1950) and

Eysenck (1952), focus on traits that describe fundamental differences between people. This research has

resulted in the well-known Big Five theory (see for example Goldberg, 1993; Kohnstamm, Mervielde,

Besevegis & Halverson, 1995). Given the fact that people tend to behave differently in different

situations, social cognitive theorists focus on learned beliefs and habits that have been acquired through

experiences in social situations and that influence behaviour (Gray, 1991).

One of the ‘founding fathers’ of the social cognitive perspective on personality is Rotter, whose

social learning theory describes how people’s behaviour is affected by whether they believe that success

or reward depends on their effort or on pure luck (Rotter, 1966). People differ from each other in terms of

their dispositions or learned habits and thoughts: people with an internal locus of control (‘internals’) tend

to attribute outcomes of events to their own control, whereas people with an external locus of control

(‘externals’) tend to attribute outcomes to external circumstances.

Previous research linked locus of control to coping with (organizational) change. Research shows

that an internal locus of control is associated with problem-focussed coping strategies (Callan, Terry &

Schweizer, 1994; Judge et al, 1999). Furthermore, people with an internal locus of control report more

positive attitudes towards organisational changes than employees with an external locus of control

(Nelson, Cooper & Jackson, 1995; Lau & Woodman, 1995). It seems that people who believe they are in

control, even when confronted with the uncertainty that accompanies changes, are able to see changes as

opportunities (Phares, 1976; Kobasa, 1979).

Given these prior findings, we assume that the degree to which line management and HRM staff in

schools – i.e. the message senders – perceive the added value of the new HRM policy depends on their

locus of control. This leads to our first hypothesis:

H1: Internal locus of control and perceived added value of the new HRM policy are positively related.

School level: consensus as a moderator

As mentioned above, the behaviours and attitudes of people depend on the perception of their ability to

exercise control over the environment. However, the ability to exercise control is not only dependent on

the individual perception. The characteristics of the situation play a role too: in some situations, the luck-


31

aspect is more important for predicting success, and in other situations, effort is more important. Rotter

(1966) states that, in ambiguous situations where it is not apparent whether success depends on one’s own

effort or on luck, people’s attitude and behaviour is determined by a generalized disposition acquired by

past experiences, i.e. their locus of control.

In fact, this is in line with the theory and findings of situation strength (see for example Mischel,

1973) and climate strength research (see for example Schneider, Salvaggio, & Subrirats, 2002; Bowen &

Ostroff, 2004). Situation or climate strength both refer to the extent to which a situation – i.e.

organisational policies, practices, procedures and goals – is interpreted by organisational members in a

similar way. A strong situation can be characterized as established, stable, and closed from external

influences. Expectations are well defined and all members know which norms, attitudes, and behaviours

are important (Sanders, Dorenbosch & De Reuver, 2008). In strong situations, variances between

individuals’ perceptions of the meaning of the situation will be small and will reflect a common desired

content, whereas in weak situations, differences in perceptions will be great and will reflect individual

characteristics (Schneider et al, 2002).

Translated to our case, a situation in a school can be considered strong when the HRM policy - in

terms of goals and features – is interpreted by the message senders in the same way. Following the

reasoning described above, the individual locus of control of message senders will play a lesser role in

explaining the perceived added value in situations where consensus between message senders exists than

in situations where this consensus does not exist. Our second hypothesis therefore is:

H2: In situations where consensus exists – in terms of agreement between message senders about purpose

and features of the new HRM policy - the relationship between individual locus of control and perceived

added value will be weaker than in situations without consensus.

Method

Respondents and procedure

Schools for secondary vocational education and training (VET) were chosen to participate in this study.

The VET colleges were contacted via the HRM manager. The implementation of HRM in schools can be

seen as an expression of the process in which the Dutch government is increasingly deregulating and

decentralizing responsibilities to schools, thereby granting schools more and more autonomy (Karsten,

1999; Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005). The decentralization process started earlier in

the vocational schools than in other sectors (Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005), which

makes the outcomes of this study potentially valuable for these other school sectors, as well. There are 42

Dutch VET Colleges, divided into the units Technique, Economics, Service and Welfare, with employees

numbering between 850 and 2,500, and with varying locations (a maximum of 60) (VET Council, 2006).

A policy advisor of the Dutch VET Council assisted in selecting VET Colleges and in contacting the

HRM managers. We wanted VET Colleges of different sizes and locations and, of course, HRM

Chapter 3

32

managers who were prepared to invest their time in our study and encourage other respondents to

participate, as well.

Because VET Colleges are often large organisations with many units, it is likely that subcultures

exist (Van der Krogt & Vroom, 1988). This can affect the different ways in which people think about

HRM policy. To control for the effects of subcultures, we chose managers and HRM officers from

technical and welfare units.

We interviewed six message senders in 5 different VET Colleges: one board member and the HRM

manager (policymakers), as well as two unit managers and their HRM officers from the same sectors

(policy executives). The 30 participating message senders also filled out a questionnaire at the end of the

interview. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used. Pre-structured interviews were used as

research tool (Swanborn, 1987) and a document analysis was done.

The response group consisted of 18 women and 12 men. The mean age of the respondents was 48.2

(SD=8,1). All had received higher education. 57 % had had a length of service of at least 10 years; 20%

between four and ten years; 13 % between one and four years and 10% less than one year.

Two researchers conducted the study. To improve reliability, the researchers performed two test

interviews and carried out the first six interviews together. All but one of the interviews were recorded

and transcribed – one HRM officer did not want the interview to be recorded. After reading the

transcriptions the answers were clustered separately and differences (in 10% of the cases) were discussed

afterwards.

Also a document analysis was done. HRM policy plans were analysed by each researcher separately

and differences in opinions were discussed afterwards.

Measurements

Individual level: Perceived added value of the new HRM policy

Respondents were first asked what they believed the added value of the new HRM policy was and were

then asked to express the added value numerically: 1 = ‘no value at all’ and 10 = ‘very valuable’.

Locus of control

The Work Locus of Control Scale (Spector, 1988) was implemented, which originally consists of 16

items and uses a 5-point Likert scale (1 = totally disagree and 5 = totally agree). Results of the factor

analysis revealed several factors. We therefore included seven items in the analysis. Some sample items

are: ‘Most employees have more influence on their managers than they think’; ‘Promotions are often a

matter of luck’. The reliability of these seven items was sufficient, Cronbach’s α = .78. The higher the

score on the scale, the more internal the locus of control, and the lower the score on the scale, the more

external the locus of control.


33

School level: consensus

To measure whether a situation in a school could be considered strong, we measured two things: first,

whether the new HRM policy was interpreted by the message senders in the school in the same way; and

second, whether there was a clear HRM policy plan, consistent with the interpretations of the message

senders.

To measure and compare the interpretations of message senders, we asked respondents to describe

the new HRM policy. By asking the general question, “What does the new HRM policy consist of?” and

following up with questions concerning specific points, the purpose and features of the HRM policy could

be distilled. The three forms of integration – vertical, horizontal and functional – were used as guidelines

for comparing views. If respondents had not covered all three forms of integration, we explored the

missing aspects with them to find out if these aspects were important for them. The following is an

example of an answer that covered vertical integration: ‘..HRM is personnel policy that follows from the

mission of our organisation. We have formulated a course, an educational concept, which directs

everything and thus the personnel policy. . .’ (one of the board members). The following is an example of

an answer that covered horizontal integration: ‘. . . by talking and writing in terms of competencies, the

link between different instruments becomes clear. . .’(one of the HRM officers). The final quote is an

example of functional integration: ‘..it’s difficult. The managers need to internalise the HRM philosophy,

but they are used to focussing on solving ad hoc problems. . .’ (one of the unit managers).

HRM policy plans were analysed on the basis of the following questions: 1) Does a plan exist?; 2) Is

the purpose of the HRM policy clearly described – in terms of experienced problems in the primary

process (e.g. reform of the educational process, decrease in pupil achievements) or in the secondary

process (e.g. need for professional development of teachers)? and 3) Does the plan cover all three forms

of integration?

We determined whether or not there was consensus between policymakers and executives on the

basis of three criteria: 1) there is an HRM policy plan with a clear purpose, covering vertical, horizontal

and functional integration; 2) the views of the policymakers (board member and the HRM manager) are

consistent with each other and the HRM policy plan; 3) the views of the majority of policy executives are

consistent with the HRM policy plan.

After assessing the qualitative data, two clusters of VET colleges could be distinguished: those where

consensus about goals and features of HRM policy exists (Schools A and B), and those where no

consensus exists (School C, D and E). In table 1 lists the results per school, in conformance with the

criteria described in the method section

Control variables

The variables age and gender were added as control variables in the quantitative analyses.

Chapter 3

34

Data analysis

We performed correlation and regression analyses in order to test the first hypothesis, in which we

proposed a relationship between locus of control and added value. Model 1 contains the control variables

and model 2 contains the independent variable locus of control of regression analyses. To test the second

hypothesis, in which we assessed the influence of consensus on this relationship, we split the five schools

into two groups: a group of schools with clear consensus, and a group of schools with less consensus. We

performed correlation and regression analyses for the two groups in a similar way and compared results.

We expected that the correlation between locus of control and perception of added value would be

stronger for the group with less consensus concerning the purpose and features of HRM policy than for

the group with more consensus.

Results

Individual level: Locus of control and perceived added value

The first part of Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations and correlations between the different

variables for the total group of respondents (N=30). Locus of control marginally significantly relates with

the perceived added value of the HRM policy (r = .25, p ≤.10): as expected, a more internal locus of

control is accompanied with a higher perceived added value. Age and gender are not related with locus of

control or perceived added value.

The first part of Table 3 shows the result of the regression analysis for all five schools. Although the

regression coefficient points in the right direction (β = . 24), it is not significant. This means that our first

hypothesis, in which we propose that internal locus of control and perceived added value of the new

HRM policy are positively related, can not be confirmed.


35

Table 1: Results of the document analysis and interviews to measure consensus.

Cluster 1: consensus Cluster 2: no consensus

HRM policy plan School A School B School C School D School E

1) Does a plan exist? Yes Yes No. No. Yes.

A clear purpose? Yes. HRM is viewed as a

means to realize the

educational changes, more

specifically, to stimulate

and facilitate teachers’

professional development.

Yes. HRM is viewed as a

means to communicate

what competencies are

important and as a form of

competence management

and development in line

with the mission.

Yes. The focus is on how

professional development

can be stimulated in line

with organizational goals.

2) Are all form of

integration covered?

Yes. There is a link

between organization

goals, the roles and

responsibilities of different

actors are described and

different instruments are

aligned.

Yes. There is a link

between organization

goals, the roles and

responsibilities of different

actors are described and

different instruments are

aligned

No. The functional

integration is lacking:

although the goals are

clear and the importance of

horizontal alignment is

noticed, no concrete

activities and

responsibilities are

mentioned (functional

integration).

Interviews

Policymakers: board

member and HRM

manager.

Consistency with the

policy plan: all forms of

integration?

Yes. All forms of

integration could be

distilled. For example, for

vertical integration, the

board member: ‘HRM has

to facilitate the people who

have to realize the

educational changes, the

teachers’ and for

functional integration, the

HRM manager: ‘line

Yes. All forms of



horizontal integration,

board member: ‘the

‘competence-language’

helps to align different

instruments’ and for

vertical integration, HRM

manager: ‘you can’t plan

educational reform without

Yes. All forms of



vertical integration, the

board member: ‘we have to

operate more flexible,

HRM is a means to

influence behavior’ or for


HRM manager: ‘HRM

means line managers have

Yes. All forms of



vertical integration, board

member: ‘we are amidst in

educational changes and

have to consider the

consequences for the

personnel’ and for


HRM manager: ‘for HRM

Yes. All forms of



vertical integration, board

member:: ..in our

educational concept, the

learning career of the

student is central. To be

consistent, the learning

career of the teachers has

to be central in our HRM”

Chapter 3

36

managers have to feel

responsibility for executing

HRM’

noticing the consequences

for the personnel’.

to motivate, mobilize,

approach and stimulate

people”

to be put into practice,

people have to get used to

talking about their

functioning and ask each

other for feedback’.

and for functional

integration, HRM

manager: ‘all different

actors have to know what

is expected of them’

Policy executives: unit

managers and HRM

officers

Consistency with the

policy plan: all forms of

integration?

All forms of integration

could be distilled in the

answers of all actors.

Example of an answer

from a unit manager

(functional integration):

‘The most crucial and

difficult part is to convince

people to use the personnel

instruments’


could be distilled in the

answers, except in the case

of one HRM officer, where

vertical integration was

lacking: ‘HRM means that

all instruments fit

together…I don’t know

exactly why we started

with it, what the goals

exactly are’.


could be distilled from the

answers of the unit

managers. The two HRM

managers’ views were

very different. One of the

HRM officers: ‘those

plans are developed at

central level and do not

reach me’.

In the answers of three out

of four actors, vertical

integration was missing.

For example, the two

HRM officers said they did

not know the content of the

policy. One HRM

managers did not sense the

alignment with

organizational (change)

goals.

In the views of all four

actors, vertical integration

was missing. For example,

one of the unit managers

focused on wellness but

did not mention the

alignment with

organization goals and one

of the HRM officers told

us: ‘I am not involved with

implementation’.

Table 2: Means, standard deviations and correlations between variables: in all schools, schools A&B and schools C, D & E.

1. All organisations (N=30) 2. Schools A & B 3. Schools C, D & E

Variables M SD 1 2 3 M SD 1 2 3 M SD 1 2 3

1. Gender 1.60 .49 1.58 .52 1.61 .50

2. Age 48.2 8.09 -.18 47.8 7.41 -.09 48.5 8.73 -.23

3. Locus of control 2.25 .46 -.06 .15 2.21 .48 -.60* .31 2.27 .46 .32 .01

4. Added value 7.77 1.72 .02 .13 .25+ 7.44 2.18 -.11 .44+ .04 8.00 1.30 .15 -.15 .66**

+ Correlation is significant at the 0.10 level (one tailed); * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (one tailed); ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (one tailed)


37

Table 3: Results from regression analyses, with ‘added value’ as dependent variable: in all schools,

schools A&B and schools C, D & E.

1. All organisations (N=30) 2. Schools A & B 3. Schools C, D & E

Variables Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

1. Gender .04 .04 -.07 -.27 .12 -.23

2. Age .14 .10 .43 .52 -.12 -.28

3. Locus of control .24 .36 .77**

F .25 .65 1.09 .98 .25 4.25

R² .02 .08 .19 .26 .04 .52

** = p<.01

School level: consensus as a moderator

The second part of Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations and correlations between all variables in

the schools where consensus exists (Schools A and B). The locus of control is not significantly related to

perceived added value. However, gender and age are. It appears that women are more strongly associated

with a more external locus of control (r = -.60, p <.05) and that a higher age is accompanied with a higher

internal locus of control (r = .44, p < .10). The third part of Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations

and correlations between all variables in the schools where no consensus between message senders exists

(school C, D and E). In this group, locus of control is significantly related to perceived added value

(r=.66, p≤ .01). This correlation is stronger than in the group of five schools as a whole. We computed z-

scores to measure the significance of the differences between the three correlation coefficients. The

difference between the correlation coefficients within the total group of schools and within the schools C,

D and E is significant (z= -1.67, p<.05) and the difference between correlation coefficients within the

group of schools A&B and within the group of schools C, D and E is also significant (z=-.1.78, p≤ .05).

These results are in line with the second hypothesis: in situations where message senders agree about

goals and features of the new HRM policy, the strength of the relationship between locus of control and

perceived added value is smaller than in situations where no consensus between message senders exists.

The second and third parts of Table 3 contain the same regression analyses within the schools A & B

(consensus) and C, D & E (no consensus) respectively. Within the schools A & B, no significant

relationships exist between locus of control and perceived added value, nor between added value and the

control variables. This means that, in the schools where the views of the message senders correspond to

the plans and to each other, the individual locus of control does not influence the individual’s perceived

added value of the new policy. Within schools C, D & E, however, the relationship between locus of

control and perceived added value is significant (β = .77, p< .01). This means that, in the schools where

the views of the message senders do not correspond to each other, the individual perceived added value of

the new HRM policy depends on the individual’s locus of control. More specifically, when there is no

consensus, the more internal one’s locus of control, the more added value one perceives. These results are

in line with our second hypothesis: consensus about purpose and features of the new HRM policy

moderates the relationship between locus of control and perceived added value. Unfortunately, the

Chapter 3

38

number of cases is too small to measure the significance of the difference between regression coefficients

within the different samples.

Discussion

Implementing Human Resources Management (HRM) in schools appears to be complicated and lags

behind expectations (Education Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science,

2005). In this study, we have tried to contribute to the understanding of why implementation lags behind

and how implementation can be fostered. HRM is viewed as communications from the employer to the

employees about what attitudes and behaviours are expected and rewarded. The presumption is that HRM

can only lead to a clear and consistent message when message senders – i.e. line management and HRM

staff – agree on the message to be sent. Given the relative novelty of HRM in schools, creating consensus

about goals and features of HRM demands a change in the way managers and HRM think about personnel

policy. Such a change will only happen if managers and HRM staff truly perceive an added value of

HRM. In this study, we examine the perceived added value of HRM for the message senders of HRM in

schools - namely, the board, HRM management, line management and HRM officers - at both the

individual and the school levels.

We examined whether perceived added value of HRM can be explained by personality, more

specifically, by locus of control: people with an internal locus of control (‘internals’) tend to attribute

outcomes of events to their own control whereas people with an external locus of control (‘externals’)

tend to attribute outcomes to external circumstances. A positive relationship between internal locus of

control and perceived added value was expected. Furthermore, we examined whether this relationship is

moderated by the strength of the situation – i.e. the degree to which the new HRM policy is interpreted by

message senders in the same way.

The first hypothesis, in which we propose that internal locus of control and perceived added value of

the new HRM policy is positively related, can not be confirmed. Although the correlation analysis indeed

shows that a more internal locus of control accompanies a more positive perceived added value,

regression analysis did not confirm the relationship between the two variables. The analysis shows that

other factors are likely playing a role in predicting the added value. One factor might be the function of

the actors. One can imagine that people at the top of the organization – the initiators of the new policy –

have a more positive attitude towards the change. Furthermore, the difference between HRM and line can

play a role. HRM managers and officers might be more familiar with the way of thinking about personnel

policy and therefore their attitude might be more positive. It is a well known fact that HRM has to

convince line management about the value of their service (see for example, Ulrich and Brockbank,

2005). However, it may well be that the number of respondents in this study is simply too small to

uncover a relationship.

The second hypothesis, in which we propose that consensus between message senders about purpose

and features of the new HRM policy moderates the relationship between of locus of control and perceived

added value, can be partly confirmed. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted on schools


39

with consensus - i.e. a clear HRM policy plan exists and the respondents’ views correspond to each other

and to the policy plan - and on schools without. The correlation between locus of control and perceived

added value is strongest in the schools without consensus. The regression analyses show that the

perceived added value of the new policy can be predicted by the locus of control of each actor only in the

schools without consensus – i.e. where no HRM policy plan with clear goals and features exists and

where the policy is interpreted by message senders in different ways. In line with the locus of control

theory, these results suggest that, in ambiguous situations where norms are vague, the attitudes of the

actors are determined by the dispositions they have acquired through past experiences, i.e. their locus of

control. And in such ambiguous situations, the more internal the locus of control, the more people are

able so see the chances that accompany the change in policy.

The results can be viewed as support for the theory that consensus plays a role in the implementation

process. For new policy to be implemented successfully in schools – whether it concerns policy that is

initiated by government or by a school – the heads of the school organization have to communicate about

the new goals and features with their policy executives. Communication about and aligning of

expectations can foster consensus between the message senders, which in turn results in a consistent

message that can be given to the teachers about what attitudes and behaviours are expected and rewarded.

However, we wish to draw attention to some of the limitations in the way this study has been

conducted and suggest ways to replicate the study in another way. The first limitation arises from the

number of respondents. We interviewed six persons in five schools, which is a total of 30 respondents.

We recommend a replication of this study using a larger sample in order to better exclude the influence of

personal or functional characteristics on the results. The second limitation results from the qualitative

research method we used to assess consensus. Although two researchers interpreted and scored the data

independently, a subjective element always remains. An option for future research might be to include the

perceptions of the ‘message senders’ themselves. Furthermore, due to the cross-sectional method, we can

only speak in terms of relationships and not in terms of causality. A longitudinal research design could

solve this problem. Finally, only one item is used to measure the dependent variable. It would be

preferable to add more items in future research in order to get a more valid and reliable impression of the

attitude of respondents. We are determined to replicate the study in the near future and even expand on it

by assessing the effects of consensus between message senders of HRM – i.e. the policymakers and

executives - on the message receivers – i.e. the teachers.

41

Part Two

Studies on individual and organisational factors

explaining teachers’ professional development

Breaking down the barriers

43

CHAPTER 4

BREAKING DOWN THE BARRIERS:

PROMOTING TEACHERS’ REFLECTION AND FEEDBACK ASKING5

5 This chapter was presented as a paper - Runhaar, P.R., K. Sanders & H. Yang. Promoting teachers’ professional

development: The relationships between self-efficacy, learning goal orientation, transformational leadership and

teacher’s learning behaviour - at the annual WAOP (Association of Work and Organisational Psychologists)

Conference, November the 23rd 2007, Twente University.

Abstract

The goal of the study is to contribute to the understanding of teachers’ professional development. This is done by

focussing on teachers’ informal learning, conceptualized as reflection and feedback asking. A survey study with

data from 456 teachers and instructors from a College for Secondary Vocational Educational and Training was used

to investigate which individual factors (self-efficacy and learning goal orientation) and organisational factors

(transformational leadership) explain teachers’ informal learning. As expected, positive relationships between self-

efficacy and learning goal orientation, on the one hand, and reflection and feedback asking, on the other hand, were

found. In addition, the expected mediating effects of learning goal orientation in the relationships between self-

efficacy and reflection and feedback asking were found. Furthermore, the expected positive relationships between

transformational leadership and professional development could be confirmed for feedback asking. Finally, as

expected, learning goal orientation moderated the relationship between transformational leadership, on the one hand,

and reflection and feedback asking, on the other hand. The results offer insights into the relationships between

individual and situational factors with respect to teachers’ informal learning.

