Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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.
General introduction
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).
General introduction
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
General introduction
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
General introduction
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
General introduction
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.
12
13
Part One
Studies on HRM as a tool in teachers’
professional development
14
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.
HRM department as intermediary
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.
HRM department as intermediary
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.
HRM department as intermediary
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
HRM department as intermediary
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
HRM department as intermediary
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
Consensus within schools
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-
Consensus within schools
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.
Consensus within schools
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.
Consensus within schools
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
integration could be
distilled. For example, for
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
integration could be
distilled. For example, for
vertical integration, the
board member: ‘we have to
operate more flexible,
HRM is a means to
influence behavior’ or for
functional integration, the
HRM manager: ‘HRM
means line managers have
Yes. All forms of
integration could be
distilled. For example, for
vertical integration, board
member: ‘we are amidst in
educational changes and
have to consider the
consequences for the
personnel’ and for
functional integration, the
HRM manager: ‘for HRM
Yes. All forms of
integration could be
distilled. For example, for
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’
All forms of integration
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’.
All forms of integration
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)
Consensus within schools
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
Consensus within 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.
40
41
Part Two
Studies on individual and organisational factors
explaining teachers’ professional development
42
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
Breaking down the barriers
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.
Breaking down the barriers
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
Breaking down the barriers
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).
Breaking down the barriers
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,
Breaking down the barriers
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).
Breaking down the barriers
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
Transformational leadership
.40
.30
.20
.10
0
-.10
LGO=strong
LGO=weak
Ask
ing
Feed
back
Low High
Transformational leadership
Breaking down the barriers
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
Breaking down the barriers
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.
60
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;
Breaking through the isolation
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
Breaking through the isolation
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 &
Breaking through the isolation
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).
Breaking through the isolation
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
Breaking through the isolation
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)
Breaking through the isolation
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
Task interdependence (TI)
Breaking through the isolation
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
Breaking through the isolation
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.
78
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.
Part One: Studies on HRM as a tool in 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
General discussion and conclusions
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
General discussion and conclusions
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
Part One: Studies on HRM as a tool in teachers’ professional development
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
General discussion and conclusions
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
(+)
(-)
-
(+)
(-)
+
-
Task interdependence (TI)
+
+
(+)
+
(+)
+
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.
General discussion and conclusions
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.
General discussion and conclusions
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.
90
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.
112
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