Chapter 4

44

Introduction

Education is seen as one of the most crucial factors in international competitiveness in the increasingly

knowledge-based economy, (see for example Center for American Progess, 2005; TDA, 2006; Dutch

Education Council, 2006). As pupil attainment seems to depend mainly on teacher quality (Cornet,

Huizinga, Minne & Webbink, 2006; Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain, 2005; Scheerens & Bosker, 1997), it is

understandable that different governments are investing in teachers’ professional development. More

specifically, because students have to acquire lifelong learning skills rather than memorising information

in order to be able to regulate their own learning once they go to work, schools are increasingly striving

for self-regulated student learning (Van Eekelen, 2005; European Commission, 2005).

This kind of student learning requires new teacher roles such as coach or tutor, which, in turn,

means that teachers themselves have to learn the skills required to fulfil these new roles (Bransford,

Berliner, Derry & Hammerness, 2005; Hargreaves & Fink, 2000; Van Eekelen, 2005). Furthermore, the

ongoing technological innovations and continuous changes in pupils’ backgrounds force teachers to

continuously develop themselves (European Commission, 2005). To summarize, the necessity for

continuous professional development in schools is now unquestioned. However, in many countries -

including The Netherlands - it seems hard to organize (OECD, 2005; NWO, 2007).

Research on teachers’ professional development

Although teachers’ professional development receives a lot of attention in educational research, different

approaches and conceptualizations are used by researchers (Putnam & Borko, 1997, 2000; Richardson &

Placier, 2001; Wilson & Berne, 1999). More specifically, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) distinguish

between three conceptions of teacher learning, based on the way the relationship between knowledge and

practice is understood. First, the knowledge-for-practice-conception defines teacher learning as the

gathering of all the knowledge needed to teach well (e.g. education in pedagogical theories, didactic

methods etc.) In this conception of teacher learning, professional development is seen to be

predominantly shaped by courses, handbooks, and other ‘formal’ learning tools. In this so-called “deficit-

mastery approach”, professional development is something that finds place outside of the workplace

(Sleegers, Bolhuis & Geijsel, 2005). The effects of these forms of professional development appear

disappointing (Richardson & Placier, 2001; Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002), and, in line with research in

adult learning (e.g. Eraut, Alderton, Cole & Senker, 1998; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Marsick & Watkins,

2001), the workplace of teachers is being recognized more and more as a potential learning situation. This

results in the second conception of teacher learning: the knowledge-in-practice conception. Following

Schön (1983, 1985), this conception assumes that the knowledge teachers need to teach well is embedded

in the experiences, practices, and actions of the teachers themselves. This knowledge comes from

reflection on practice, either individually or in dyadic situations (e.g. colleagues giving each other

feedback). Third, the knowledge-of-practice conception focuses on the assumption that the knowledge

teachers need to teach well emanates from the teachers’ own systematic inquiries concerning teaching,

learning, students, subject matter etc. In contrast with the first conception, knowledge is not to be


45

gathered from outside the classroom or school, but constructed by teachers themselves in local or broader

communities. And, in contrast to the second conception, reflection on practice is not only used to improve

one’s own teaching, but also to construct meaningful local knowledge as a part of larger efforts to

transform teaching.

Professional development as learning from reflection and feedback

In this study, we align ourselves with the knowledge-in-practice conception of teacher learning (Cochran-

Smith & Lytle, 1999). More specifically, we focus on learning from practice by reflection and feedback

asking, as these activities are assumed to play an important role in learning from practice (see for example

Hopkins, 2001; Imants, 2001; Korthagen, 2001; Vandenberghe & Kelchtermans, 2002; Zwart, 2007).

Furthermore, studies on teacher peer coaching explore the thinking underlying practice via reflection

(Garmston, Linder & Whitaker 1993) and the exchange of feedback (Kohler & Ezell, 1999). Reflection is

aimed at the assessment of assumptions implicit in beliefs about how to solve problems (Mezirow, 1990).

Feedback asking can be seen as a way to reflect, as it stimulates employees to look critically at their own

behaviour and their underlying assumptions (Reynolds, 1998; Vince, 2002; Van Woerkom, 2004).

Reflection and feedback: influence of individual and organisational factors

In line with this focus, two separate lines of research on factors explaining the professional

development of teachers have been conducted. First, there is the individual teacher perspective, which

results in research with a focus on describing the learning processes of individual teachers in terms of

reflection and learning by collaboration (e.g. McLaughlin, 1997; Hopkins, 2001; Meijerink, 2007).

Within this line of study, cognitive and social psychological theories dominate. For example, researchers

describe changes in cognitions during learning (Zwart, 2007) or investigate the emotions teachers

experience during change processes (Van Veen, 2006). Second is the organisational perspective, which

focuses on how learning processes of individual teachers and groups of teachers should look like and

ought to be organized and stimulated. Attention is paid to the organisational environment as a ‘learning

environment’ that stimulates teachers to learn form each other (see for example Rosenholtz, 1985; Fullan,

2007). Within this line of research, theories on adult learning are applied to prescribe how learning ought

to take place. Different authors call for the introduction of ‘professional learning networks’ or

‘communities of practice’ in education (e.g. Verbiest, 2004; Bruining, 2007; Stoll, Bolam, McMahon,

Wallace & Thomas, 2006). Organisational psychological theories are also used to explain teacher

learning. For example, researchers examine how task characteristics influence teachers’ learning

(Kwakman, 1999) or how transformational leadership affects teachers’ organizational citizenship

behaviour (Nguni, Sleegers & Denissen, 2006).

Our study contributes to a growing body of research in which both the individual and

organisational factors that stimulate informal teacher learning are taken into account (see for example

Kwakman, 1999, 2003; Van Dam, 2006; De Rooij, 2006; Kuijper Rinsema, 2007). To distinguish

between the kind of individual and organisational factors that play a role, we make use of a well-known

Chapter 4

46

theory in the literature on Human Resources Management (HRM): the AMO-theory of performance

(Boxall & Purcell, 2003). The central idea in this meta theory on factors that influence employee

performance – such as the professional development of teachers - is that employee performance (P) is a

function of individual ability (A), individual motivation (M), and opportunity (O). This framework has

often been used to study HRM systems and their effects (Gerhart, 2007), and its main contribution lies in

the fact that all three components are viewed together. Translated to our topic, the formula P = f (A, M,

O) becomes: teachers’ professional development - in terms of reflection and feedback asking - is a

function of teachers’ ability, motivation, and opportunities to learn. The research question has therefore

been formulated as follows: ‘Can professional development, in terms of reflection and feedback asking,

be explained by the ability, motivation, and opportunities of teachers?’

The question remains as to how to interpret the three different components. To answer this

question, we examined which of the factors that are often stressed in the literature on teacher learning

resemble ability, motivation, and opportunity. With regard to the ‘ability’ of teachers to engage in

learning activities, much attention is paid to the self-efficacy of teachers. The concept of self-efficacy is

introduced by Bandura (1977) and refers to the belief in one’s capability to mobilize the resources needed

to meet situational demands (see for example Tschannen-Moran, Woolfok Hoy & Hoy, 1998). We chose

to focus on this belief or perceived ability instead of trying to uncover a more or less objective ability to

predict informal learning. In the case of formal learning, learning a mathematical formula, for example, it

is logical to expect that a certain level of IQ or mathematical knowledge can serve as a predictor.

Learning from reflection and feedback, however, involves engaging actively in particular activities or

not, and this has more to do with attitude: seeing the advantage of it, daring to ask others for feedback,

and discussing one’s own assumptions. As for the ‘motivation’ of teachers to learn, much research has

been done on the willingness of teachers to participate in changes and development activities (see for

example Bransford et al; Snoek, 2004; Van Eekelen, 2005; Van den Berg, 1993). Because these studies

are mostly qualitative, different terms for willingness are used, resulting in different measurements. We

introduce the concept of learning goal orientation (Dweck & Legett, 1988), which refers to peoples’

motivation to improve their competencies through learning and training new skills, as well as through

learning to complete new and more complex tasks. Finally, concerning the factor ‘opportunities’,

attention is paid to the organisational environment as a ‘learning environment’ in which teachers are

stimulated to learn from each other (see for example Rosenholtz, 1989; Fullan, 2007). Much attention is

paid to the role of the leader and, more specifically, to transformational leadership as an inducement of

professional development activities (Lam, 2002; Nguni, Sleegers & Denissen, 2006; Ross & Grey, 2006).

In sum, we will try to explain teachers’ professional development in terms of reflection and

feedback asking, by considering teachers’ self-efficacy and learning goal orientation, on the one hand,

and transformational leadership, on the other hand.


47

Self-efficacy

Learning by reflection and feedback asking involves people taking a certain amount of risk. In fact,

people can be confronted with information that can affect their self-image and, as a consequence, they

often feel hesitant to engage in those learning activities (Schön, 1983; Argyris, 1991). People with high

self-confidence have an easier time taking that ‘risk’ than people who lack self-confidence (Van

Woerkom, 2004). Translated to schools, the ideas of colleagues can negatively affect a teacher’s self-

image or idea about ‘what good education looks like’, which makes it logical to expect that the higher the

self-efficacy of teachers, the more they are prepared to take that ‘risk’. Self-efficacy has often been

studied in the context of schools, more specifically, in the context of educational improvements and

teacher learning (e.g. Ross, 1995; Soodak & Podell, 1996; Tschannen-Moran, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001).

Research points out that the higher the self-efficacy of teachers, the more they are open to new ideas and

the more willing they are to experiment with new methods to better meet the needs of their students

(Berman, McLaughlin, Bass, Pauly, & Zellman, 1977; Guskey, 1988; Stein & Wang, 1988).

In line with theory and empirical evidence, we assume that teachers’ self-efficacy is positively

related to the learning behaviours we are interested in, reflection and feedback asking, and therefore

formulate our first hypothesis as follows:

H1: Self-efficacy of teachers is positively related to reflection (H1a) and feedback asking

(H1b)..

Learning goal orientation

The concept of goal-orientation (Poortvliet, Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004) seems appropriate to explore

the meaning of motivation to reflect and ask for feedback. According to the goal orientation theory, goals

are important for the motivation of behaviour, for task interpretation, and for the reaction to work

outcomes. The concept of goal orientation refers to the way people interpret tasks, their ability to

complete tasks successfully, and the extent to which they believe they can develop the skills needed to

complete the task (VandeWalle, 1997). Although slightly different terms are used in the literature, two

types of goal orientations are typically distinguished. First, there is learning goal orientation (Dweck &

Legett, 1988), which refers to the motivation to improve one’s competencies through learning and

training new skills, as well as through learning to complete new and more complex tasks. This is also

called task orientation (Ames, 1992) or mastery orientation (Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004). Second, there

is performance goal orientation (Dweck & Legett, 1988), which refers to the motivation to perform better

than others, to seek affirmation of one’s competency, and to avoid negative feedback. This type is also

called competition orientation (Ames, 1992) or achievement orientation (Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004).

People tend to prefer either the learning or the performance goal orientation.

People with a strong learning goal orientation tend to view feedback – positive and negative – as

diagnostically relevant information that helps them to increase their skills and abilities (VandeWalle,

2001; Tuckey, Brewer & Williamson, 2002). That is why they are, in the terms of Van Woerkom (2004),

Chapter 4

48

more likely to take the risk of receiving information that affects their self-image than people with a low

learning goal orientation or performance goal orientation. As a point of contrast, people with a high

performance goal orientation tend to view ability as difficult to develop and therefore tend to attempt to

validate and demonstrate the ability they possess (Dweck & Leggett, 1988). These people are therefore

not very motivated to take the risk of receiving disconfirming information. In line with this, research has

shown that performance goal orientation does not, and learning goal orientation does, relate positively to

different forms of learning behaviours, such as openness to organizational changes and making

contributions to change (Bettencourt, 2004), learning and innovative behaviour (De Rooij, 2006),

feedback seeking behaviour (VandeWalle et al, 2000), and learning (Harackiewicz, Barron, Pintrich,

Elliot & Trash, 2002). For this reason, we will focus only on the learning goal orientation of teachers in

this chapter and propose the following hypothesis:

H2: Learning goal orientation of teachers is positively related to reflection (H2a) and feedback

asking (H2b).

Research points out that self-efficacy and learning goal orientation are inter-related (VandeWalle, 2001).

However, there is no consensus on the causal relationship between the two variables (Gong & Fan, 2006).

First, there are studies that suggest and empirically show that learning goal orientation leads to self-

efficacy in specific situations (see for example Elliot, 1997). The line of reasoning here is that people with

a high learning goal orientation who are confronted with setbacks while executing a specific complex task

will not experience a decrease of self-efficacy because they view setbacks as opportunities to improve

mastery (Gist & Mitchell, 1992). In this kind of study, a more specific concept of self-efficacy is used (for

example, self-efficacy in computer skills) and the learning goal orientation–self-efficacy link actually

relates to the maintenance of self-efficacy. Second, researchers suggested and found empirical evidence to

support the idea that self-efficacy leads to learning goal orientation (see for example Phillips & Gully,

1997). The reasoning here is that goal orientations seem to be based on implicit theories about one’s

abilities, such as intelligence and personnel skills (Dweck, 2000; VandeWalle, 2001). Following this line

of reasoning, learning goal orientation is associated with the belief that - with effort - one can learn how

to deal with difficult situations, whereas performance goal orientation is associated with the belief that

ability is a fixed, innate attribute that is difficult to develop (Dweck & Legett, 1988; VandeWalle, 1997).

This means that individuals with a high learning goal orientation possess what Bandura (1977) calls self-

efficacy. In this reasoning, a broad concept of self-efficacy is used.

Following the social cognitive theory of Bandura (1977; 1997), both lines of reasoning are

complementary. A ‘general’ sense of self-efficacy can lead to a learning goal orientation and, when

confronted with specific complex tasks, learning goal orientation can lead to self-efficacy with respect to

that specific task. The conceptualisation of teachers’ self-efficacy has changed over the years in line with

the changing roles of teachers (Chan, 2008). The different conceptualisations almost always refer to

teaching-specific tasks such as classroom management, student engagement, or interaction with parents


49

(see for example Friedman & Kass, 2002; Tschannen-Moran, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). While researchers

agree that the self-efficacy of teachers is situation specific, the degree of specificity remains one of the

most difficult problems to solve (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). For example, is the self-efficacy specific to

teaching mathematics, or more specific to teaching algebra, or even more specific to teaching quadratic

equations? (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001, p.790).

Because the reflection and feedback asking behaviour of teachers is not directed towards a

specific learning goal or content, we chose to use a broad concept of self-efficacy and assume a positive

link between self-efficacy and learning goal orientation.

H3: Learning goal orientation mediates the relationship between self-efficacy and reflection (H3a)

and self-efficacy and feedback asking (H3b).

Transformational leadership

The leadership style of the manager directly influences individual experiences in organisational settings

(Burns, 1978; Vroom, 1964; Robbins, 1991). Empirical evidence suggests that school principals

significantly influence, for example, teachers’ experiences on the job (Rosenholtz, 1985), their efforts

(Geijsel, Sleegers, Leithwood & Jantzi, 2003), their commitment to change (Yu, Lethwood & Jantzi,

2002), and their professional growth (Blase & Blase, 2000).

For the past decades, the attention in leadership research has shifted from ‘transactional’ leadership

theories to theories that accentuate ‘transformational leadership’ (De Hoogh, Den Hartog & Koopman,

2004). Transactional leadership is based on an exchange relationship in which follower compliance

(effort, productivity, and loyalty) is exchanged for expected rewards (Burns, 1978; Barnett, McCormick

& Conners, 1999). Transformational leaders, also called charismatic leaders, provide a clear vision for the

future, inspire employees, and give the work a greater sense of meaning. This results in the employees

being prepared to do more than what would strictly be expected from them on the basis of their job

descriptions (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978; House, 1996). It also stimulates employees to question old

assumptions (Avolio et al, 1999). While transactional leaders reward employees for meeting agreed-upon

objectives, transformational leaders stimulate employees to perform beyond expectations (Bass, 1985;

Burns, 1978). Given the changes that schools are confronted with, transformational leadership seems to

be the ideal leadership style in theory. In the literature on school leadership and management,

transformational leadership is considered a requirement in the pursuit of school effectiveness (Cheng,

1997) and in the shaping and adopting of coping strategies to deal with turbulent environmental

constraints (Lam, 2002).

In this study, a positive relationship between transformational leadership and teacher learning

behaviour is expected. Research increasingly shows that transformational leadership has strong

relationships with teachers’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational citizenship

behaviour (Nguni, Sleegers & Denissen, 2006), teachers’ commitment to the school mission and

Chapter 4

50

commitment to professional learning community (Ross & Grey, 2006), and to organisational learning

(Lam, 2002). We therefore formulated the following hypothesis:

H4: Transformational leadership is positively related to reflection (H4a) and feedback asking (H4b).

As stated earlier, reflection and feedback asking can be regarded as ‘risky’ because an individual can be

confronted with information that can impair his or her self-image (Van Woerkom, 2004). A

transformational leader can, however, serve as an ‘external source of motivation’ to encourage the taking

of such risks. Individuals with a high learning goal orientation already have their ‘internal source of

motivation’ to engage in these behaviours, which may limit the importance of situational factors in

explaining these behaviours. In contrast, in the absence of a high learning goal orientation, only those

teachers who perceive transformational leadership would be expected to engage in - what they probably

experience as – ‘risky’ behaviour. These dynamics have been described previously, albeit in somewhat

different contexts and with somewhat different employee outcomes (see f.e. Tierney, Farmer & Grean,

1999; Bettencourt, 2004; VandeWalle et al, 2000). Our final hypothesis is formulated as follows:

H5: The stronger the learning goal orientation, the weaker the relationship between

transformational leadership and reflection (H5a) and transformational leadership and feedback asking

(H5b).

Method

Respondents

The focus in this study is on the teaching staff of a school for secondary vocational education and training

(VET College). A school from this sector was chosen because the devolvement of responsibilities from

the level of central government to the level of schools as autonomous and professional organisations

started earlier here than in other sectors (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2005).

Hence, the outcomes of this study can be valuable for other schools, as well. In addition to the teachers,

instructors and teaching assistants also participated in the study. More and more ‘non-teachers’ are

working in the classroom (SBO, 2005), which makes the learning of every worker in the education

process of equal importance.

456 respondents filled out the total questionnaire (a response rate of 38%)6. Three percent of the

respondents are teaching assistants, seven percent instructors and 90% are teachers. The group consists of

54.2% men and 45.8% women. The age distribution of respondents is in accordance with the national age

distribution of employees in secondary vocational education (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and

6 185 employees started filling out the questionnaire but quit half way through. It is possible that, for those

employees, the instruction letter had led to expectations that proved wrong after reading the first questions. The

length of the questionnaire might also have been a problem for them (as the questionnaire also consisted of items for

other researchers; the total amount of items was 137).


51

Science, 2005): 2% of the respondents are 30 years of age or younger, 9% are 30 to 39 years of age, 36%

are 40 to 49 years of age, 48% are 50 to 59 years of age, and 5% are 60 years of age or more. Most

respondents have received higher education (85%). 10% of the respondents have a master’s degree. 5%

(who function as teaching assistants) have received secondary vocational education. Most respondents

work full time (42.3%), 53.3% of the respondents work between 80% and full time, and 4.4% of the

respondents work less than 40%. The sample can be considered representative of the total personnel of

the college (see Table 1 in the Appendix for a comparison).

Procedure

The VET College that participated in this study was selected because much attention is paid in this

college to teacher learning and their professional development. For this reason, the willingness of the

College Board to put effort into the research was expected. The research goal, research questions and

theoretical model were discussed with the College Board in order to clarify the practical relevance and

value of the research. After this, the College Board referred to the research specialist of the college for

further procedural help and instructions. A digital questionnaire was used. Employees received an

instructional letter in which the goal and procedure of the research was explained. After a week, this letter

was sent again to those teachers who hadn’t yet filled out the questionnaire. This was done again after two

weeks. Research specialists of the VET College assisted in all aspects of the procedure. The teaching staff

of the VET College consists of 1,207 employees, working in 30 teams within four units.

Instruments

In this study, existing scales, which had been proven reliable in other studies, were used (Cronbach’s α >

.70). All items were measured by using 5 point Likert scales (1 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree).

To measure reflection and feedback asking, three subscales of the ‘Critically reflective work

behaviour scale’ developed by Van Woerkom (2003) were used. The reflection subscale consists of nine

items. The reflection subscale consists of items like: ‘I compare the way I function now with the way I

functioned last year’ (α=.72). An example of the ten-item feedback subscale is: ‘I ask pupils how they

judge my way of teaching’ (α=.82).

To measure a general sense of self-efficacy, we used the broad concept of occupational self-efficacy

(Bandura, 1995), which refers to self-efficacy in the working situation. To measure occupational self-

efficacy, the occupational self-efficacy scale developed by Schyns and Von Collani (2002) was used. This

six-item scale consists of items such as, ‘Whatever happens in my work, I can usually cope with it’ (α =

.75).

Learning goal orientation was measured by a five-item scale developed by VandeWalle (1997),

which consists of items such as, ‘I am prepared to do challenging tasks from which I can learn a lot’ (α =

.85).

Chapter 4

52

Transformational leadership was measured by eleven items from the CLIO (which refers to the

enquiry Charismatic Leadership in Organisations; De Hoogh, Den Hartog & Koopman (2004). An

example of an item is: ‘My manager stimulates workers to think about work problems in new ways’ (α =

.95).

Control variables

Pre-structured questions were used to determine age (1 = <25, 2 = ≥ 25-30 years, 3= ≥30-39, 4= ≥40-

49, 5= ≥50-59, 6= ≥ 60), gender (1=man, 2= woman), level of education (1= secondary vocational

education, 2 = higher education, 3 = university) , function (1=teacher, 2=instructor, 3=teaching assistant),

and number of working hours a week (1=fulltime, 2=≥80%-100%, 3=≥60%-80%, 4=≥40%-60%,

5=≥20%-40%, 6=<20%).

We expected that when teachers need each other to perform their job and are able to interact more

with each other, learning from each other will occur more easily than when teachers work isolated from

each other (see also Gerrichhauzen, 2007). Furthermore, the general tendency to work in teams within

schools (Friedman, 1997; Pelkmans & Smit, 1999; Pounder, 1996; Verbiest, 2002) led us to take task and

goal interdependence into account in the different models. Task interdependence is defined as work

flowing from one team member to another in such a way that the task performance of one team member

depends on the task performance of the other (Van de Vegt, Emans & Van de Vliert, 1998). Goal

interdependence refers to the extent to which team members believe that their personal benefits and costs

depend on the successful goal attainment of other members (Van der Vegt et al, 1998). To measure task

and goal interdependence, the scales of Van der Vegt, Emans and Van de Vliert (1998) were used. The

task interdependence scale consists of six items such as, ‘To do my job well, I need information from my

colleagues’, and proved reliable (α=.79). To improve the reliability of the goal interdependence scale, one

of the eight items (‘When team members accomplish their goals, it becomes harder for me to reach my

goals’) was removed (α= .71).

Data analysis

To test the hypotheses, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted. Model 1 contains the control

variables and model 2 includes self-efficacy. To test the direct and mediating effect of learning goal

orientation, this variable was added in model 3. If the influence of self-efficacy disappears after the

addition of learning goal orientation, a mediating role of learning goal orientation can be confirmed

(Baron & Kenny, 1986). In model 4, transformational leadership was added. To test the moderating role

of learning goal orientation on the relationships between transformational leadership and teachers’

informal learning, the scores of the two independent variables were first standardized and a product

variable was computed (Aiken & West, 1991). Finally, this product variable was added in Model 5.

Because teachers are nested within teams, the data are not independent and a multi-level analysis

should be considered. However, due to our main interest in teacher-to-teacher differences, with the

predictors on the individual level as well, we chose to analyse our results on the individual level (Bickel,


53

2007). Furthermore, the intra class correlations (ICC1) of feedback and reflection are relatively low (.15

and .12 respectively). This means that 15% and 12 % of the variance of feedback asking and reflection

occurs between teams, with the remaining 85% and 88% occurring within teams.

Results

Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations of all variables and the correlations between all

variables. The two different aspects of teacher’s learning behaviour – reflection and feedback asking -

related significantly with each other (r=.55, p<.01). All independent variables related significantly

positively with reflection (p<.01) and, except for self-efficacy, related significantly positively with

feedback asking (p<.01). Task and goal interdependence were positively and significantly (p<.01) related

to reflection and feedback asking. Females tended to reflect more and ask more for feedback than men.

Age related negatively significantly with feedback asking, which means that the older the respondents,

the less they ask for feedback.

Testing the hypotheses

Table 2 shows the results of the regression analysis with the dependent variables reflection and feedback

asking, respectively. It was hypothesized that self-efficacy is positively related to reflection (1a) and

feedback asking (1b). Indeed, significant positive relationships were found between self-efficacy and

reflection (β= .15, p≤.01) and feedback asking (β= .14, p≤.01). This means that H1a and H1b can be

confirmed. The hypotheses that a strong learning goal orientation is positively related to reflection (2a)

and feedback asking (2b) can be confirmed as well. Indeed, the higher the learning goal orientation, the

more reflection (β=.28, p≤.01) and the more feedback asking respondents reported (β= .26, p≤.01).

Furthermore, we expected that learning goal orientation mediates the relationship between self-

efficacy, on the one hand, and reflection and feedback asking, on the other hand (3a and b).When learning

goal orientation entered the equation in model 3, we found that the impact of self-efficacy on reflection

and feedback asking became non-significant. To be sure of the mediating effect of learning goal

orientation, we repeated the regression analyses, but entered the variables learning goal orientation and

self-efficacy in a different order.

Chapter 4

54

Table 1: Means, standard deviations and correlations between study variables

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. Reflection 3,72 0,42

2. Feedback 3,34 0,53 .55**

3. Self-efficacy 3,84 0,49 .13** -.003

4. Learning Goal Orientation 3,74 0,57 .19** .46** .38**

5. Transformational Leadership 3,22 0,79 .46** .12** .09* .32**

6. Gender 1,46 0,49 .13** .10* -.03 .05 .14**

7. Age 4,46 0,79 -.08 -.10* .00 -.16** -.09 -.11*

8. Level of education 2,11 0,50 .07 .02 .11* .09* -.03 .01 .13**

9. Function 1,14 0,43 -.04 .04 .01 -.01 .12* .07 -.18* -.27**

10. Tenure 2,23 1,31 .03 .07 -.07 -.09* .12* .60** .04 .01 .06

11. Goal interdependence 3,40 0,54 .21** .44** .17** .34** .18** -.11* .09* -.11* .08 -.07

12. Task interdependence 3,03 0,54 .36** .24** .18** .32** .36** -.07 -.04 -.05 -.03 -.11* .22**

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).


55

Table 2: Results from regression analyses with the dependent variables

Variables Reflection Asking feedback

Model 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Gender .18** .17** .13* .13* .14* .10 .10 .06 .04 .03

Age -.09 -.09 -.05 -.04 -.04 -.14** -.13** -.10* -.07 -.07

Level of education .10* .08 .07 .06 .07 .08 .06 .04 .03 .04

Function -.05 -.06 -.05 -.05 -.06 .01 .01 .02 -.00 -.01

Tenure -.04 -.03 -.01 -.02 .00 .05 .06 .10 .08 .08

Goal interdependence .19** .16** .17** .15** .15** .34** .31** .32** .24** .24**

Task interdependence .17** .18** .14** .14** .14** .15** .16** .12** .13** .12**

Self-efficacy .15** .02 .01 -.00 .14** .02 .01 .00

Learning Goal Orientation .28** .28** .28** .26** .26** .26**

Transformational

Leadership

.06 .09 .22** .24**

TFL * LGO -.11* -.09*

R² .12 .14 .19 .19 .21 .19 .21 .26 .29 .30

R change .02 .05 .00 .02 .02 .05 .03 .01

* = p<.05, **=p<.01

Chapter 4

56

In hypotheses 4a and b, positive relationships between transformational leadership and teachers’ learning

were expected. The data confirm that the perception of transformational leadership has positive effects on

feedback asking (β=.22, p<01). However, transformational leadership did not influence reflection (β=.09,

n.s.).

Our last hypotheses concerned the moderating effect of learning goal orientation on the relationship

between transformational leadership and teachers’ learning (H5 a and b). In model 5, when the interaction

term entered the equation, we detected moderating effects for reflection (β= -.11, p≤.01) and feedback

asking (β= -.09, p≤.05).

We further depicted the interaction pattern, shown in figure 1 and 2. When learning goal orientation

is low, transformational leadership has a positive impact on reflection and feedback asking. When

learning goal orientation is strong, the effect of transformational leadership on reflection disappears (see

figure 1) and its impact on feedback asking decreases (see figure 2). Overall, the findings support H5a

and H5b.

Figure 1. Reflection as a function of learning goal orientation and leadership.

Figure 2. Feedback asking as a function of learning goal orientation and leadership.

.40

.30

.20

.10

0

-.10

LGO=strong

LGO=weak

Refl

ecti

on

Low High


.40

.30

.20

.10

0

-.10

LGO=strong

LGO=weak

Ask

ing

Feed

back

Low High



57

Results from the regression analysis: control variables

Table 2 shows the results of the regression analysis with the dependent variables. The control variable

gender showed a significant effect on reflection. This means that women have higher scores on reflection

than men (β =.14, p≤.01). Goal and task interdependence were positively related to reflection (β=.141,

β=.152, both at the .01 level) and feedback asking (β=.24, β=.120, both at the .01 level). The significant

effect of level of education (β=.10, p<.05) on reflection and the significant negative effect of age on

feedback asking (β=-.14, p≤.01) disappeared after entering the other variables. It is worth noting that,

when the dependant variables and the interaction term entered the equation, the impact of demographic

variables on teachers’ informal learning became non-significant. However, the impact of task and goal

interdependence remained significant.

Discussion

The aim of the study described in this chapter was to examine which individual and situational factors

influence teachers’ learning in terms of ‘reflection’ and ‘feedback asking’. We based our study on a well-

known theory of performance, drawn from literature on human resources management (HRM), namely,

the AMO theory (Boxall & Purcell, 2003). The central idea in this meta theory on factors that influence

employee performance is that employee performance (P) is a function of individual ability (A), individual

motivation (M), and opportunity (O). Translated to our topic, the formula P = f (A, M, O) becomes:

teachers’ professional development - in terms of reflection and feedback asking - is a function of

teachers’ ability, motivation, and opportunities to learn. In the study, ability is translated as ‘self-

efficacy’, willingness as ‘learning goal orientation’ and learning conditions as ‘transformational

leadership’.

The first hypothesis, self-efficacy is positively related to the two aspects of teachers’ learning, was

confirmed. The results show that self-efficacy has positive effects on reflection and feedback asking.

Second, we expected positive effects of learning goal orientation on reflection and sharing feedback. This

means that the more teachers are motivated to improve their competencies through learning and training

new skills, as well as through learning to complete new and more complex tasks, the more they reflect

and ask for feedback. Furthermore, we expected that the positive relationship between self-efficacy, on

the one hand, and reflection and feedback asking, on the other hand, is mediated by learning goal

orientation. This was indeed confirmed.

Transformational leadership was expected to be positively related to reflection and feedback asking.

The results show that this can be confirmed for feedback asking. The more teachers perceive their leaders

as transformational – in other words, as having a clear vision for the future, inspiring them and giving

their work a greater sense of meaning - the more they ask each other for feedback. However, this is not

the case for reflection. Possible explanations can be found in the different natures of the two learning

activities. While feedback asking is an activity teachers undertake in interaction with each other,

reflection is an individual activity and therefore may be less dependent on situational factors. To acquire a

Chapter 4

58

better understanding of how different learning activities can be promoted, further research on the exact

nature of the different activities is needed.

Our last hypothesis, learning goal orientation moderates the relationship between transformational

leadership, on the one hand, and reflection and feedback asking, on the other hand, was confirmed. As

expected, the positive effects of transformational leadership on reflection and feedback asking are

stronger for teachers with a relatively low learning goal orientation than for those with a high learning

goal orientation. Apparently, transformational leaders serve as an ‘external source of motivation’ that

encourages engaging in reflection and feedback asking in those individuals with a relative weak internal

source of motivation. Teachers with a high learning goal orientation already have their ‘internal source of

motivation’ for engaging in these behaviours, which limits the importance of situational factors in

explaining reflection and feedback asking. These findings point out that, to gain an optimal effect of

transformational leadership on informal learning, we need to take individual characteristics, such as

learning goal orientation, into account.

As mentioned above, our control variables task and goal interdependence appear to be strongly

related to teacher learning. This demonstrates the influence of situational factors on informal learning

from the point of view of task characteristics. It confirms the assumption that when teachers need each

other to do their work and interact more with each other, learning from each other will occur more easily

than when teachers work isolated from each other. Furthermore, recent research on teacher learning

shows that the role and forms of teacher collaboration are important factors in stimulating teacher

learning. Such collaboration can be promoted by creating opportunities for it, by developing the

collaborative skills of teachers, and by rewarding teacher collaboration (Zwart, 2007; Meijrink, 2007).

In sum, our research has met our goals to a large extent. The integration of different theoretical

perspectives does indeed lead to more insight into the individual and situational factors that contribute to

teachers’ informal learning. By using an interactionist perspective, light is also shed on the relative

importance of these different factors in relation to each other. Furthermore, the results show that the two

learning activities that dominate literature about teacher learning – reflection and feedback asking – are of

a different nature. Finally, this study has led to some suggestions for future research.

In addition to these outcomes, we also wish to draw attention to the limitations of this study. First,

the causal relationships in this study rely on prior research and theoretical arguments. Due to the use of a

cross-sectional design, these relationships cannot be ascertained here. Therefore, it would be interesting to

replicate this study by using a longitudinal design and using different methods. Second, most variables

were measured using self-reports, which possibly leads to a common method bias. This means that, due to

the tendency of respondents to answer consistently, the correlations between the variables increase.

Furthermore, the length of the questionnaire can stimulate people to give the same answers, just to finish

the job quickly. Third, 185 teachers started filling out the questionnaire, but quit half way through. 456

persons finished the questionnaire despite its length. Unfortunately, we cannot go back to find out what

the causes for these differences are. However, it leaves some questions for further clarification. Do those

who finished the questionnaire have a higher interest in teacher learning than those who dropped out? Or


59

do they, for some reason, have more time than other teachers? Or are they more committed to the

organization? This unknown fact may have distorted the results.

We wish to conclude this chapter by translating our findings into some practical implications.

First, given the central role of learning goal orientation in teachers’ learning, we recommend shaping the

working situation of teachers in such a way that it promotes their learning goal orientation and creates a

so-called situational learning goal orientation (Button, Mathieu & Zajac, 1996). This can be done by

stressing the importance of teachers’ learning by, for example, assuring that teachers have enough time to

develop themselves and to learn from each other, appreciating new ideas and new solutions to problems,

assuring that teachers can attend a course or training when they find that they need it, and adding learning

as a performance evaluation criterion. Second, given the importance of transformational leadership in

teachers’ learning, school leaders should be encouraged to develop their ‘transformational competencies’

by, for example, initiating and identifying a vision for the school’s future, providing individual support,

and providing intellectual stimulation (Geijsel, Sleegers, Leithwood & Jantzi, 2003). In addition,

transformational leaders should be aware of the difference between teachers concerning their motivation

to learn (from each other). Finally, given the positive relationship between task and goal interdependence

and teachers’ learning, a search for ways in which teachers can become more dependent on each other in

fulfilling their tasks and achieving their goals would be fruitful. Task interdependence can be promoted

by redesigning the team task in such a way that teachers are no longer solely responsible for their own

isolated educational activity, but share responsibilities when developing and executing educational

activities (e.g. a multidisciplinary school task). Goal interdependency can be promoted by formulating

clear team targets. Further research is needed to examine exactly how this can be done.

Breaking through the isolation

61

CHAPTER 5

BREAKING THROUGH THE ISOLATION OF TEACHERS:

INTERDEPENDENCE BETWEEN TEACHERS AS A TOOL IN INNOVATION7

7 This chapter was presented as a poster at the ORD (Onderwijs Research Dagen / Educational Research

Conference), June 18th – 20th, Eindhoven University: Runhaar, P.R., K. Sanders & H. Yang, Promoting teachers’

learning at the workplace (Bevorderen van werkplekleren door docenten).

Abstract

This study aims at explaining teachers’ innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, as these behaviours are

considered to be crucial in organisations that are continuously confronted with changes. Because of the interactive

character of the two behaviours, the perceived task and goal interdependence within teams are taken into account as

independent variables. Self-efficacy and learning goal orientation are taken into account as control variables. We

used a survey study in which 456 teachers from a school for secondary and vocational education and training

participated. As expected, perceived task interdependence positively influences innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, whereas perceived goal interdependence is positively related to knowledge sharing, but not to

innovative behaviour. The interaction between task and goal interdependence positively influences innovative

behaviour, but has no effect on knowledge sharing. Furthermore, self-efficacy and learning goal orientation

influences the found effects of task and goal interdependence.

Chapter 5

62

Introduction

In the knowledge economy, economic growth emanates to a large extent from knowledge instead of from

‘traditional’ sources such as money, natural resources, and man power (Drucker, 1993; Machlup, 1980).

Investing in the production, utilization, and dissemination of knowledge is important for at least three

related reasons (cf Van Aken, Bruining, Jurgens & Sanders, 2003). First, the ongoing technological

development has resulted in a lot of physical labour and routine jobs being taken over by machines.

Second, the increase in the service industries has forced organizations to produce custom-made products

and hence requires employees to be more customer-oriented and flexible. Third, the continuous

development of modern media and ICT has lead to the consequence that the tempo of developing new

products and services has increased and that the competition between organisations has become more and

more severe. Employees at different levels are expected, not only to adapt to these changes, but also to

contribute to them (Kessels, 2001; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Different governments have stressed the central role that schools play in the knowledge economy

(see for example Centre for American Progress, 2005; TDA, 2006; Dutch Education Council, 2006).

Schools are expected to train students – i.e. future employees - in lifelong learning skills that will be

needed in order to be able to adapt to the changes in the working world. This means that teachers are not

only expected to transfer knowledge to students, but also to coach students in how to gather knowledge

themselves and actively construct meaning on their own (Kwakman, 2003; European Commission, 2005;

Van Eekelen, 2005). This change in pedagogical approach and methods is fundamental and not unique for

The Netherlands (Hargreaves & Fink, 2000; Putnam & Borko, 2000; Van Eekelen, 2005; Bransford,

Berliner, Derry & Hammerness, 2005). The role of teachers in bringing this change into practice is of

crucial importance (see for example Hall & Hord, 1987; Fullan, 2007; Wikeley, Stoll, Murillo & De Jong,

2005). More specifically, teachers’ willingness and ability to change and invent new didactic methods is

key (Desimone, 2002; Kwakman, 2003; Snoek, 2004; Van Eekelen, 2005).

A recent evaluation of the many innovations within primary, secondary and vocational schools in

The Netherlands has led to the belief that the position of the teachers and their professional development

has been more or less neglected (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, 2008; Parliamentary

Research Committee Educational Innovations, 2008). In line with conclusions in international research,

the conclusion of this Dutch evaluation is that innovations can no longer be implemented in a top-down

manner, but that the active involvement of teachers and more organic forms of cooperation amongst

teachers are needed (Gerrichhauzen, 2007; Van den Berg, VandenBerghe & Sleegers, 1999; Fullan,

2007). Furthermore, more knowledge about methods that stimulate teachers’ involvement in innovation

processes is needed (Desimone, 2002; Teachers Committee, 2007; Van der Bolt et al, 2006).

Research on teachers’ professional development

Innovations and changes within schools can not be realized without the professional development of

teachers. Although a lot of research on teachers’ professional development has been conducted, different

concepts and approaches have been used (Putnam & Borko, 1997, 2000; Richardson & Placier, 2001;


63

Wilson & Berne, 1999). Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) provide an overview by presenting three images

that represent the most prominent conceptualisations of teacher learning: First, the knowledge-for-

practice image puts forward the idea that researchers produce the knowledge for teachers. Teachers can

then use this knowledge to improve their practice. In this image, teachers’ learning takes place by means

of formal activities, such as attending courses and reading handbooks. Second, the knowledge-in-practice

image puts forward the idea that the knowledge that teachers need to improve their practice derives from

their experiences in practice. Teachers’ learning in this image takes place by means of informal activities,

such as reflecting on practice and asking for feedback (see chapter four). Third, the knowledge-of-

practice image puts forward the idea that the knowledge teachers need to improve their practice derives

from systematically and collaboratively inquiry of practice (teaching, students, learning processes, subject

matter etc.) and experimenting and studying literature. In contrast to the first image, knowledge is not to

be gathered from outside the classroom or school, but constructed by teachers themselves in local or

broader communities. And in contrast to the second image, reflection on practice is not only used to

improve one’s own teaching, but also to construct meaningful knowledge as a part of larger efforts to

transform teaching (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999).

This chapter focuses on the innovative behaviour of teachers, as this behaviour is generally

considered to be crucial in organisations that are continuously confronted with change (see for example

Amabile, 1997; De Jong & Den Hartog, 2005; Janssen, 2003; Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003; West,

2000). For innovations to be implemented successfully, employees need to go beyond their formal job-

descriptions and exhibit innovative behaviour. Innovation and innovative behaviour have often been

associated with creativity or the invention of new ideas. The terms innovation and creativity have

therefore often been used interchangeably (Scott & Bruce, 1994). However, authors presently agree on

the fact that innovations not only require new ideas in and of themselves, but also require the adoption

and implementation of these ideas (Kanter, 1988; Van de Ven, 1986). Creativity can be seen as a first step

in innovation (Amabile, 1997). Although new ideas can come from within the organisation, innovation

can also mean adopting new ideas from outside the organisation (Scott & Bruce, 1994). In fact, Scott and

Bruce (1994) state that innovation is a multistage process that begins with problem recognition and the

generalisation of ideas or solutions, either novel or adopted. In the next step, individuals seek sponsorship

for the new idea and attempt to build a coalition of supporters for it. In the last step, the idea is completed

by the application of the idea, by making a prototype or product of it (Kanter, 1988). In line with the work

of West and Farr (1989), Janssen (2000), Scott and Bruce (1994) and Van der Vegt and Janssen (2003),

we conceptualize innovative behaviour as a combination of three types of behaviour: it involves the

generalisation of new ideas, the promotion of new ideas, and the application of new ideas.

In addition to innovative behaviour, knowledge sharing is also often identified as being an

important aspect of the professional development of teachers. Although the basis of innovation lies in the

knowledge and ideas of individual employees (Scott & Bruce, 1994), organizational learning is more than

just a simple sum of individual knowledge (Lipshitz & Popper, 2000; Schechter, 2008). By sharing

knowledge and ideas with colleagues, new knowledge can be produced (see for example Van Woerkom,

Chapter 5

64

2004; Verloop & Kessels, 2006). Furthermore, in sharing knowledge, assumptions and opinions that

underlie practices and methods are made overt and can be reflected upon. Discussions on the theories-in-

use can ensue (Annett, 1969; Ashford, Blatt, and VandeWalle, 2003; Schön, 1983).

The interaction between teachers is an important aspect of both innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, and both of these activities are regulated by the surroundings of teachers. Knowledge

sharing is inherently an activity that is performed in interaction with others, but interaction can itself also

stimulate the generalisation of new ideas as teachers are confronted with each others’ ideas and methods.

Furthermore, the promotion of new ideas and the application of these ideas by other team members imply

interaction. In schools, however, teachers often work autonomously and are isolated from each other.

Interaction with colleagues is thereby hindered (Caluwé & Vermaak, 2005; Hanson, 1993) and the power

of schools to innovate is decreased (Coonen, 2005; Rijswijk & Oldeboom, 2005). It is therefore vital for

schools to establish system structures that facilitate interaction between teachers and foster continuous

collective learning (Marks, Louis & Printy, 2000; Silins & Mulford, 2002). Research has shown that

working collaboratively is an important stimulator for learning (London & Sessa, 2007). In particular,

when teachers are involved in multidisciplinary teams, they are confronted with different ways of

thinking about teaching and learning (Meijerink, 2007). Increasing the (perception of) interdependence

between teachers is viewed as a potentially potent way to promote the professional development of

teachers. For this reason, we examine the influence of the perception of task- and goal interdependence

between teachers on their innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing in this study.

Perceived task and goal interdependence

Task interdependence is defined as a situation in which work flows from one team member to another in

such a way that the task performance of one team member depends on the task performance of the other

(Brass, 1981; Kiggundu, 1981; Van de Vegt et al, 1998). Task interdependence exists when a team

member needs information, resources, advice, knowledge, physical assistance, and/or equipment from

another team member to complete his or her task successfully (e.g., Cummings, 1978; De Jong, Van der

Vegt & Molleman, 2007). For example, low task interdependence exists in situations where a teacher’s

task is limited to teaching a specific subject. In these situations, there is little need for teachers to

cooperate or exchange information. The situation is different in competence-based education, where the

different subjects are offered in an integrated manner. In those situations, teachers of different disciplines

have to work together to create meaningful courses (see for example Debats, 2004; Ritzen, 2004).

Goal interdependence refers to the extent to which team members believe that their personal

benefits and costs depend on the successful goal attainment of other members (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978;

Deutsch, 1980; Van der Vegt et al, 1998). In other words: goal interdependence refers to the extent to

which team members believe that their own goals can be achieved only when the goals of other team

members are also met (Weldon & Weingart, 1993). For example, low goal interdependence exists when

teachers are only held responsible for the achievement of pupils in the subjects they teach. High goal


65

interdependence exists when a team of teachers is held responsible for the minimization of the total

amount of drop outs within a department.

Although the relationship between task interdependence and learning has been intensively studied

in the context of students’ cooperative learning (see for example Antil, Jenkins, Wayne, & Vadasy, 1998;

Cook, 1991; Summers, & Svinicki, 2007), not many studies are available on the relationship between task

interdependence and learning or innovation in organisations (see also Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003).

Nevertheless, there are some good reasons to assume a positive relationship between task

interdependence, on the one hand, and innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, on the other hand.

First, task interdependence increases the interaction between employees (Campion, Medsker & Higgs

1993). As stated before, interaction is an important aspect in innovative behaviour and knowledge

sharing. Knowledge sharing is inherently interactive, although it can also enhance the generalisation of

new ideas. Furthermore, innovative activities involve the risk of being confronted with conflict and

resistance to change from colleagues or managers who want to prevent change (Janssen, 2003; Janssen,

Van der Vliert & West, 2004). Research has shown that the more one perceives that one’s task fulfilment

is affected by the task fulfilment of others, and vice versa, the more one feels responsible for the task

outcomes of others (Kiggundu, 1983), and the more employees turn to each other to seek and provide

help when confronted with problems (Allen, Sargent & Bradley, 2003; Koster, Stokman, Hodson &

Sanders, 2007; Wagner, 1995).

In line with theory and empirical evidence, we expect that the more teachers perceive that they

are dependent on each other for performing their task, the more they will exhibit innovative behaviour

and knowledge sharing. We therefore formulated our first hypothesis as follows:

H1: Perceived task interdependence has a positive impact on teachers’ innovative behaviour (H1a)

and knowledge sharing (H1b).

As is the case with task interdependence, there are also several reasons to assume a positive

relationship between goal interdependence and innovative activities (Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003).

When people believe that their goals are positively related, they are motivated to find ways in which

mutual goals can be achieved and ways to resolve issues for mutual benefits. To do so, they will try to

integrate their ideas (Deutsch, 1973). Opposing views and ideas will be examined by engaging in

discussions and asking questions, as people want to understand each other. Empirical studies have shown

that positive goal interdependence leads to open-minded discussions and diverse views (e.g. Deutsch,

1973; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). People with cooperative goals engage in direct discussions and

exchange points of view, which leads to the understanding of each other’s perspectives (e.g. Alper,

Tjsovold & Law, 1998; Tjosvold, 1998).

Chapter 5

66

In line with earlier research, theoretical arguments, and these empirical results, we expect that

positive goal interdependence will stimulate teachers’ innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing. We

formulated the second hypothesis as follows:

H2: Perceived goal interdependence has a positive impact on teachers’ innovative behaviour (H2a)

and knowledge sharing (H2b).

Several studies on the effects of task and goal interdependence show that their effects strongly

depend on how they are combined (De Jong et al, 2007; Van der Vegt, Van de Vliert & Oosterhof, 2003).

Laboratory research shows that congruent low-low and high-high combinations of task and goal

interdependence lead to consistent task cues and clarify performance. In contrast, incongruent low-high or

high-low combinations send confusing signals to team members, resulting in uncertainty and a decrease

in pro-social behaviour (Saavedra, Earley, & Van Dyne, 1993). More specifically, when team members

experience low task and low goal interdependence, little interaction is needed and personal interests can

be pursued with low potential for conflicts (Saavedra et al, 1993). This is different under incongruent

circumstances. An individual perceiving a situation as involving low task interdependence but high goal

interdependence will likely experience uncertainty regarding his or her own intentions and goals. In such

situations, people may benefit from the cooperative behaviour of others but give nothing in return (Karau

& Williams, 1993). In situations with high task interdependence but low goal interdependence, individual

interests may prevail over collective interests. The more task interdependence, the more people have the

opportunity to promote or hinder the performance of others. The extent to which they will use their power

to hinder or promote the other will depend on the degree of perceived goal interdependence (Van der

Vegt & Janssen, 2003). When high task interdependence is accompanied with high goal interdependence,

employees actually need to work together and need each other to achieve common goals (Van der Vegt,

et al, 2003).

Research has shown that, in situations where high task and high goal interdependence are

experienced, interpersonal helping and coordination are encouraged (Saavedra et al, 1993). Moreover,

there is also empirical evidence suggesting that the effects of task interdependence on innovative

behaviour is higher when goal interdependence is also high than when goal interdependence is low (Van

der Vegt & Janssen, 2003). This led us to formulate the following hypothesis:

H3: Perceived goal interdependence moderates the relationships between perceived task

interdependence on the one hand and teachers’ innovative behaviour (H3a) and knowledge sharing

(H3b) on the other hand.

As already stated, our focus in this study is to investigate the impacts of task and goal

interdependence on teachers’ innovative behaviours and knowledge sharing. However, employee

workplace behaviour is generally assumed to be a function of individual and situational factors (Boxall &


67

Purcell, 2003). To fairly demonstrate the impacts of interdependence on these two specific behaviours, we

also need to include and control for individual characteristics. The implementation of innovations and

changes within schools is often accompanied by teachers’ feelings of uncertainty (Geijsel, Sleegers, Van

den Berg & Kelchtermans, 2001; Van den Berg, 1993; Van den Berg, Vandenberghe & Sleegers, 1999;

Verloop & Kessels, 2006). In situations of change, teachers are concerned about whether or not they will

be able to meet expectations (Van den Berg, 1993) and doubt with regard to one’s competencies

(Kelchtermans, 1996; Wood, 1999). Self-efficacy, which refers to the belief in one’s ability to meet

situational demands (Bandura, 1977; Tschannen-Moran, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001), is generally assumed to

play a major role in innovation and change processes in schools (e.g. Ross, 1995; Soodak & Podell,

1996).

Furthermore, innovative activities are by definition ones that go beyond the formal job

descriptions and can therefore be considered new elements within a teacher’s job (Snoek, 2004; Coonen,

2005; Gerrichhauzen, 2007). We therefore expect that individual motivation will need to be relatively

high for teachers to take on such activities. More specifically, the learning goal orientation – which refers

to the motivation to improve one’s competencies through learning and training new skills, as well as

through learning to complete new and more complex tasks (Dweck & Legett, 1988; Poortvliet, Janssen &

Van Yperen, 2004) – is likely to play an important role in innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing.

Previous research has shown that a high learning goal orientation is positively related to openness to

organizational changes and to actively making contributions to change (Bettencourt, 2004), as well as to

learning and innovative behaviour (De Rooij, 2006).

On the basis of the above, both self-efficacy and learning goal orientation will be taken into

account.

Method

Respondents

The focus in this study is on the teaching staff in secondary vocational education and training (VET

College). There are several reasons why we chose this sector. First, this sector – as a provider of future

employees for all branches – is directly confronted with the changes in organisations we mentioned in the

introduction of the chapter. As a consequence, there is strong need to continuously adapt to changes.

Second, despite the fundamental, educational changes that are going on within this school sector, the

VET-schools have not yet received a lot of attention in research on the professional development of

teachers (NWO, 2007). Third, school boards within this sector have been busy with the introduction of

more or less autonomous teacher teams as a means to more easily stimulate professional development and

innovation (Pelkmans & Smit, 1999; Venne, Felix & Vermeulen, 2001). And finally, the devolvement of

responsibilities from the level of central government to the level of schools as autonomous and

professional organisations started earlier here than in other sectors (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture

and Science, 2005), which makes the outcomes of these studies valuable for other schools, as well.

Chapter 5

68

In addition to the teachers, instructors and teaching assistants also participated in this study. More

and more ‘non-teachers’ are working in the classroom (SBO, 2005; Runhaar, 2007), which makes the

learning of every worker in the education process of equal importance8.

456 respondents filled out the total questionnaire (a response rate of 38%)9. Three percent of the

respondents are teaching assistants, seven percent instructors, and 90% teachers. The group consists of

54.2% men and 45.8% women. The age distribution of respondents is in accordance with the national age

distribution of employees in secondary vocational education (Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and

Science, 2005): 2% of the respondents are 30 years of age or younger, 9% are 30 to 39 years of age, 36%

are 40 to 49 years of age, 48% are 50 to 59 years of age, and 5% are 60 years of age or older. Most

respondents have received higher education (85%); 10% of the respondents have a master’s degree. 5%

(who function as teaching assistants) have received secondary vocational education. Most respondents

work full time (42.3%). 53.3% of the respondents work between 40% and 80% of a full time contract, and

4.4% of the respondents work less than 40%. On the basis of these data, our sample can be considered

representative of the total personnel of the college (see Table 1 in the Appendix for a comparison).

Procedure

The VET College that participated in this study was selected because much attention is paid to teacher

learning and teachers’ professional development in this college. For this reason, the willingness of the

College Board to put effort into the research was expected. The research goal, research questions, and

theoretical model were discussed with the College Board in order to clarify the practical relevance and

value of the research. After this discussion, the College Board referred to the research specialist of the

college for further procedural help and instructions. A digital questionnaire was used. Employees received

an instructional letter in which the goal and procedure of the research was explained. After a week, a

reminder was sent to those teachers who hadn’t yet filled out the questionnaire. The second reminder was

sent after two weeks. The research specialists of the VET College assisted in all aspects of the procedure.

The teaching staff of the VET College consists of 1,207 employees, working in 30 teams within four

departments.

Instruments

In this study, existing scales that had been proven reliable in other studies were used. In some of the

cases, items were removed to reach satisfactory reliability (Cronbach’s alpha > .70). All items were

measured using 5-point Likert scales (1 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree).

8 In the service of readability, we will only use the term teachers and will only accentuate the different functions

when relevant. 9 185 employees started filling out the questionnaire but quit half way through. It is possible that, for these

employees, the instruction letter had led to expectations that proved wrong after reading the first questions. The

length of the questionnaire could also have been a problem for them (as the questionnaire also consisted of items for

other researchers, the total amount of items was 137).


69

To measure innovative behaviour, we used the scale developed by De Jong and den Hartog (2005),

which consists of twelve items, such as: ‘I am involved in examining new methods and instruments’ and ‘I

promote and defend my innovative ideas’. The reliability of this scale proved good (Cronbach’s α =.87).

To measure knowledge sharing, a subscale of the ‘Critically reflective work behaviour scale’

developed by Van Woerkom (2003) was used. The ten-item subscale knowledge sharing also proved

reliable (Cronbach’s α=.80) and consists of items such as: ‘On account of the advice of my colleagues, I

can do my work better’.

To measure the perception of task and goal interdependence, the scales published by Van der Vegt,

Emans and Van de Vliert (1998) were used. The task interdependence scale consists of six items such as,

‘To do my job well, I need information from my colleagues’. The scale proved reliable (Cronbach’s

α=.79). An example of one of the eight items that measure goal interdependence is: ‘In our team, we all

want to achieve the same goals’. To improve the reliability of the goal interdependence scale, one of the

eight items (‘When team members accomplish their goals, it becomes harder for me to reach my goals’)

was removed (Cronbach’s α=.71).

Control variables

Pre-structured questions were used to determine age (1 = <25, 2 = ≥ 25-30 years, 3= ≥30-39, 4= ≥40-49,

5= ≥50-59, 6= ≥ 60), gender (1=man, 2= woman), level of education (1= secondary vocational education,

2 = higher education, 3 = university) , function (1 = teaching assistant, 2 = instructor, 3 = teacher), tenure,

i.e. number of working hours a week (1=fulltime, 2=≥80%-100%, 3=≥60%-80%, 4=≥40%-60%,

5=≥20%-40%, 6=<20%).

To measure self-efficacy, the occupational self-efficacy scale developed by Schyns and Von Collani

(2002) was used. This scale consists of six items. An example item is: ‘Whatever happens in my work, I

can usually cope with it’ (Cronbach’s α = .75).

Learning goal orientation was measured by a five-item scale developed by VandeWalle (1997),

which consists of items such as, ‘I am prepared to do challenging tasks from which I can learn a lot’

(Cronbach’s α = .85).

Data analysis

To test the hypotheses, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted. Model 1 contains the

control variables. The perceptions of task and goal interdependence were added in model 2. To test the

interaction effect of task and goal interdependence on innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, the

scores of the two independent variables were first standardized and a product variable was computed

(Aiken & West, 1991). Finally, model 3 contains this product variable.

To illustrate the impact of the control variables of self-efficacy and learning goal orientation, the

regression analysis was done with and without these variables.

Because teachers are nested within teams, the data are not independent and a multi-level analysis

should be considered. However, due to our main interest in teacher-to-teacher differences, with predictors

Chapter 5

70

on the individual level as well, we chose to analyse our results on the individual level (Bickel, 2007).

Furthermore, the intra class correlations (ICC1) of innovative behaviour and reflection are relatively low

(.10 and .08 respectively). This means that that 10% and 8 % of the variance of feedback asking and

reflection occurs between teams, with the remaining 90% and 92%, respectively, occurring within teams.

Furthermore, the intra class correlations of task and goal interdependence were low, as well (.09 and .08,

respectively).

Results

Descriptive statistics

Table 1 contains the means and standard deviations for all variables, as well as the correlations

between the variables. As theoretically assumed, the two dependent variables, innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, appeared to be related to each other (r = .22, p < .01). Innovative behaviour was

related to all independent variables in the assumed direction, with the exception of goal interdependence

(r = .05, n.s.). Knowledge sharing was related to all independent variables.

Furthermore, innovative behaviour was related to age (r = -.08, p<.5), level of education (r =.09, p

<.05), tenure (r = -.12, p <.01) and function (r =.16, p <.05). Innovative behaviour was accompanied by a

lower age, a higher level of education, more working hours per week, and a higher function (i.e. teachers

score higher on innovative behaviour than teaching assistants and instructors do). Knowledge sharing was

related to age (r = -.09, p<.05), suggesting that the younger the respondent, the more knowledge sharing is

reported.

Finally, self-efficacy and learning goal orientation were correlated with each other (r =.46, p<.01).

Task and goal interdependence were also positively related to each other (r =.37, p<.01). This means that

the higher the perceived task interdependence, the higher the perceived goal interdependence. Self-

efficacy was positively related to goal interdependence (r =.13, p<.01), suggesting that the higher the self-

efficacy, the more the perceived goal interdependence. Learning goal orientation was related to task

interdependence (r =.11, p<.01), indicating the higher the learning goal orientation, the higher the

perceived task interdependence.

Regression analysis: testing the hypotheses

In Table 2, the results of the regression analysis, with innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing as the

dependent variables and task and goal interdependence as the independent variables, are shown. Models

1, 2 and 3 contain the results from the regression analysis without self-efficacy and learning goal

orientation. Models 4, 5 and 6 contain the results of the regression analysis with self-efficacy and learning

goal orientation. We will first describe the results without these variables.

The first hypothesis, task interdependence positively influences innovative behaviour and knowledge

sharing (H1a; H1b), was confirmed by the data. The more teachers perceive that they need each other to

fulfil their tasks, the more they exhibit innovative behaviour (β=.23, p<.01) and the more they share


71

knowledge (β=.10, p<.05). The second hypothesis, goal interdependence positively influences innovative

behaviour and knowledge sharing (H2a; H2b), was partly confirmed. That is, the more teachers report

that they are dependent on each other for reaching their goals, the more they share knowledge (β=.54,

p<.01). However, the positive impact of perceived goal interdependence on innovative behaviour was not

supported by our data (β=.00, n.s.), which means that teachers’ innovative behaviour is not directly

affected by the degree to which teachers believe that their own goals can be achieved only when the goals

of other team members are also met.

The third hypothesis, goal orientation moderates the relationship between task interdependence and

innovative behaviour (H3a) and task interdependence and knowledge sharing (H3b) was partly

confirmed. The results showed that a combination between task and goal interdependence had a

significant impact on innovative behaviour (β= .10, p<10), but not on knowledge sharing (β= .01, ns). We

further depict the interaction effect of task and goal interdependence on innovative behaviour in Figure 1,

in which task interdependence is shown to have a positive influence on innovative behaviour when the

goal interdependence is high (bslope = .35, p < .01). When the goal interdependence is low, the positive

impact of task interdependence on innovative behaviour disappears (bslope =.05, n.s.).

Chapter 5

72

Table 1: Means, standard deviations and correlations between study variables

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Innovative behaviour 3,71 0,47

2. Knowledge Sharing 3,59 0,45 .22**

3. Self-efficacy 3,84 0,49 .38** .13**

4. Learning Goal Orientation 3,74 0,57 .57** .19** .46**

5. Task interdependence 3,02 0,54 .20** .29** -.03 .11**

6. Goal interdependence 3,35 0,51 .05 .55** .13** .07 .37**

7. Gender 1,46 0,50 -.01 .07 -.03 .05 -.07 -.11**

8. Age 4,46 0,81 -.08* -.09* .00 -.16** -.03 .10** -.11**

9. Level of education 2,11 0,50 .09* -.03 .11* .09* -.05 -.11** .01 .12**

10. Tenure 2,23 1,31 .12** .00 .07 .10* .11* .07 .60** .05 .01

11. Function 2,86 0,43 .16* -.01 -.01 .01 .03 -.07 -.07 - 17** .27** -.06

** = Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); * =Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)


73

Table 2: Results from regression analyses with the dependent variables, with and without the control variables self-efficacy and learning goal orientation.

Variables Innovative behaviour Knowledge sharing

Model 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Gender .08 .08 .08 .01 .01 .01 .07 .12* .12* .05 .10* .10*

Age -.13* -.12* -.12* -.05 -.04 -.04 -.07 -.13** -.13** -.05 -.11** -.11**

Level of education .05 .06 .06 -.02 -.02 -.02 -.03 .04 .04 -.05 .02 .02

Tenure .15* .13* .12* .05 .04 .04 .04 .02 -.01 .01 -.01 -.01

Function .16** .15** .15** .16** .15** .15** .01 .05 .04 .02 .04 .05

Self-efficacy .16** .18** .17** .08 .02 .02

Learning Goal Orientation .50** .47** .47** .15** .11* .11*

Task interdependence .19** .23** .16** .18** .10* .10* .09* .09+

Goal interdependence .02 .00 -.05 -.05 .55** .55** .53** .54**

TI * GI .10* .05 .01 .00

R² .24 .31 .32 .38 .40 .40 .01 .35 .35 .05 .36 .36

Change in R2 .07 .01 .14 .04 .00 .34 .00 .04 .31 .00

* = p<.05, **=p<.01

Chapter 5

74

Figure 1. Goal interdependence moderates the relationship between task interdependence and innovative

behaviour

Interestingly, when the individual characteristics self-efficacy and learning goal orientation entered

the equation in Models 4, 5 and 6, the results pattern showed three main changes. First, self-efficacy and

learning goal orientation showed a positive impact on innovative behaviour and on knowledge sharing.

Second, the interaction effect of perceived task and goal interdependence on innovative behaviour

disappears. It suggests that individual psychological characteristics,, more specifically, self-efficacy and

learning goal orientation, take over the variance explained by the interaction terms. This unexpected

finding indicates that self-efficacy and learning goal orientation may play a strong role in stimulating

teachers’ innovative behaviour. Third, the results from Models 4, 5 and 6 also revealed that the individual

psychological variables contributed significantly to the variance explanation of innovative behaviour (∆R²

= .38 -.24 = .14). In contrast, task and goal interdependence contributed significantly to the variance

explanation of knowledge sharing (∆R² = .36 -.05 = .31). These findings indicate that innovative

behaviour is more influenced by individual characteristics (self-efficacy and learning goal orientation)

than by situational factors, whereas knowledge sharing is more influenced by situational factors (task and

goal interdependence) than by individual factors.

The unexpected effects of self-efficacy and learning goal orientation challenged us to explore

whether the joint effect between the individual variables (self-efficacy and learning goal orientation) and

the situational factors (perceived task and goal interdependence) provides an even clearer picture for

interpreting teachers’ innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing. The interaction terms between the

two individual and the two situational variables were added to Model 6 (see Table 3). The results showed

that, in the case of innovative behaviour, the interactions between self-efficacy and goal interdependence

(β=.13, p < .10), and between learning goal orientation and goal interdependence (β=-.12, p <.10), are

significant. It seems that goal interdependence in combination with individual psychological variables

may provide a better understanding of teachers’ innovative behaviour than its combination with task

independence. Concerning knowledge sharing, none of the four interaction terms turned out to be

significant. This means that teachers’ learning goal orientation and their perception of goal

interdependence have an impact on knowledge sharing among teachers in a parallel way.

3.2

3.0

2.8

2.6

2.4

GI=high

GI=low

Inn

ovati

ve

beh

avio

ur

Low High



75

Table 3: Additional interaction effects

Interaction effects

Innovative

behaviour

Knowledge

sharing

Task interdependence * Self-efficacy -.08 .05

Goal interdependence * Self-efficacy .13* .04

Task interdependence * Learning goal orientation .07 -.08

Goal interdependence * Learning goal orientation -.12* .01

*=p<.05

Discussion

The aim of our study is to explain teachers’ innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing through

individual and organisational perspectives. Both innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing are thought

to play an important role in schools at present, as extensive education innovation processes are taking

place. Both innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing are assumed to take place in interaction with

other teachers. In the case of knowledge sharing, the interaction with others is inherent. And although

innovation often starts with an individual’s idea, the application and implementation of ideas implies that

the idea is shared with and adopted by others. Interaction confronts an individual with the ideas and

methods of others, which , in turn, can lead to new ideas for both parties. Given the often isolated position

of teachers in schools, interaction is not always something that happens naturally. We therefore

emphasize the role that task and goal interdependence play in explaining innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing in teams, whereas self-efficacy and learning goal orientation were taken into account

as control variables.

The first hypothesis, task interdependence positively effects innovative behaviour and knowledge

sharing, was confirmed. The results suggest that the more teachers need information, resources, advice,

knowledge, physical assistance, and/or equipment from each other to complete their task successfully, the

more they tend to exhibit innovative behaviour and share knowledge. The second hypothesis, goal

interdependence positively effects innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, was confirmed for

knowledge sharing but not for innovative behaviour. Hence, the more teachers believe that their own

goals can be achieved only when the goals of other teachers are also met, the more knowledge sharing

between teachers occurs.

The third hypothesis, goal interdependence moderates the relationship between task interdependence

and innovative behaviour and task interdependence and knowledge sharing was confirmed for innovative

behaviour but not for knowledge sharing. Perceived goal interdependence moderates the relationship

between task interdependence and innovative behaviour. That is, only when teachers perceive that their

goals are interdependent will the arrangement of related tasks stimulate teachers’ innovative behaviour.

Self-efficacy and learning goal orientation seem to play a role in predicting innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing and seem to influence the effects of task and goal interdependence. That is, knowledge

sharing between teachers is influenced by their learning goal orientation, although task and goal

interdependence still play a more important role. Self-efficacy and learning goal orientation positively

Chapter 5

76

affect innovative behaviour and diminish the effects of task and goal interdependence on innovative

behaviour. The interaction effect of task and goal interdependence on innovative behaviour even

disappears. Furthermore, the moderating effects of self-efficacy and learning goal orientation on the

relationship between perceived goal interdependence and innovative behaviour are interesting. These

effects suggest that perceived goal interdependence and self-efficacy strengthen each other in their effect

on innovative behaviour, whereas the opposite is true for learning goal orientation: the more learning goal

orientation a teacher has, the less goal interdependence is needed to stimulate innovative behaviour and

vice versa. Teachers with a high learning goal orientation apparently have their ‘internal source of

motivation’ to engage in these behaviours, which then limits the importance of situational factors. This

interplay between individual and external factors has been described previously (see f.e. Tierney, Farmer

& Grean, 1999; Bettencourt, 2004; VandeWalle et al, 2000). Our results contribute to the growing interest

in the role of individual characteristics in research on the effects of interdependence on employee

behaviour (see for example Van der Vegt & Janssen, 2003; Wageman, 1999) and encourage further

research on the interplay between individual factors and interdependence.

Before turning to the practical implications, we would first like to highlight the limitations of this

study and offer suggestions for future study. The first limitation concerns the cross-sectional design. As a

consequence of this design, the relationships found here rely on prior research and theoretical arguments,

but can not be ascertained. Second, the fact that we only used self-reports to measure our variables might

have led to a common method bias – i.e. the tendency of respondents to give consistent answers that in

turn lead to higher correlations between variables. Third, in our examination of task and goal

interdependence, we used rather abstract items. This might have led to different interpretations by

teachers. A recommendation for future research is to make the items more concrete and related to the

tasks of teachers – for example, “To teach my students successfully, I need information from my

colleagues” – or related to the pedagogical and didactic goals of teachers – for example “To elicit a more

active learning attitude in my students, it is important that all of my colleagues work towards this same

goal”.

These kinds of items, as well as the ones we used in our study, only refer to individual teachers’

perceptions of their interdependence and not to the ‘real situation’. This is done because the way people

make retrospective sense of the situations in which they find themselves shapes their behaviour to a large

extent (Weick, 1995) and, more specifically, determines their learning behaviour (Kwakman, 1999; Van

Woerkom, 2004). Nevertheless, it would also be interesting to use other measurements to determine the

degree of interdependence. For example, analysing task descriptions and observing teams executing their

tasks can serve to distinguish between teams with high interdependence and teams with low

interdependence. Furthermore, the effects on innovative activities can be examined by using a more

quasi-experimental design.

The study has led to some practical implications. Given the positive influence of task

interdependence on innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, schools can gear the tasks of teachers to

one another. We can point out some of the possibilities. A first option is to restructure parts of the


77

teaching tasks of teachers. For example, the policy within a school can be that teachers are expected to

develop and execute a number of multidisciplinary lessons. By collaborating with colleagues from

different subject-matter departments, more exchanges of ideas and methods can occur than when

collaboration is limited to colleagues from the same department (Witziers, 1992; Imants, 2001). The

development of competence-based education within the VET colleges, where disciplines are integrated

and the education is directed more towards the competences the students will need in their future

professions (Debats, 2004; Ritzen, 2004), can be viewed as a manner to increase innovative behaviour

and knowledge sharing. The second option concerns the secondary tasks of teachers. Every teacher is

expected to spend 10% of the job on professional development activities (see the Dutch collective labour

agreements). The policy in a school can be that this part of the task of teachers is to coach each other, and

visit and observe each others’ lessons.

The practical implications that derive from the positive influence of goal interdependence on

knowledge sharing and the fact that the effect of task interdependence on innovative behaviour is

dependent on the perceived goal interdependence concern the way teachers are held responsible and

rewarded. To prevent ‘double’ or confusing messages to teachers of what is expected from them (see for

example Vijfeijken, 2004), the reward system for teachers – whether expressed in money, such as in a

salary increase or bonus, or in immaterial rewards, such as getting the opportunity to take a course or

participate in a challenging project - should match the degree of task interdependence between teachers.

In sum, our study has shown the importance of perceived task and goal interdependence between

teachers as conditions for innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing and has enlarged the

understanding of how both forms of interdependence interact with each other and with individual factors

in explaining the innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing of teachers.

General discussion and conclusions

79

CHAPTER 6

GENERAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Introduction

Because of the crucial role schools are considered to play in our knowledge economy (Centre for

American Progress, 2005; TDA, 2006; Dutch Education Council, 2006) and the major impact teacher

quality has on pupil achievement (Cornet, Huizinga, Minne & Webbink, 2006; Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain,

2005; Scheerens & Bosker, 1997), teachers’ professional development has of late received a lot of

attention in educational policy in many countries, including The Netherlands. Furthermore, the ongoing

technological innovations and constant changes in pupils’ backgrounds forces teachers to continuously

develop themselves (European Commission, 2005). The aim of this thesis is to provide guidelines for

teachers, school management, and HRM staff concerning how to shape the professional development of

teachers within their schools.

The professional development of teachers is also a recurrent topic in research, although

researchers do conceptualize it differently. Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) distinguish between three

different conceptions of teacher learning: first, the knowledge-for-practice conception defines teacher

learning as the gathering of all the knowledge needed to teach well from sources outside the school, such

as from experts, courses, or handbooks. Second, the knowledge-in-practice conception defines teacher

learning as the finding out of ‘what works’ by reflection on day-to-day practice. Third, the knowledge-of-

practice conception defines teacher learning as the collaborative researching for ‘what works’ by studying

literature, experimenting and innovating in the classroom, and building the needed ‘body of knowledge’

together with other teachers (see Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999 for an overview). Since formal education

methods for the purpose of continuous teacher learning have proven to be unsatisfactory (Clarke &

Hollingsworth, 2002; Richardson & Placier, 2001), and given the fact that the learning of professionals

(Watkins & Callahan, 1998) and of teachers in particular (Kwakman, 1999; Van Eekelen, 2005), takes

place unintentionally for the most part and during work, we align ourselves with the knowledge-in-

practice and knowledge-of practice conceptions (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999) and focus on teachers’

professional development as learning at the workplace. More specifically, on the basis of the work of

Schön (1983), Van Woerkom (2004), De Jong and Den Hartog (2005), Scott and Bruce (1994) and Van

der Vegt and Janssen (2003), we operationalize teacher learning at the workplace as reflection, asking for

feedback, innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing.

As there is a lack of research combining both organizational and psychological factors when

explaining teachers’ professional development (Kwakman, 2003; Smylie, 1988), we focus here on

precisely this interplay of individual and organisational factors in explaining teachers’ professional

development. Furthermore, we augment existing studies by paying attention to Human Resources

Management (HRM) as a tool to stimulate the professional development of teachers within schools. The

general questions in this thesis are: ‘How can HRM serve as a tool in professional development?’ and

Chapter 6

80

‘Can professional development of teachers be explained by the interplay between individual and

organisational factors?’

Five empirical studies, reported in four chapters, were conducted to answer a series of research

questions derived from this central topic. All studies were conducted within schools for secondary

vocational education and training (VET Colleges). This sector was chosen because it has not yet received

much attention in research on teachers’ professional development, and because the teachers in this sector

are confronted with fundamental educational changes.

In this final chapter, we will first summarize the main findings and draw the main conclusions from

our studies and then discuss the limitations and strengths of our research. We will then outline the

implications of the research in terms of suggestions for future research and practical implications.

Summary of findings

As the central question already reveals, we have studied teachers’ professional development from two

different perspectives: from the HRM perspective and from the perspective of teacher learning. For the

purpose of clarity, the thesis is divided into two parts: Part One contains three studies on HRM as a tool

in teachers’ professional development and Part Two contains two studies on individual and organisational

factors explaining teachers’ professional development.


Since the beginning of this century, Dutch schools have been implementing Human Resources

Management (HRM) policies as a means of stimulating the continuous professional development of

teachers in line with organisational goals (e.g. educational innovations). Despite the investments of the

Dutch government over the past years and the efforts of school boards, school leaders, and HRM

departments, the implementation of Integral Personnel Policy (IPP) in schools is still lagging behind

expectations (Teurlings & Vermeulen, 2004; Education Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch Ministry of Education,

Culture and Science, 2005). The research question in the first study (described in Chapter two) was ‘What

factors impede and promote the implementation of HRM in schools?’ and focused on the problems

policymakers and executives of HRM policy encounter when implementing the new policy. Because the

implementation of HRM in schools can be seen as a relatively high impact organisational change, we

expected implementation problems to be more related to social and psychological processes in school

organisations (‘soft’ factors) than to physical aspects such as time, money, or means (‘hard’ factors). We

used pre-structured interviews (Swanborn, 1987) to examine whether this expectation could be confirmed

or not. We interviewed a board member, the HRM manager, two unit managers and their HRM officers

from each of five VET colleges (N=30). As expected, soft factors appeared to be the main obstacles. That

is, most respondents reported that ‘making policy and instruments is easy, but getting people to use them

is very difficult’. More specifically, three underlying reasons were reported: the ‘users’ of the policy

(teachers) do not recognize the added value of the policy; the teachers are tired of the continual changes

in national or school policy; the new policy doesn’t seem to fit well enough to the current organizational


81

culture, in which people aren’t used to working and learning together. According to the respondents, more

interaction between management, HRM, and teachers is necessary to make the connection between the

policy and the various expectations, worries, and desires of teachers clear. Hard factors such as time and

money seemed to play a minor role, although some respondents referred to the incompetence of

management in executing HRM policy.

Knowing that soft factors are more important than hard factors in the implementation of HRM in

schools, the research question in the second study (described in Chapter two) was: ‘Which role can the

HRM department play in fostering the implementation of HRM?’ In HRM-literature, much attention is

paid to the development of the HRM-department in organisations from a pure administrative function to a

strategic function in which HRM helps in the realization of long-term organisational goals (see for

example Baron and Kreps, 1999; Biemans, 2001). A well-known model of different HRM-roles is that of

Ulrich (1998). He describes four roles, which he derives from the crossing over of two underlying

dimensions, namely the strategic-operational-dimension and the processes-people-dimension: the

administrative expert leads to efficient HRM processes and procedures; the strategic partner leads to a

translation of organisational strategy into HRM activities; the change agent leads to the implementation

of the changes that are needed to realise the organisation’s strategy; and the employee champion leads to

the connection of the desires and needs of employees to the organisational goals. Since our first study

emphasized the importance of soft factors (referring to the social processes within the schools), the two

‘people’ roles described by Ulrich (1998), employee champion and change agent, should be particularly

appropriate in schools. A survey based on Ulrich’s (1998) framework was used to examine the roles that

the HRM departments in VET Colleges fulfil. A distinction was made between the actual and desired

situation. The questionnaire was filled in by 46 representatives from the HRM departments of all Dutch

VET Colleges, including HRM managers (28), HRM policy advisors (12) and HRM officers (6). The 46

representatives were approached during regional periodical meetings of HRM managers, organised by the

national VET Council. The results showed that the administrative expert role seems to be fulfilled most

often and that the respondents seem confident about that. The two strategic roles, strategic partner and

change agent, seemed to be executed less often and high levels of ambition were reported concerning the

desire for these two roles. The role of employee champion received the lowest score in both the actual and

desired situation. Hence, we were forced to conclude that the two ‘people roles’ we had assumed to be

important in schools at present are not, in fact, executed often, and although high ambitions were reported

concerning the taking on of the role of change agent, not much ambition was reported concerning the role

of employee champion.

In the third study (Chapter three), the implementation process of HRM was examined from the

perspective of the ‘signalling function’ of HRM (Sonnenberg, 2006). This means that HRM policy and

instruments are viewed as messages from employer to employees about what behaviour is expected and

rewarded (Guzzo and Noonan, 1994). These messages lead to consistent interpretations at the employee

level when there is consensus between ‘message senders’ – i.e. management and HRM-staff – concerning

the purpose and features of HRM (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Fiske & Taylor, 1991). The tendency to see

Chapter 6

82

the added value of changes, like the new HRM policy, can be assumed to depend on people’s personality,

more specifically, their locus of control (Rotter, 1966). We therefore expected that the perception that

policymakers and executives have of their ability to exercise control over the environment (internal locus

of control) and their judgement concerning the added value of the new HRM would be positively related.

Furthermore, we expected that this relationship would be weaker in situations where consensus about

goals and features of HRM exists between HR-policymakers. The research question in the third study is

‘Can the degree to which HR policymakers and executives perceive added value of HRM be explained by

their locus of control and by the consensus between them about the goals of HRM?’ Both qualitative and

quantitative methods were used to examine this research question. Through document analysis and the

interviewing of a board member, the HRM manager, two unit managers and their HRM officers from

each of five VET Colleges (N=30, see also study 1), we identified two schools with consensus and three

with less consensus. The same respondents were asked to fill in a questionnaire in which locus of control

and perceived added value was measured. The expected positive relationship between locus of control

and perceived added value was partly confirmed, and this relationship appeared to be moderated by the

consensus between management and HRM staff. More specifically, in the three schools with less

consensus between message senders on the goals and features of HRM, the locus of control of the

respondents appeared to have a positive impact on their perceived added value of HRM, whereas this

relationship was not found in the two schools where consensus existed.

Part two: Studies on individual and organisational factors explaining teachers’ professional development

The studies in the second part concentrate on one of the aims of HRM: promoting the continuous

professional development of teachers (Moerkamp, Vedder & Vos, 2005). Given the nature of reflection

and feedback asking, we focused on individual variables in explaining these behaviours, while controlling

for situational factors (Chapter four). In explaining innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, we

focused on situational factors while controlling for individual factors (Chapter 5).

In the first study of Part two, we examined how learning by reflection and feedback asking can be

explained. Because one runs the risk of being confronted with information that can affect the self-image

(Argyris1991; Schön, 1983; Van Woerkom, 2004), we expected that the higher the self-efficacy of

teachers – which refers to the belief in one’s capability to mobilize the resources needed to meet

situational demands (Bandura, 1977) – and the higher one’s learning goal orientation – which refers to

the motivation to improve one’s competencies through learning and training new skills, as well as through

learning to complete new and more complex tasks (Dweck & Legett, 1988) - the more reflection and

feedback asking would be reported. Furthermore, a mediating effect of learning goal orientation in the

relationship between self-efficacy and reflection and feedback asking was expected. Given the inherent

‘risky’ nature of reflection and feedback asking, we expected a positive relationship between

transformational leadership – i.e. leadership style that is characterized by initiating and identifying a

vision for the school’s future, providing individual support, and providing intellectual stimulation


83

(Geijsel, Sleegers, Leithwood, Jantzi, 2003; Leithwood & Sleegers, 2006) - and reflection and feedback

asking. Finally, it was expected that learning goal orientation moderated this relationship.

To answer the central question in the fourth study - ‘Can professional development of teachers, in

terms of reflection and feedback asking, be explained by self-efficacy, learning goal orientation and

transformational leadership?’ – a survey study was conducted in a VET College (456 teachers). The

results showed positive relationships between self-efficacy and learning goal orientation, on the one hand,

and reflection and feedback asking, on the other hand. In addition, learning goal orientation mediated the

relationship between self-efficacy and reflection and feedback asking. Furthermore, the expected positive

relationship between transformational leadership and feedback asking was found, whereas reflection

appeared not to be affected by transformational leadership. Finally, the learning goal orientation appeared

to moderate the effects of transformational leadership on both reflection and feedback asking. When the

learning goal orientation was low, transformational leadership showed a stronger effect on reflection and

feedback asking.

Our last study concerns the explanation of innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing of teachers.

In this study, the perceived task and goal interdependence within teams of teachers were taken into

account as independent variables. Task interdependence refers to the degree to which the task

performance of one team member depends on the task performance of the other (Brass, 1981; Kiggundu,

1981; Van der Vegt, Emans & Van de Vliert, 1998). Goal interdependence refers to the degree to which

team members believe that their personal benefits and costs depend on the successful goal attainment of

other members (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978; Deutsch, 1980; Van der Vegt, Emans & Van de Vliert, 1998).

We expected that the more task and goal interdependence teachers perceived, the more innovative

behaviour and knowledge sharing they would report. Furthermore, we expected goal interdependence to

moderate the relationship between task interdependence, on the one hand, and innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, on the other hand.

These hypotheses were tested in the same way as in the preceding study. A survey study in which a

questionnaire was filled in by 456 teachers from a VET College was used to answer the research question

in our fifth study: ‘Can the professional development of teachers, in terms of innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, be explained by perceived task and goal interdependence?’ As expected, positive

relationships were found between task interdependence, on the one hand, and innovative behaviour and

knowledge sharing, on the other. The expected positive relationship between goal interdependence and

knowledge sharing was also found, whereas innovative behaviour appeared not to be influenced by goal

interdependence. In addition, goal interdependence moderated the effects of task interdependence on

innovative behaviour. In other words, when goal interdependence is high, task interdependence stimulates

innovative behaviour.

Chapter 6

84

Main conclusions


The results of the first study on factors that promote and impede the implementation of HRM in schools

showed that most policymakers and executives of HRM policy in VET Colleges experience a gap

between policy and practice and that ‘soft’ factors, such as willingness to change, are more important in

explaining this gap than ‘hard’ factors, such as time and money. The intentions, written down in policy

plans, are not sufficiently put into effect mainly because the ‘users’ of the policy (teachers) do not

recognize the added value of the policy. An explanation for the gap between policy and practice could lie

in the nature of school organisations. Schools have often been described as what Minzberg (1983) calls

professional bureaucracies (see for example Hooge, 1998; Boerman, 1998), where managers and

employees operate in separate ‘zones’ and have different needs. Teachers operate in the professional

zone, their classroom, carrying the responsibility for pupils’ learning processes and performances.

Teachers are dealing with uncertainty and need the opportunity to improvise (Hanson, 1996). Managers

operate in their own zone, in which they are responsible for personnel policy, as well as for public

relations, finances, etc. They are focused on controlling processes and in fact diminishing uncertainty.

Because the members in both zones need autonomy and space to function well, the link between the

zones is often weak. By fulfilling various roles – administrative expert, strategic partner, change agent

and employee champion, as described by Ulrich (1998) - school management and the HRM department

can strengthen the link between the different zones. The fact that not all roles are satisfactorily fulfilled

within the VET Colleges shows that the function of HRM policy and practices within the organizations

has not yet fully crystallized. A critical first step in this process would be to try to reach consensus

between HRM and management concerning the goals and features of HRM.

Overall, all three studies stress the importance of communication. The first study does so by

emphasising the importance of a match in expectations about HRM between management, the HRM

department, and the teachers. The second study shows a discrepancy between actual and desired

fulfilment of HRM roles, which implies that communication between different actors is needed

concerning the importance of the roles and who is responsible for what role. The third study offers an

indication of the importance of consensus between management and HRM about the goals and features of

HRM. It suggests that consensus can be achieved by communicating with each other. Both HRM and

management within schools can be seen as (or can be held) responsible for increasing the communication

within their schools in order to improve the process of professional development of teachers


85

Part two: Studies on individual and organisational factors explaining teachers’ professional development

Table 1 shows all the effects that were found in studies one and two of this Second part of the

dissertation.

Table 1. Summary of found relationships between independent and dependent variables (studies one and

two, Part Two).

Chapter four

Chapter five

Dependent variables

Independent variables

Reflection

(H)* E

Asking

Feedback

H E

Innovative

Behaviour

H E

Knowledge

Sharing

H E

Self-efficacy (SE)

(+)

+

(+)

+

+

Learning goal orientation (LGO)

Mediating function of LGO

(+)

(+)

+

+

(+)

(+)

+

+

+

+

Stu

dy

1, fo

cus

on

in

div

idu

al

fact

ors

Transformational leadership (TL)

Interaction TL * LGO

(+)

(-)

-

(+)

(-)

+

-


+

+

(+)

+

(+)

+

Goal interdependence (GI)

+

+

(+)

(+)

+

Stu

dy

2, fo

cus

on

org

anis

atio

nal

fac

tors

Interaction TI * GI

(+)

+

(+)

*(H)=hypothesized relationships, E=empirically found relationships.

The first conclusion refers to the proven importance of teachers’ learning goal orientation in explaining

their professional development. The first study of this second part shows that a higher level of self-

efficacy in teachers is positively related to a higher learning goal orientation, which, in turn, is positively

related to more reflection and feedback asking. Furthermore, the second study shows that learning goal

orientation also plays an important role in explaining innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing. It can

be concluded that one of the key factors in explaining teachers’ professional development is their

willingness to improve their capabilities by learning and training new skills, as well as by learning to

complete new and more complex tasks. The fact that learning goal orientation moderates the relationships

between transformational leadership, on the one hand, and reflection and feedback asking, on the other

hand, emphasizes the importance of this individual variable. In other words, the results show that the

Chapter 6

86

effects of transformational leadership on reflection and feedback asking are strongest for those teachers

with a relatively low learning goal orientation. This leads us to a second conclusion concerning the

interplay between individual and situational factors. Apparently, teachers tend to react differently to

situational aspects, depending on their personal characteristics.

A third conclusion refers to the proven importance of task and goal interdependence in explaining

teachers’ professional development. The first study shows that task and goal interdependence can be

considered important conditions for reflection and feedback asking. The second study shows that

perceived task and goal interdependence, by themselves and in combination with each other, play an

important role in predicting innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing. More specially, knowledge

sharing is affected by task and goal interdependence in a parallel way, but innovative behaviour appears

to be elicited more effectively with a combination of perceived high task and high goal interdependence.

Finally, the results show that the four professional development activities differ in their nature.

Transformational leadership does have a main effect on feedback asking, but not on reflection. Individual

characteristics are more important than situational factors in explaining innovative behaviour, whereas the

opposite is true for knowledge sharing. Apparently, the relative importance of individual and situational

factors is different for different types of behaviour. In fact, the division of the four professional

development activities turns out to be different than expected. This is confirmed by the correlations

between the four forms of professional development (see Table 2 in the Appendix). All four learning

activities are related to each other, in particular feedback asking and knowledge sharing. Innovative

behaviour seems to be related more to reflection than to knowledge sharing or feedback asking. Further

research should focus more on the clustering and the mechanism of teachers’ learning activities

Limitations and strengths

The focus in this study is on teachers in Colleges for Vocational Education and Training (VET). These

teachers were chosen because of the large educational changes that are going on in their schools and

because research on teacher learning has not yet often been conducted in this sector. Moreover, the

decentralization processes and the development of schools towards autonomous professional

organizations started earlier here than in the other sectors. For this reason, the outcomes of our studies are

valuable for schools in other sectors. And although the organizational and individual processes have been

studied in many business sections, they have not been explored extensively in the school sectors. In this

sense, our project extends past research into a new contextual domain.

The first three studies on HRM as a tool for stimulating teachers’ professional development

contribute to the understanding of why the process of implementing HRM is complex and slow, and

provide some suggestions concerning how this process can be fostered. This knowledge is valuable given

the scarcity of academic research done in this field of interest. Demonstrating the link between HRM

theories and teachers’ professional development is an important contribution to this field of educational

research. However, the mix of qualitative and quantitative methods that we used in these studies has both

strengths and weaknesses.


87

Concerning the first and third study of the First Part, interviews are a suitable way to explore how

people experience situations, but the interpretation of what people say is always a subjective process.

Nevertheless, the fact that the first six interviews (out of 30) were done by the two researchers together,

and the fact that the two researchers clustered the answers separately, increased the reliability.

Furthermore, given the number of respondents, the results of study one can not be generalized to all VET

Colleges, let alone to all schools in different sectors. Nevertheless, we still believe that the results can

stimulate management and HRM staff from other VET Colleges or schools in other sectors to reflect on

their own HRM processes. Another limitation of the third study is the fact that a single item was used to

measure the dependent variable ‘added value’. A more reliable picture would have arisen if more items

had been included for this variable.

The first and second studies of the Second Part of this dissertation contribute to the understanding of

how professional development of teachers can be explained. The main contribution lies in the fact that

both individual and organizational factors, and the way they interact, are taken into account. Furthermore,

we contribute to existing educational research by introducing organisational psychological theories and

concepts such as task and goal interdependence. The same research method was used in both studies, so

the limitations are the same for the most part. The first limitation concerns the cross-sectional designs,

which means that the relationships found here rely on prior research and theoretical arguments, and

cannot be deduced directly from the results. Second, the use of self-reports to measure our variables

means that respondents might have had the tendency to give consistent answers that, in turn, lead to

higher correlations between variables (the so-called common method bias). Third, we have not been able

to examine the non-response and do not know why 185 teachers started filling in the questionnaire but

quit half way. These unknown facts may have distorted the results.

Implications of the study

Implications for (further) research

An examination of how teachers experience the different aspects of HRM policy and practices would be

helpful for gaining additional insight into the implementation process of HRM in schools. Furthermore, it

would be interesting to expand the research by examining the effects of HRM on aspects such as the

professional development of teachers or their commitment to a school, as well as on school outcomes

such as attainment or number of drop-out students. Much can be learned from research on the so-called

‘HRM-performance link’ (see Boselie, Dietz & Boon, 2005; Paauwe, 2007, for an overview), which

studies the effects of HRM practices on business performance via employee behaviour.

Our study has provided evidence for the fact that interdependence between teachers plays an

important role in their professional development in terms of learning at the workplace. A suggestion for

future research is to examine the ways in which this interdependence can be increased. Moreover, a

search for other ways to stimulate the interaction between teachers could be another interesting avenue.

Some potentially stimulating activities might be attending seminars together as a team, having meetings

Chapter 6

88

where a problem or new insights acquired by practice are presented by a different teacher each time, or

attending a course together.

The items we used to measure task and goal interdependence only refer to individual teacher

perceptions. It would therefore be interesting to use other measurements to determine the degree of

interdependence. For example, researchers could analyse task descriptions and observe the teams while

executing their tasks; teams with high interdependence could thereby be distinguished from teams with

low interdependence. A multi-level-analysis, in which different slopes and intercepts within teams could

be examined, would make it possible to distinguish between teacher-to-teacher differences and between-

team differences in explaining professional development.

Finally, the different perspectives we used in our research could be integrated in a longitudinal

design, in which the factors of the different levels (individual, team, and HRM) could be taken into

account to examine how teachers develop themselves in the course of time and the kind of interventions

that promote development.

Practical implications

For HRM to be implemented effectively, it is important that management and HRM have the same views

on the goals and features of HRM. Communication about and matching of expectancies can foster

consensus between these ‘message senders’, which, in turn, leads to giving a consistent message to the

teachers about what attitudes and behaviours are expected and rewarded. Furthermore, a connection to the

(development) needs and concerns of teachers is needed to put the policy into practice. To achieve this,

communication between management, HRM, and teachers about the goals of HRM is also needed. Such

communication opportunities could be facilitated by the HRM department.

Given the central role of learning goal orientation in teachers’ learning, we recommend that the

working situation of teachers be shaped in such a way that it promotes their learning goal orientation. The

importance of teachers’ learning needs to be expressed explicitly - for example, by making sure that

teachers have and take enough time to develop themselves and to learn from each other, by clearly

appreciating new ideas and new solutions to problems, by assuring teachers that they can attend a course

or training if they find they need it, and by adding learning as a performance evaluation criterion. These

are ways in which the learning goal orientation of teachers can be increased.

The importance of transformational leadership in teachers’ learning urges us to recommend that

school leaders attend to the development of their own ‘transformational competencies’ by, for example,

initiating and identifying a vision for the school’s future, providing individual support, and providing

intellectual stimulation. Management development trajectories should place emphasis on these

competencies. In addition, leaders should be aware of the differences in self-efficacy and learning goal

orientation between teachers. In stimulating learning from practice and learning in interaction with

colleagues, leaders should focus on those teachers who are most hesitant to engage in such activities – i.e.

teachers with lower self-efficacy and learning goal orientation. Perhaps colleagues with higher self-

efficacy and learning goal orientations could even actively encourage these teachers.


89

Given the positive relationship between task and goal interdependence and teachers’ learning, a

search for ways in which teachers can become more dependent on each other in fulfilling their tasks and

achieving their goals would be fruitful. Task interdependence can be promoted by redesigning the team

task in such a way that teachers are no longer solely responsible for their own isolated educational

activity, but share responsibilities when developing and executing educational activities (e.g. a

multidisciplinary school task). Goal interdependence can be promoted by formulating clear team targets.

To prevent ‘double’ or confusing messages to teachers of what is expected from them, the goal

interdependence, i.e., a reward system for teachers expressed monetarily, such as in salary increase or a

bonus, or immaterially, such as being given the opportunity to attend a course or participate in a

challenging project, should match the degree of task interdependence between teachers.

Finally, we hope that the outcomes of our studies can serve as practical guidelines for school leaders

in their development of quality support programs within their schools. We hope also that the outcomes of

our studies will offer teachers tools for shaping their own professional development in interaction during

work.

References

91

REFERENCES

Abdel-Haqq, I. (1992). Professional development schools: An annotated bibliography of selected ERIC

resources. Journal of Teacher Education, 43, 42-46.

Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regressions: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury

Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Aken, T. van, Bruining, T., Jurgens, B., & Sanders, A. (2003). Knowledge about brainwork: Return on

thinking revisited. (Kennis maken met denkwerk: Return on thinking revisited.) Utrecht: Lemma.

Alejandro, J. (2001). Continuing Professional Education in Today's Changing World: Understanding

professionals’ reasons for participating in continuing professional education. Adult Learning, 12,

15-16.

Allan, B.C., Sargent, L.D., & Bradley, L.M. (2003). Differential effects of task and reward

interdependence on perceived helping behaviour, effort and group performance. Small Group

Research, 34, 716-740.

Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K.-S. (1998). Interdependence and controversy in group decision making:

Antecedents to effective self-managing teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, 74, 33–52.

Amabile, T.M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what

you do. California Management Review, 40, 40-58.

Ames, C. (1992). Achievement goals, motivational climate and motivational processes. In: G.C. Roberts

(Ed.), Motivation in sport and exercise (p. 161-176). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Books.

Annett, J. (1969). Feedback and Human Behavior. Penguin Books, Baltimore.

Antil, L.R., Jenkins, J.R., Wayne, S.K., & Vadasy, P.F. (1998). Cooperative learning: Prevalence,

conceptualizations, and the relation between research and practice. American Educational Research

Journal, 35, 419-454.

Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Harvard Business Review. 69, 99-110.

Argyris, C. (1999). On organizational learning. Oxford: Blackwell Business.

Ashford, S.J., Blatt, R., & VandeWalle, D. (2003). Reflections of the looking glass: A review of research

on feedback-seeking behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 29, 773-799.

Avolio, B.J., Burns, J.M., & Jung, D.I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and

transactional leadership using the multi factor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational

and Organisational Psychology, 72, 441-462.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review,

84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1995). Exercises of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In A. Bandura

(Ed.), Self-Efficacy in Changing Societies (pp. 1-45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Barnett, K., McCormick, J., & Conners, R. (1999). Transformational leadership in schools. Panacea,

placebo or problem? Journal of Educational Administration, 39, 24-46.

References

92

Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological

research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Baron, J.N. & Kreps, D.M. (1999). Strategic Human Resources. Framework for General Managers. New

York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: The Free Press.

Beijaard, D. (2002). Changes in research on teacher learning (Veranderingen in het onderzoek naar leren

van docenten). Pedagogische Studiën, 79, 243-250.

Berg, R. van den (1993). The concerns-based adoption model in the Netherlands, Flanders and the United

Kingdom: State of the art and perspective studies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 19, 51-63.

Berg, R. van der, Vandenberghe, R., & Sleegers, P. (1999). School Effectiveness and School

Improvement, 10, 321-351.

Berger, J., & Klein, T. (2002). Monitor Integrated personnel policy in the VET sector, First assessment

(2002) (Monitor integraal personeelsbeleid in de Bve-sector, Eerste meting (2002), Eindrapport).

Leiden: Research voor Beleid.

Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting

educational change. Vol. VII: Factors affecting implementation and continuation (Report No. R-

1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.

Bettencourt, L.A. (2004). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors: the direct and

moderating influence of goal orientation. Journal of Retailing, 80, 165-180.

Bickel, R. (2007). Multilevel analysis for applied research. It’s just regression! New York, London: The

Guilford Press.

Biemans, P.J. (2001). Professionalising HRM. An empirical study in twenty organisations.

(Professionalisering van de personeelsfunctie. Een empirisch onderzoek bij twintig organisaties.

Delft: Eburon.

Biemans, P.J. (2008). Changes in the profile of HRM in practice. (Veranderingen in het beroepsprofiel

van HRM in de praktijk). Tijdschrift voor HRM, 11, 5-31.

Blase, J., & Blase, J. (2000). Effective instructional leadership: Teachers’ perspectives on how principals

promote teaching and learning in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 38, 130–141.

Boerman, P.L.J. (1998). Decentralised decision making processes and organizational effectiveness.

(Decentrale besluitvorming en organisatie effectiviteit). Dissertation. University of Amsterdam.

Bolt van der, L., Studulski, F., Vegt van der A.L., & Bontje, D. (2006). Teacher involvement in

educational innovations – Literature review. (De betrokkenheid van de leraar bij

onderwijsinnovaties - Een verkenning op basis van literatuur.). Utrecht: Sardes.

Boonstra, J.J. (2000). Walking on the water. (Lopen over water). Oration. Amsterdam University.

Boselie, P., Dietz, G., & Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and contradictions in HRM and performance

research. Human Resource Management Journal, 15, 67-94.

References

93

Bowen, D.E., & C. Ostroff (2004). Understanding HRM-firm performance linkages: The role of

‘Strenght’ of the HRM system. Academy of Management Review, 29, 203-221.

Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2003). Strategy and Human Resource Management. Bas-ingstoke: Palgrave

MacMillan.

Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., & Hammerness, K. (2005). Theories of learning and their role in

teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world

(pp. 40-87). San Francisco Ca: Jossey-Bass.

Brass, D.J. (1981). Structural relationships, job characteristics and worker satisfaction and performance.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 331-348.

Bruining, T. (2007). Didactic ergonomics for learning communities. (Didactische ergonomie voor

leergemeenschappen), Paper for Velon congress 2007.

Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.

Button, S.B., Mathieu, J.E., & Zajac, D.M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research: A

conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67,

26-48.

Buyens, D. & A. de Vos (2001). Perceptions of the value of the HR function. Human Resources

Management Journal II, 3, pp 70-89.

Callan, V.J., Terry, D.J., & Schweitzer, R. (1994). Coping resources, coping strategies and adjustment to

organizational change: Direct of buffering effects? Work and Stress, 8, 372-383.

Caluwé, L. de, & Vermaak, H. (2002). Learning to change. Handbook for the change agent. (Leren

veranderen. Een handboek voor de veranderkundige.) Deventer: Kluwer.

Campion, M.A., Medsker, G.J., & Higgs, A.C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and

effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823-

850.

Cattell, R.B. (1950). Personality: a systematic, theoretical, and factual study. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Center for American Progress (2005). Better teachers, better schools. In: Progressive Priorities: an action

agenda for America. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.

Chan, D.W. (2008). General, collective and domain specific teacher self efficacy among Chinese

prospective and in-service teachers in Hon Kong. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1057-1069.

Cheng, Y.C. (1997). The Transformational Leadership for School Effectiveness and Development in the

New Century. Paper presented at the International Symposium of Quality Training of Primary and

Secondary Principals toward the 21st Century (Nanjing, China, January 20-24, 1997).

Clarke, D.J., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching

and Teacher Education, 18, 947-967.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in

communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-305.

Commissie van Es (1991). The future of the teacher profession. (Het gedroomde koninkrijk. De toekomst

van het leraarschap). Culemborg: EPN.

References

94

Cook, L. (1991). Cooperative learning: A successful college teaching strategy. Innovative Higher

Education, 16, 27-38.

Coonen, H.W.A.M. (2005). The teachers in the knowledge society. Essay on the new professional identity

of the teacher, innovation of the teacher education and the management of educational innovations.

(De leraar in de kennissamenleving. Beschouwing over een nieuwe professionele identiteit van de

leraar, de innovatie van de lerarenopleiding en het management van onderwijsvernieuwing).

Oration, Open University Heerlen.

Cornet, M., Huizinga, F., Minne, B., & Webbink, D. (2006). Knowledge management. (Kansrijk

kennisbeleid). Den Haag: Cultureel Planbureau.

Cummings, T.G. (1978). Self-regulating work groups: A socio-technical analysis. Academy of

Management Review, 3, 625–634.

Dam, R. van (2006). Factors contributing to teachers’ participation in school development activities

(Factoren die bijdrage aan de participatie van leerkrachten in het school ontwikkelingsproces).

Dissertation, Tilburg University.

Debats, P. (2004). Make it concrete! Questions and answers about competence-based education. (Word

nou eens concreet! Een reis in 20 vragen door competenties en leren.) Den Bosch: KPC Groep.

Delery, J.E., & Doty, D.H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resources management: tests

of universalistic, contingency, and configural performance predictions. Academy of Management

Journal, 39, 619-654.

Delery, J.E. (1998). Issues of fit in strategic human resources management: Implications for research.

Human Resource Management Review, 8, 289-309.

Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully implemented?

Review of Educational Research, 72, 433-479.

Deutsch M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,

Deutsch M. (1980). Fifty years of conflict. In: L. Festinger (Ed.), Retrospections on social psychology

(pp. 46-77). New York: Oxford University Press.

Drucker, P.F. (1993). The post-capitalist society. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.

Dutch Education Council (2006). Appreciation for the teacher profession. The Hague: Dutch Education

Council (Onderwijsraad (2006). Waardering voor het leraarschap. Den Haag: Onderwijsraad).

Dutch Education Inspectorate (2005). Education Report 2004 (Onderwijsverslag 2004), Utrecht:

Education Inspectorate.

Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (2005). Working in Education. The Hague: Dutch

Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (2007). Working in Education. The Hague: Dutch

Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (2008). Action programme teachers in The

Netherlands. (Actieplan Leerkracht van Nederland). The Hague: Dutch Ministry of Education,

Culture and Science.

References

95

Dweck, C.S., & Legett, E.L. (1988). A social cognitive approach tot motivation and personality.

Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.

Dweck, C.S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia,

PA: Psychology Press.

Eekelen, I.M. van (2005). Teachers’ will and way to learn, Dissertation, University Maastricht.

Elliot, A.J. (1997). Integrating the “classic” and “contemporary” approaches to achievement motivation:

A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Advances in Motivation

and Achievement, 10, 143–179.

Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer Press.

Eraut, M., Alderton, J., Cole, G., & Senker, P. (1998). Development of knowledge and skills in

employment. Brighton: University of Sussex.

European Commission (2005). Key Data on Education in Europe 2005. Luxembourg: Office for Official

Publications of the European Communities.

Eysenck, H.J. (1952). The scientific study of personality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Fiske, S.T., & Taylor, S. (1991). Social cognition (second edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Friedman, V.J. (1997). Making Schools Safe for Uncertainty: Teams, Teaching, and School Reform,

Teachers College record, 99, 335-370.

Friedman, I.A., & Kass, E. (2002). Teacher self-efficacy: a classroom-organization conceptualization.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 675-686.

Fullan, M.G. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership & sustainability. System thinkers in action. California: Corwin Press.

Garmston, R., Linder, C., & Whitaker, J. (1993). Reflections on cognitive coaching. Educational

Leadership, 51, 57-61.

Geijsel, F., Sleegers, P., Berg, R. van den, & Kelchtermans, G. (2001). Conditions fostering the

implementation of large scale innovation programs in schools: teachers perspectives. Educational

Administration Quarterly, 37, 130-166.

Geijsel, F., Sleegers, P., Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2003). Transformational leadership effects on

teacher commitment and effort toward school reform. Journal of Educational Administration, 41,

228-256.

Gerhart, B. (2007). Horizontal and vertical fit in Human Resources Systems. In: Ostroff, C. & Judge,

T.A. (Eds.), Perspectives on organisational fit. New York: Lawrence Eribaum.

Gerrichhauzen, J.T.G. (2007). Teachers that learn and investigate. Accelerate professional developement

by HRM, e-learning and workplace learning.(De lerende en onderzoekende docent.

Professionalisering versnellen met HRM-beleid, afstandsonderwijs en werkplekleren.) Oration,

Open University, Heerlen.

Gist, M.E., & Mitchell, T.R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of it determinants and

malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17, 183-211.

Goldberg, L.R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26-34.

References

96

Gong, Y. & Fan, J. (2006). Longitudinal Examination of the Role of Goal Orientation in Cross-Cultural

Adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 176-184.

Gray, P. (1999). Psychology. Third edition. New York: Worth Publishers, Incl.

Griffin, D., Shaw, P., & R. Stacey (1998). Speaking of complexity in management theory and practice.

Organization, 5, 315-339.

Gruenert, S. (2005). Correlations between collaborative school cultures with student achievement. NASSP

Bulletin, 89, 43-55.

Guskey, T.R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15,

5–12.

Guskey, T.R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of

instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 63–69.

Guzzo, R.A., & Noonan, K.A. (1994). Human resources practices as communications and the

psychological contract. Human Resources Management, 33, 447-462.

Hall, G.E. & Hord, S.M. (1987). Change in schools. Facilitating the process. Albany: State University of

New York Press.

Hanson, E.M. (1996). Educational administration and organizational behaviour. Boston: Allyn and

Bacon.

Harackiewicz, J.M., Barron, K.E., Pintrich, P.R., Elliot, A.J., & Trash, T.M. (2002). Revision of

achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 636-

644.

Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2000). The three dimensions of reform. Educational Leadership, 57, 30-34.

Hooge, E.H. (1998). Room for policy (Ruimte voor beleid). Dissertation. University of Amsterdam.

Hoogh, A.H.B. de, Hartog, D.N. den, & Koopman, P.L. (2004). De ontwikkeling van de CLIO, een

instrument voor het meten van leiderschap in organisaties. Gedrag & Organisatie, 17, 354-382.

Hopkins, D. (2001). School improvement for real. London/New York: Routledge Falmer.

Houle, C.O. (1980). Continuing learning in the professions. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

House, R.J. (1996). A path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy and a reformulated theory.

Leadership quarterly: an international journal of political, social and behavioural science, 7, 323 -

352.

Hoyle, E. (1989). The primary school teacher as professional. In: M. Galton & E. Blyth (Eds). Handbook

of primary education in Europe (pp. 415-432). Londen: David Fulton (in association with the

Council of Europe).

Imants, J. (2001). Professionalisation and innovation (Professionalisering en innovatie). In: B. Creemers

& A. Houtveen (Reds.), Educational innovation. (Onderwijsinnovatie.) Onderwijskundig Lexicon

editie III. Alphen a/d Rijn: Samsom.

Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behaviour.

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 287-302.

References

97

Janssen, O. (2003). Innovative behaviour and job involvement at the price of conflict and less satisfactory

relations with co-workers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 347-364.

Janssen, O, Vliert, E. van de, & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and group

innovation: a special issue introduction, Journal of organizational behaviour, 25, 129-145.

Janssen, O., & Yperen, N.W. van (2004). Employees' Goal Orientations, the Quality of Leader-Member

Exchange, and the Outcomes of Job Performance and Job Satisfaction, Academy of Management

Journal, 47, 368-384.

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN:

Interaction Book Company.

Jong, J.P.J. de, & Hartog, D.N. den (2005). Determinants of innovative behaviour: research on knowledge

workers in SME. (Determinanten van innovatief gedrag: een onderzoek onder kenniswerkers in het

MKB). Gedrag & Organisatie, 18, 235-259.

Jong, S.B. de, Vegt, G.S. van der, & Molleman, E. (2007). The Relationships Among Asymmetry in Task

Dependence, Perceived Helping Behavior, and Trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1625–

1637.

Joyce, B., Calhoun, E., Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change.

School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 2, 336.

Judge, T.A., Thoresen, C.J., Pucik, V., & Welbourne, T.M. (1999). Managerial coping with

organisational change: a dispositional perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 107-122.

Kanter. R. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for

innovation in organizations. In B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummings (Eds,), Research in Organizational

Behavior, 10, 169-211. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Karau, S.J., & Williams, K.D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681-706.

Karsten, S. (1999). Neo-liberal education reform in the Netherlands. Comparative Education, 35, 303-

317.

Kelchtermans, G. (1996). Teacher vulnerability: Understanding its moral and political roots. Cambridge

Journal of Education, 26, 307-324.

Kelley, H.H., & Thibaut, A. (1978). Interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

Kessels, J.W.M. (2001). Tempting into knowledge production (Verleiden tot kennisproductiviteit).

Oration. Enschede: Universiteit Twente.

Kiggundu, M.N. (1981). Task interdependence and the Theory of Job Design. Academy of Management

review, 6, 499-508.

Kiggundu, M.N. (1983). Task interdependence and job design: Test of a theory. Organisational

behaviour and human performance, 31, 145-172.

Knight, P. (2002). A systemic approach to professional development: learning as practice. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 18, 229-241.

References

98

Kobasa, S.C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1-11.

Kohler, F.W., & Ezell, H.K. (1999). Promoting changes in teachers’ conducts of student pair activities:

An examination of reciprocal peer coaching. Journal of Special Education, 33, 154-166.

Kohnstamm, G.A., Mervielde, I., Besevegis, I., & Halverson, C.F. (1995). Tracing Big Five in parents’

free descriptions of their children. European Journal of Personality, 9, 283-304.

Korthagen, F.A.J. (2001). Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education.

Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Koster, F., Stokman, F., Hodson, R., & Sanders K. (2007). Solidarity through networks: the effect of task

and informal interdependence on cooperation within teams. Employee Relations, 29, 117-137.

Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press

Krogt, Th. van der, & Vroom, C.W. (1988). Organisation is motion. (Organisatie is beweging).

Culemborg: Lemma.

Kuiper Rinsema, M.M.N. (2007). Professional development of teachers in secondary education

(Professionalisering van docenten in het VMBO), Masterthesis Twente University.

Kwakman, K. (1999). Teacher learning during the career. Studies on professionality on the job in

secondary education (Leren van docenten tijdens de beroepsloopbaan. Studies naar

professionaliteit op de werkplek in het voortgezet onderwijs). Dissertation. Katholic University

Nijmegen).

Kwakman, K. (2003). Factor’s affecting teachers’ participation in professional learning activities.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 149-170.

Lam, Y.L.J. (2002). Defining the effects of transformational leadership on organisational learning: a

cross-cultural comparison. School Leadership & Management, 22, 439-452.

Lau, C.M., & Woodman, R.W. (1995). Understanding organizational change: A schematic perspective.

Academy of Management Journal, 38, 537-554.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Lawrence, P.R. (1958). The changing organizational behavior patterns: A case study of

decentralization. Boston: Harvard Business School.

Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times. Buckingham,

UK: Open University Press.

Leithwood, K., & Sleegers, P. (2006). Transformational school leadership: Introduction. School

effectiveness and school improvement, 17, 143-144.

Linden, R. van der, Teurlings C., & Vermeulen, M. (2005). The school as a professional organisation

Outcomes of 5 years of research (1998 – 2000) (De school als professionele organisatie.

Opbrengsten van 5 jaar Kortlopend Onderzoek (1998-2002), Antwerpen-Apeldoorn: Garant.

Lipshitz, R., & Popper, M. (2000). Organisational learning in a hospital. Journal of Applied Behavioral

Science, 36, 345-361.

References

99

London, M., & Sessa, V. (2007). How groups learn continuously. Human Resource Management, 46,

651-669.

Lovitt, C., & Clarke, D. M. (1988). Mathematics curriculum and teaching program. Carlton, Victoria:

Curriculum Corporation.

Lubberman, J., & T. Klein. (2003). An in-depth study on the implementation of integrated Personnel

Policy within schools for primary and secondary education. (De diepte in met Integraal

Personeelsbeleid. Een verdiepende studie naar de invoering van IPB in het PO en VO). Leiden:

Research voor Beleid.

Machlup, F. (1980). Knowledge: its Creation, Distribution, and Economic Significance, Vol. I:

Knowledge and Knowledge Production. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Marks, H.M., Louis, K.S., & Printy, S.M. (2000). The capacity for organizational learning: Implications

for pedagogical quality and student achievement. In K. Leithwood & K. S. Louis (Eds.),

Understanding schools as intelligent systems. Greenwood, CT: JAI.

Marsick, V.J., & Watkins, K.E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 89, 25-34.

McLaughlin, M.W. (1997). Rebuilding teacher professionalism in the United States. In: A. Hargreaves &

R. Evans (Eds.), Beyond educational reform. Bringing teachers back in (p. 77-93). Buckingham:

Open University Press.

Meesters, M. (2003). Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Country background report

for the Netherlands. Haarlem: BMO.

Meijrink, J. (2007). Individual teacher learning in a context of collaboration in teams. Dissertation.

Leiden: Iclon.

Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and casestudy applications in education. San Fransisco:

Jossey-Bass Publications.

Mezirow, J. and associates. (1990). Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood A Guide to Transformative

and Emancipatory Learning, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Miller, V.D., J.R. Johnson & J. Grau (1994). Antecedents to willingness to participate

in a planned organizational change. Journal of applied communication research,

22, 59-80.

Millward, L. (2005). Understanding occupational & organizational psychology. Londen: Sage

Publications.

Mintzberg, H. (1993). Structures in fives: designing effective organizations. London: Prentice Hall.

Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning conceptualisation of personality. Psychological

Review, 80, 252-283.

Moerkamp, T.,Vedder, J., & Vos, J. (red.) (2005). Teachers Learn (Leraren leren), The Hague: Board of

the Educational Labour Market (Sectorbestuur Onderwijsarbeidsmarkt).

Nehles, A., Riemsdijk, M. van, Kok, I., & Looise, J.K. (2006). Implementing HRM on the Floor. A

challenage for line managers. Tijdschrift voor HRM, 9, 75-94.

References

100

Nelson, A., Cooper, C.L., & Jackson, P.R. (1995). Uncertainty amidst change: The impact of

privatization on employee job satisfaction and well-being. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 68, 57-71.

Nguni, S., Sleegers, P., & Denissen, E. (2006). Transformational and transactional leadership effects on

teachers' job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior in

primary schools: The Tanzanian Case, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 145-177.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford University Press, New

York.

NWO (2007). Education research program 2008-2011. (Programma onderwijsonderzoek 2008-2011).

The Hague: Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2005). Teachers Matter. OECD

Paauwe, J. (2007). HRM and performance: in search of balance. Oration. Tilburg: Tilburg University.

Parliamentary Research Committee Educational Innovations (2008). Time for education (Tijd voor

onderwijs). The Hague: Parliamentary Research Committee Educational Innovations.

Pelkmans, T., & Smit, F. (1999). Autonomous teams: an orientation within schools for vocational

education and training. (Zelfsturende teams: een oriënterend onderzoek in scholen voor

beroepsonderwijs). Mesofocus, 19, 2-7.

Phares, E. J. (1976). Locus of control in personality. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press.

Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (1997). Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement, and locus

of control in the self-efficacy and goal-setting process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 792–

802.

Pintrich, P.R., & Schunk, D.H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Poortvliet, P.M., Janssen, O., & Yperen, N.W. van (2004). Achievement motivation within interpersonal

context: goal orientations and feedback and social exchange with managers and colleagues.

(Prestatiemotivatie in inter-persoonlijke context: de betekenis van doeloriëntaties voor feedback

zoeken en sociale uitwisseling met leidinggevenden en collega’s.) Gedrag & Organisatie, 17(6),

402-413.

Pounder, D.G. (1996). Teacher teams: Promoting teacher involvement and leadership in secondary

schools. The High School Journal, 80, 115-123.

Putnam, R.T., & Borko, H. (1997). Teacher learning: implications of new views of cognition. In: B.J.

Boddle, T.L. Good & I.F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (p

1223-1296). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Putnam, R.T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about

research on teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 29, 4-15.

Reynolds, M. (1998). Reflection and critical reflection in management learning. Management Learning,

29, 83-200.

References

101

Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In: V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on

teaching (pp. 905-947). Washington D.C: American Educational Research Association.

Rijswijk, M. van, & Oldeboom, B. (2005). Learning from experiences through reflection (Spiegel jezelf,

leren door ervaringen door reflectie). In: Educating teachers. (Leraren opleiden) VELON.

Apeldoorn: Garant.

Ritzen, H. (2004). Meaningful learning trajectories. Action research on innovative learning situations for

students of VET Colleges (Zinvolle leerwegen. Actieonderzoek naar innovatieve leeromgevingen

voor ROC-leerlingen van kwalificatienuveaus 1 en 2). Soest: Nelissen.

Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E.A., &. Kain, J.F (2005). Teachers, Schools and Academic Achievement.

Econometrica, 73, 417-458.

Robbins, S.P. (1991). Organizational Behavior. Concepts, controversies, and apllications. New Jersey:

Prentice Hall, inc.

Roelofs, W. (2005). Professional development schools and academic schools. A change from workers’

organisations in to innovation centres. (Dieptepilots opleidingsschool en academische basisschool.

Van arbeidsorganisatie tot centrum van innovatie). Den Bosch: KPC Groep.

Roelofs, W. (2007). Academic schools (Praktijkonderzoek academische basisschool). Oration, Institute

for Teacher Education, Utrecht.

Rooij, K. de (2006). A model for individual and situational determinants of individual development,

innovative behaviour and OCB.(Een model voor individuele en situationele determinanten van

individuele ontwikkeling, innovatief gedrag en OCB) Masterthesis, Tilburg University.

Ros, A. (2007). Knowledge and learning in primary education. (Kennis en leren in het basisonderwijs.)

Oration. Eindhoven: Fontys University.

Rosenholtz, S.J. (1985). Effective Schools: Interpreting the Evidence. American Journal of Education,

93, 352-388.

Rosenholtz, S.J. (1989). Teachers’ workplace: The social organisation of schools. New York: Teachers

College Press.

Ross, S.J. (1995). Strategies for enhancing teachers’ beliefs in their effectiveness: Research on a school

improvement hypothesis. Teachers College Record, 97, 227-250.

Ross, J.A., & Grey, P. (2006). Transformational Leadership and Teacher Commitment to Organizational

Values: The Mediating Effects of Collective Teacher Efficacy. School Effectiveness and School

Improvement, 17, 179-199.

Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external locus of control of

reinforcement. Washington D.C:. American Psychological Association.

Runhaar, P. (2007). Career ladders for teachers and other quality impulses in the United States.

(Carrièrepaden voor leraren en andere kwaliteitsimpulsen in de VS) ‘s-Hertogenbosch: KPC Group.

Saavedra, R., Earley, P. C., & Dyne, L. van (1993). Complex interdependence in task-performing groups.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 61–72.

References

102

Sanders, K., Dorenbosch, L., & Reuver, R. de (2008). The impact of individual and shared employee

perceptions of HRM on affective commitment: considering the climate strength. Personnel Review,

37, 412-425.

Sanders, K., & Ven, F. van der (2004). Differences in HRM visions (Verschillen in visie van HRM),

Tijdschrift voor HRM, 6, 37-56.

SBL - Stichting Beroepskwaliteit leraren (2001). Leraar: beelden van bekwaamheid (Teacher: images of

competence), CD-rom, Utrecht: SBL.

SBO- Sectorbestuur Onderwijsarbeidsmarkt (2005). Handbook integrated personnel policy secondary

education part one (Handboek IPB VO, deel 1) The Hague: SBO.

Schechter, C. (2008). Organizational learning mechanisms: The meaning, measure, and implications for

school improvement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 155 – 186.

Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford: Pergamon.

Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schneider, B., Salvaggio, A.N., & Subrirats, M. (2002). Climate strength: A new direction for climate

strength research. Journal of applied Psychology, 87, 220-229.

Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New York: Basic

Books.

Schön, D.A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schyns, B., & Von Collani, G. (2002). A new self-efficacy scale and its relation to personality constructs

and organizational variables. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 219-

241.

Scott, S.G., & Bruce, R.A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behaviour: a path model of individual

innovation at the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580-607.

Shroyer, G., Yahnke, S., Bennett, A., & Dunn, C. (2007). Simultaneous renewal through professional

development school partnerships. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 211-224.

Silins, H.C., & Mulford, W.R. (2002). Schools as learning organisations. Journal of Educational

Administration, 40, 425-446.

Sleegers, P., Bolhuis, S., & Geijsel, F. (2005). School improvement within a knowledge economy:

Fostering professional learning from a multidimensional perspective. In: N. Bascia, A. Cumming.

A. Datnow, K. Leithwood and D. Livingstone (Eds.), International Handbook of Educational

Policy (pp. 527-543). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Smylie, M.A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational and psychological

antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 1-30.

Smylie, M.A., Lazarus, V. & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1996). Instructional outcomes of school-based

participative decision-making. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 18, 181-198.

Smylie, M.A., & Hart, A.W. (1999). School leadership for teacher learning and change: A human and

social capital development perspective. In J. Murphy, and K.S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of Research

on Educational Administration, 2nd ed. (pp. 297-322). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

References

103

Snoek, M. (2004). From being changed to change – change skills as a meta competence for teachers. (Van

veranderd worden naar zelf veranderen - Veranderbekwaamheid als metacompetentie van leraren).

Oration. Amsterdam: University Amsterdam.

Sonnenberg, M. (2006). The signalling effect of HRM on Psychological Contracts of Employee.

Rotterdam: Erasmus Research Institute of Management.

Sonntag, L.M. Vermeulen, M., Wiersma, H., & Wolput, B. van (2001). Demand based continuous

development (Vraaggestuurde nascholing), The Hague: Ministry of Education, Culture and

Science.

Soodak, L., & Podell, D. (1996). Teaching efficacy: Toward the understanding of a multi-faceted

construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 401–412.

Spector, P.E. (1982). Behavior in organizations as a function of employee’s locus of control.

Psychological Bulletin, 91, 482-497.

Spector, P.E. (1988). Development of the work locus of control scale. Journal of Occupational

Psychology, 61, 335-340.

Stein, M.K., & Wang, M.C. (1988). Teacher development and school improvement: The process of

teacher change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 171-187.

Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning

communities: a review of literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 221-251.

Summers, J.J. &, Svinicki, M.D. (2007). Investigating classroom community in higher education

Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 55-67

Swanborn, P.G. (1987). Methods of social scientific research. (Methoden van sociaal wetenschappelijk

onderzoek). Meppel, Amsterdam: Boom.

Teacher Committee (2007). Advisory report teachers (Rapport LeerKracht!), The Hague: Teacher

Committee.

Teurlings, C., & Vermeulen, M. (2004). Learning in changing school organisations (Leren in

veranderende schoolorganisaties) Alphen a.d. Rijn: Kluwer.

Tichy, N.M. (1982). Managing Change strategically: The technical, political, and cultural

keys. Organizational dynamics, 11, 59-80.

Tierney, P., Farmer, S.M., & Grean, G.B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity:

the relevance of traits and relationships, Personnel Psychology, 52, 591-620.

Tjosvold, D. (1998). The cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: Accomplishments

Training and Development Agency for Schools (2006). 2006-9 Corporate Plan. London: TDA.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805.

Tuckey, M., Brewer, N., & Williamson, P. (2002). The influence of motives and goal orientation on

feedback seeking. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75. 195 - 216.

Ulrich, D. (1998). Human Resources Champions. Boston: Harvard Business School.

Ulrich, D., & W. Brockbank (2005). The HR value proposition, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

References

104

Vandenberghe, R., & G. Kelchtermans (2002). Teachers who learn to learn professionally: comments

about context (Leraren die leren om professioneel te blijven leren: kanttekeningen over context).

Pedagogische Studiën, 79, 339-351.

VandeWalle, D. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument.

Educational & Psychological Measurement, 57, 995-1015.

VandeWalle, D., Ganesan, S., Challagalla, G.H., & Brown, S.P. (2000). An integrated model of feedback

seeking behaviour: Disposition, context and cognition, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 996-

1003.

VandeWalle, D. (2001). Why wanting to look successful doesn’t always lead to success. Organizational

Dynamics, 30, 162-171.

Veen, K. van. (2003). Teachers’ emotions in a context of reforms. Dissertation. Katholic University

Nijmegen.

Vegt, G. van der, Emans, B., & Vliert, E. van de (1998). Motivating effects of task and outcome

interdependence in work teams. Group and Organization Management, 23, 124-143.

Vegt, G.S. van der, & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint impact of interdependence and group diversity on

innovation. Journal of Management, 29, 729-751.

Vegt, G.S. van der, Vliert, E. van de, & Oosterhof, A. (2003). Informational dissimilarity and

organizational citizenship behavior: the role of intrateam interdependence and team identification.

Academy of Management Journal, 46, 715–727.

Ven, A. van de (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32,

590-607.

Venne, L. van de, Felix, C., & A. Vermeulen (2001). Autonomous teams within VET Colleges: a study on

the development of autonomous teams within VET Colleges. (Zelfsturende teams in ROC's : een

studie naar de ontwikkeling van zelfsturende teams binnen ROC-verband). Amsterdam : SCO-

Kohnstamm Instituut.

Verbiest, E. (2002). Collective learning in schools (Collectief leren in scholen). Oration. Tilburg: Fontys

University.

Verbiest, E. (2004). Clever Together. Building bricks for professional learning communities. (Samen wijs.

Bouwstenen voor professionele leergemeenschappen.) Antwerpen/Apeldoorn: Garant.)

Verloop, N. & Kessels, J.W.M. (2006). Education science: developments in training and education of

professionals in schools and business. (Opleidingskunde: ontwikkelingen rond het opleiden en leren

van professionals in onderwijs en bedrijfsleven.) Pedagogische Studiën, 83, 301-321.

Vermeulen, M., Wiersma, H., Hienen, H. van, & Hartog, C. den (2003). Team rewards in the VET sector.

(Teambeloning in de be). Zoetermeer: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.

VET Council (2006). Year report 2006. (Jaarbericht 2006). De Bilt: Vocational Education and Training

Council.

Vijfeijken, H.T.G.A. (2004). Managing team performance: interdependence, goals and rewards.

Dissertation, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.

References

105

Vince, R. (2002). Organizational reflection. Management Learning, 33, 63-78.Vroom, V. (1964). Work

and motivation. New York: Wiley.

Wageman, R. (1999). Task design, outcome interdependence, and individual differences: their joint

effects on effort in task performing teams. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 3,

132-137.

Wagner, J.A. (1995). Studies of individualism-collectivism: effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of

Management Journal, 38, 152-172.

Watkins, K.E., & Callahan, M.W. (1998). Retrun on knowledge assets: investments in educational

technology. Educational Technology: the magazine for managers of change in education, 38, 33-

40.

Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. London: Sage Publications.

Weldon, E., & Weingart, L.R. (1993). Group goals and group performance. British Journal of Social

Psychology, 32, 307-334.

West, M.A., & Farr, J.L. (1989). Innovation at work: Psychological perspectives. Journal of Social

Behaviour, 4, 15-30.

West, M.A. (2000). Creativity and innovation at work. The Psychologist, 13, 460 - 464.

Wikeley, F. Stoll, L., Murrillo, J., & Jong, R. de (2005). Evaluating effective school improvement: case

studies of programmes in eight European countries and their contribution to the Effective School

Improvement Model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16, 387-405.

Wilson, S.M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An

examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in

Education, 24, 173-209.

Witziers, B. (1992). Coordination in schools for secondary education. (Coördinatie binnen scholen voor

voortgezet onderwijs.) Dissertation. Enschede: Twente University.

Woerkom, M. van (2003). Critical reflections at work. Bridging individual and organizational learning.

Enschede: Printpartners Ipskamp.

Woerkom, M. van (2004). The concept of critical reflection and its implications for human resource

development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 6, 178-193.

Woerkom, M. van (2004). Critical reflective behaviour. The connection between individual and

organisational learning. (Kritisch reflectief werkgedrag. De verbinding tussen individueel en leren

en organisatieleren). Tijdschrift voor HRM, 3, 67-82.

Wonderen, R. van (2005). Monitor Integrated personnel policy in the VET sector, Third assessment

(2005) Final report. (Monitor integraal personeelsbeleid in de Bve-sector, Derde meting (2005),

Eindrapport). Leiden: Research voor Beleid.

Yasumoto, J.Y., Uekawa, K., & Bidwell, C.E. (2001). The collegial focus and high school students’

achievement. Sociology of Education, 74, 181-209.

Yu, H., Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2002). The effects of transformational leadership on teachers’

commitment to change in Hong Kong. Journal of Educational Administration, 40, 368-389.

References

106

Zwart, R. (2007). Individual teacher learning in a context of collaboration in teams. ICLON, University

of Leiden.

Summary in Dutch

107

SUMMARY IN DUTCH

SAMENVATTING

Introductie

Omdat leerresultaten van leerlingen voor een groot deel worden beïnvloed door de kwaliteit van leraren

(Cornet, Huizinga, Minne & Webbink, 2006; Rivkin, Hanushek & Kain, 2005; Scheerens & Bosker,

1997) neemt de professionele ontwikkeling van leraren, ofwel het voortdurend blijven leren tijdens de

loopbaan, een belangrijke plek in binnen het onderwijsbeleid (Centre for American Progress, 2005;

European Commission, 2005; Onderwijsraad, 2006; TDA, 2006).

Ook binnen de wetenschap is in toenemende mate aandacht voor de professionele ontwikkeling van

leraren. Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1999) onderscheiden in de studies naar professionele ontwikkeling van

leraren drie benaderingen. Binnen de ‘knowledge-for-practice’ benadering wordt ervan uitgegaan dat de,

voor het beroep, benodigde kennis zich bevindt in documenten buiten de school. Door het lezen van

handboeken, het volgen van cursussen of opleidingen door leraren kan deze kennis worden vergaard.

Binnen de ‘knowledge-in-practice’ benadering wordt ervan uitgegaan dat de benodigde kennis zich

binnen de dagelijkse praktijk bevindt en dat de leraar deze kan ontdekken door middel van reflectie op

diezelfde alledaagse praktijk. Tot slot wordt er binnen de ‘knowlegde-for-practice’ benadering van

uitgegaan dat de, voor het beroep, benodigde kennis door leraren zelf wordt geconstrueerd door in

samenwerking met andere leraren systematisch te onderzoeken, ‘wat werkt’ en wat niet werkt (Cochran-

Smith & Lytle, 1999).

Voor de professionele ontwikkeling van leraren blijken formele leeractiviteiten (de eerste

benadering) minder geschikt dan informele activiteiten (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Richardson &

Placier, 2001). Het leren van professionals in zijn algemeen (Watkins & Callahan, 1998) en van leraren in

het bijzonder (Kwakman, 1999; Van Eekelen, 2005) vindt voornamelijk ongepland en tijdens het werk

plaats. In deze dissertatie wordt dan ook aangesloten op de ‘knowledge-in-practice’ en ‘knowledge-for-

practice’ benaderingen. Concreet wordt het leren binnen de ‘knowledge-in-practice’ benadering

geoperationaliseerd als reflectie en feedback vragen; en het leren binnen ‘knowledge-for-practice’

benadering als innovatief gedrag en kennis delen.

Binnen het onderzoek naar leren wordt de verklaring veelal vanuit het individuele (in dit geval: de

leraar) perspectief, of vanuit het organisatieperspectief benaderd. Onderzoek waarin beide perspectieven

worden gecombineerd is schaars (Kwakman, 2003; Smylie, 1988). Ook wordt het Human Resource

Management (HRM) perspectief nauwelijks gehanteerd. Om in deze lancune te voorzien en daarmee een

bijdrage te leveren aan bestand onderzoek zijn de volgende twee vraagstellingen geformuleerd: ‘Hoe kan

HRM de professionele ontwikkeling van leraren stimuleren?’ en: ‘Kan professionele ontwikkeling van

leraren worden verklaard door het samenspel van individuele en organisatorische factoren?’.

Om deze vragen te kunnen beantwoorden zijn vijf empirische studies, beschreven in vier empirische

hoofdstukken, verricht. Alle onderzoeken hebben plaatsgevonden in Regionale Opleidingscentra

Samenvatting

108

(ROC’s). Dit is gedaan omdat de MBO sector in het onderzoek naar professionele ontwikkeling van

leraren nauwelijks wordt meegenomen terwijl er toch fundamentele veranderingen binnen deze sector

plaatsvinden (NWO, 2007). Omdat de deregulering van bevoegdheden binnen de MBO sector eerder

gestart is dan in veel andere sectoren (Ministerie van OCW, 2005), kunnen de resultaten van deze studie

interessant zijn voor scholen in de andere sectoren.

De dissertatie bestaat uit twee delen. In Deel I worden drie studies beschreven waarin onderzocht

wordt hoe door middel van de Human Resources Management (HRM) de professionele ontwikkeling van

leraren gestimuleerd kan worden (en richt zich daarmee op de eerste deelvraag). In Deel II worden twee

studies beschreven waarin de professionele ontwikkeling vanuit individuele en organisatiefactoren wordt

verklaard (tweede deelvraag).

Deel I: Bevorderen van professionele ontwikkeling door middel van HRM

Sinds het begin van deze eeuw wordt getracht om binnen scholen HRM beleid in te voeren om zo de

professionele ontwikkeling van leraren in lijn met de ontwikkeling van de school te stimuleren

(Moerkamp, Vedder & Vos, 2005). Ondanks alle investeringen van het Ministerie van OC&W,

werkgeversorganisaties en schoolbesturen, valt de implementatie van HRM tegen (Teurlings &

Vermeulen, 2004; Education Inspectorate, 2005; Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science,

2005). De onderzoeksvraag van de eerste studie (hoofdstuk 2) is: ‘Door welke factoren wordt de

implementatie van HRM in scholen belemmerd en bevorderd?’. Door middel van voorgestructureerde

interviews is achterhaald welke problemen beleidsmakers en –uitvoerders van HRM hebben ervaren

tijdens de implementatie van dit nieuwe beleid en welke factoren volgens hen de implementatie

belemmeren en bevorderden. Interviews zijn gevoerd met een lid van het College van Bestuur, de HRM

directeur, twee unitmanager en twee personeelsfunctionarissen van vijf ROC’s (N=30). Aannemende dat

de invoering van het HRM beleid gezien kan worden als een ingrijpende verandering werd verwacht dat

zachte factoren – die verwijzen naar sociale en psychologische processen binnen de school – een

belangrijkere rol spelen dan harde factoren – verwijzend naar concrete aspecten zoals tijd en geld. Dit

bleek inderdaad het geval te zijn. Respondenten geven aan dat leraren onvoldoende het nut van het

nieuwe beleid in zien; dat leraren de elkaar voortdurend opvolgende veranderingen zat zijn; en dat de

organisatiecultuur niet rijp is voor HRM. In mindere mate wordt verwezen naar harde factoren, zoals

incompetente managers en gebrek aan tijd en middelen.

In de tweede studie (hoofdstuk 2) staat de vraag centraal:‘Welke rol kan de afdeling HRM spelen ten

aanzien van de invoering van HRM?’. In HRM literatuur is al langere tijd aandacht voor de ontwikkeling

van de HRM afdeling met een administratieve functie naar een afdeling die een strategische functie

vervult (Baron & Kreps, 1999; Biemans, 2001). Ulrich (1998) beschrijft vier HRM rollen, die ontstaan

door het kruisen van twee dimensies, te weten die van strategie versus dagelijkse praktijk, en die van

procedures versus mensen. De ‘administrative expert’ leidt tot effectieve en efficiënte HRM procedures

en processen; de ‘strategic partner’ leidt tot een vertaling van de organisatie strategie naar HRM

activiteiten; de ‘change agent’ leidt tot leer- en veranderingsprocessen die nodig zijn om de

Summary in Dutch

109

organisatiedoelen te realiseren; en de ‘employee champion’ leidt ertoe dat de behoeften en wensen van

medewerkers en organisatie aan elkaar gekoppeld worden. Door middel van een vragenlijstonderzoek

onder een representatieve groep van 46 afgevaardigden van HRM afdelingen van ROC’s (28 HRM

directeuren, 12 beleidsmedewerkers HRM, 6 HRM medewerkers) is onderzocht in welke mate de rollen

(in de huidige en in de gewenste situatie) binnen ROC’s worden vervuld. De resultaten laten zien dat de

administrative expert het meest wordt vervuld en dat het verschil tussen huidig en gewenst relatief klein

is. De twee strategische rollen, strategic partner en change agent, worden in de huidige situatie minder

vervuld maar men geeft aan deze meer te willen vervullen. De employee champion krijgt zowel in de

huidige als gewenste situatie de laagste score. Dit betekent dat de twee ‘mens rollen’ employee champion

en change agent die in het bijzonder van belang worden geacht voor scholen, nog weinig lijken te worden

vervuld. En terwijl er door de respondenten ambities worden uitgesproken voor de rol van change agent

wordt er weinig tot geen ambitie getoond voor de rol van employee champion.

In de derde studie (hoofdstuk 3) wordt ingegaan op het belang van consensus tussen management en

HRM afdeling over doelen en kenmerken van het HRM beleid voor het implementatieproces (Bowen &

Ostroff, 2004). Invoering van HRM beleid betekent voor verschillende actoren binnen de school een

verandering in het kijken naar personeelsbeleid en de eigen rol daar in (Van der Linden e.a., 2004). Door

diverse auteurs wordt opgemerkt dat mensen pas veranderen wanneer zij er de toegevoegde waarde van in

zien (zie bijvoorbeeld Kotter, 1996; Schein, 1985). ‘Locus of control’- dat betrekking heeft op de mate

waarin een individu denkt controle uit te kunnen oefenen op gebeurtenissen in zijn omgeving (Rotter,

1969) - blijkt vervolgens een belangrijke invloed te hebben op de mate waarin mensen geneigd zijn om

veranderingen te zien als iets positiefs. De centrale vraag van deze derde studie is:‘Kan de mate waarin

beleidsmakers en –uitvoerders van HRM beleid een toegevoegde waarde van dit beleid zien worden

verklaard vanuit hun locus of control en consensus over doelen en kenmerken van het HRM beleid?’

Deze vraag is beantwoord aan de hand van kwantitatieve (vragenlijst) en kwalitatieve (interview en

documentanalyse) data. Een lid van het College van Bestuur, de HRM directeur, twee unitmanager en

twee personeelsfunctionarissen van vijf ROC’s (N=30) namen deel aan het onderzoek (zie ook studie 1).

In die situaties waarin consensus bestaat tussen management en HRM staf over het doel en de kenmerken

van het HRM beleid binnen een ROC en waar visies van betrokkenen eveneens consistent zijn met

beleidsplannen, werd zoals verwacht geen relatie gevonden tussen locus of control en ervaren

toegevoegde waarde van het HRM beleid. In de situaties waar deze consensus minder is, werd deze

relatie zoals verwacht wel gevonden.

Deel II: Professionele ontwikkeling van leraren verklaard door het samenspel van individuele en

organisatiefactoren.

De studies in dit tweede deel gaan in op de verklaring van professionele ontwikkeling van leraren. In

hoofdstuk 4 richten we ons op professionele ontwikkeling in termen van reflecteren en feedback vragen.

Omdat deze twee leeractiviteiten individueel van aard zijn en voornamelijk gericht op de verbetering van

het eigen functioneren, ligt de focus van de verklaring op individuele factoren. Met reflecteren en

Samenvatting

110

feedback vragen loopt men het risico geconfronteerd te worden met informatie die het zelfbeeld aantast

(Van Woerkom, 2004). De verwachting was dat reflectie en feedback vragen positief zouden

samenhangen met ‘self-efficacy’, dat verwijst naar de overtuiging van iemand dat hij of zij in staat is om

met succes het gedrag uit te voeren dat gegeven een bepaalde situatie nodig is (Bandura, 1977),

leerdoeloriëntatie, dat verwijst naar de motivatie om zichzelf te verbeteren door moeilijke taken uit te

voeren en nieuwe vaardigheden aan te leren (Dweck & Legette, 1988), en met de mate waarin men de

leidinggevende als transformationeel ervaart – dat wil zeggen een leiderschapstijl die zich kenmerkt door

een duidelijke visie op de toekomst; individuele steun en intellectuele uitdaging (Geijsel, Sleegers,

Leithwood, Jantzi, 2003; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006). De centrale vraag, ‘Kan professionele ontwikkeling

van leraren, in termen van reflectie en feedback vragen, worden verklaard vanuit hun self-efficacy, leer

doel oriëntatie en transformationeel leiderschap?’, is beantwoord door middel van vragenlijstonderzoek

(456 leraren van een ROC).. De resultaten tonen een positief verband tussen self-efficacy en

leerdoeloriëntatie enerzijds en reflectie en feedback vragen anderzijds. Leerdoeloriëntatie blijkt de relatie

tussen self-efficacy en reflectie en feedback vragen te mediëren. Transformationeel leiderschap blijkt

positief gerelateerd te zijn aan feedback vragen. Leerdoeloriëntatie blijkt de relaties tussen

transformationeel leiderschap enerzijds en reflectie en feedback vragen anderzijds, te modereren: wanneer

de leer doel oriëntatie laag is, heeft transformationeel leiderschap een sterker effect op reflectie en

feedback vragen.

In hoofdstuk 5 wordt ingegaan op de professionele ontwikkeling in termen van innovatief gedrag en

kennisdelen. Omdat deze leeractiviteiten meer interactief van aard zijn en ook het functioneren van

anderen beïnvloeden, wordt de verklaring ervan in organisatiefactoren gezocht, namelijk de perceptie van

taak- en doel interdependentie tussen leraren. Taak interdependentie heeft betrekking op de mate waarin

de taakvervulling van het ene teamlid afhankelijk is van de taakvervulling van een ander teamlid (Brass,

1981; Kiggundu, 1981; Van der Vegt, Emans & Van de Vliert, 1998). Doel interdependentie verwijst

naar de mate waarin het bereiken van doelen en opbrengsten van het ene teamlid afhankelijk is van het al

dan niet bereiken van doelen en opbrengsten van de andere teamleden (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978; Deutsch,

1980; Van der Vegt, Emans & Van de Vliert, 1998). Verwacht werd dat zowel taak- als doel

interdependentie positief gerelateerd zijn aan innovatief gedrag en kennisdelen. De centrale vraag uit de

vijfde studie, ‘Kan professionele ontwikkeling, in termen van innovatief gedrag en kennisdelen, worden

verklaard vanuit de ervaren taak- en doel interdependentie?’, is beantwoord door middel van een

vragenlijstonderzoek waaraan 456 leraren (zie ook studie 4) hebben deelgenomen. Zoals verwacht zijn

positieve relaties gevonden tussen taak interdependentie enerzijds en innovatief gedrag en kennisdelen

anderzijds. Doel interdependentie blijkt positief gerelateerd te zijn aan kennisdelen. Doel interdependentie

blijkt een modererend effect te hebben op de relatie tussen taak interdependentie en innovatief gedrag:

taak interdependentie alleen van invloed is op innovatief gedrag wanneer ook doel interdependentie wordt

ervaren.

Summary in Dutch

111

In het laatste hoofdstuk, waarin de belangrijkste bevindingen van de verschillende onderzoeken worden

samengevat, benadrukken we het belang van communicatie voor een goede implementatie van HRM in

scholen. Communicatie tussen management, HRM afdeling en leraren is nodig om verwachtingen ten

aanzien van HRM beleid goed af te stemmen. Ook benadrukken we de centrale rollen die de

leerdoeloriëntatie van leraren en de onderlinge afhankelijkheid tussen leraren, spelen in professionele

ontwikkeling. Tot slot worden in dit hoofdstuk de sterke en minder sterke kanten van ons onderzoek

besproken en worden de theoretische en praktische implicaties van ons onderzoek beschreven.

Appendices

113

APPENDICES

Appendix I: Comparison of respondents’ characteristics and the total personnel of the VET

College.

Table 1. Distribution of age, gender, tenure (i.e. amount of working hours per week) and function of

respondents in comparison with the total personnel of the VET College.

Total

College

Respondents

Age distribution

≤ 30 years

30 - ≤ 39

40 - ≤ 49

50 - ≤ 59

≥ 60 years

2%

9%

31%

51%

7%

2%

9%

36%

48%

5%

Gender

Man

Women

51%

49%

54%

46%

Tenure

100%

80 - < 100%

40 - < 80%

< 40%

48%

10%

35%

7%

43,8%

15,4%

36,3%

4,4%

Function

Assistants

Instructors

Teachers

3%

7%

90%

3%

7%

90%

Level of Education

An overview

does not

exist

Appendices

114

Appendix II: Means, standard deviations, and correlations between dependent variables, Chapters

four and five.

Table 2. Means, standard deviations and correlations between the dependent variables in study one and

two of part two.

M. SD 1. 2. 3.

1. Reflection 3.72 0,42

2. Feedback asking 3,34 0,53 .44**

3. Innovative behavior 3,71 0,47 .46** .34**

4. Knowledge sharing 3,59 0,45 .43** .58** .22**

** p<0.01

Dankwoord

115

DANKWOORD

Zoals bij elke performance het geval is (vgl. Boxall & Purcell, 2003), is het voltooien van een proefschrift

een functie van de capaciteiten en motivatie van de promovendus én de mogelijkheden die vanuit de

omgeving van de promovendus worden gecreëerd. Ik wil hier mijn dank uitspreken voor verschillende

mensen, die voor mij de mogelijkheid hebben gecreëerd om het promotieonderzoek te voltooien.

Allereerst is dat mijn vriendin Carin Vrugterman. Zij bracht mij in het voorjaar van 2005 in contact

met Karin Sanders. Tot dan toe had ik nooit serieus overwogen om aan een promotieonderzoek te

beginnen. Het enthousiasme van Karin, haar overtuiging dat het wel iets voor me was én dat ik het binnen

afzienbare tijd zou kunnen volbrengen, heeft mij ertoe gebracht er tóch aan te beginnen. Door de

constructieve feedback die ik, elke keer op het juiste moment, van Karin kreeg heb ik in een korte tijd

veel kunnen leren, zowel op het gebied van onderzoek doen als op het gebied van schrijven. Na ongeveer

twee jaar werd Huadong Yang mijn co-promotor. Ik heb veel geleerd van zijn scherpe blik op onder meer

de analyses en beargumentering van hypotheses.

Deze leerervaringen waren er echter niet geweest wanneer ik vanuit KPC Groep niet de mogelijkheid

had gekregen om het onderzoek deels te combineren met mijn reguliere taken. Ik wil Henk Barendse,

Anje Ros en Anonette Sanders hiervoor hartelijk bedanken. Ook heb ik het erg prettig en leerzaam

gevonden om de afgelopen jaren mijn verworven kennis te kunnen delen met verschillende KPC-

collega’s en tegelijkertijd van hen feedback te krijgen. Nadja Boersen en Lisenka van het Reve,

secretaresses van resp. KPC Groep en de Universiteit Twente, wil ik danken voor de perfecte

administratieve ondersteuning de afgelopen jaren.

Mijn twee paranimfen, Hens Runhaar en Pieter Calis dank ik voor hun tips en feedback aan het begin

van het promotietraject. Dit hielp mij een duidelijke focus in mijn onderzoek te vinden. Aan het einde van

het traject heb ik veel gehad aan hun kritische blik op het gehele werk. Marina Aarts dank ik voor haar

mooie illustratie op de cover.

De steun van familie en vrienden is zeer waardevol gebleken. In het bijzonder dank ik mijn ouders

Hens en Minke Runhaar, schoonouders Jan en Miny Honnef, mijn zus en zwager Roelieke en Joost van

den Brink en schoonzus Marieke van der Steen, voor hun steun en interesse de afgelopen jaren.

Tot slot wil ik Peter, Jan en Hens, mijn man en kinderen bedanken. Afgezien van die enkele keer dat

Jan zich beteuterd afvroeg waarom mama weer zo nodig naar zolder moest om te “proviseren” zoals hij

dat zei, hebben zij mij mijn gang laten gaan. Zonder de praktische én morele steun van mijn gezin had ik

dit traject nooit succesvol kunnen afleggen!

Piety Runhaar

Utrecht, 20 oktober 2008.

Promoting Teachers’ Professional D

evelopment Piety Runhaar

Promoting Teachers’ ProfessionalDevelopment

Piety Runhaar

Because teacher quality has a great influence on pupil attainment, teachers’ professional development recieves a lot of attention in educational policy. This dissertation contains five studies on how teachers’ professional development, in terms of learning at the workplace, can be explained and promoted. The central question in the first part is how Human Resources Management (HRM) can serve as a tool in professional development. We examine what factors hinder and promote the implementation of HRM within schools and how the implementation can be fostered when different HRM roles (administrative expert, strategic partner, change agent, employee champion) are fulfilled within schools. Furthermore, we examine the impact of consensus between management and HRM department about goals and features of HRM policy on the implementation process. In the second part of the dissertation, the central question is what individual and organisational factors explain teachers’ professional development. First, we try to explain professional development in terms of reflection and asking feedback, by perceived self-efficacy, learning goal orientation and transformational leadership. Second, we try to explain professional development in terms of innovative behaviour and knowledge sharing, by perceived task and goal interdependence within teams.

Piety Runhaar has been working as a consultant for KPC Group since 2000. KPC Group is a consultancy firm that focusses on improving learning processes, both of students and staff, within schools. Since 2005 she combines consultancy with research and teaching at the Organisational Psychology & HRD Department at Twente University.

Uitnodiging

Voor het bijwonen van de openbare verdediging van mijn

proefschrift

Donderdag 20 november 2008, om 15.45 uur,

In het Amphitheater, Vrijhof,Universiteit Twente,Drienerlolaan 5,

Enschede.

Voorafgaand aan de verdediging, om 15.30 uur,

zal ik een korte toelichting geven op mijn onderzoek.

Na afloop is er een borrel op

dezelfde locatie.

Om18.00 uur sluiten we de dag feestelijk af in de Faculty

Club (UT-terrein).U bent van harte uitgenodigd

deel te nemen aan het buffet dat hier aanwezig is!

Promoting teachers’ professional development

Piety Runhaar

Paranimfen:Hens Runhaar & Pieter Calis

[email protected]@kpcgroep.nl

PROMOTING TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT_P.pdf · what factors hinder and promote the...

Documents

Transcript of PROMOTING TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT_P.pdf · what factors hinder and promote the...