Teachers' proactive behaviour: Interactions with job characteristics and professional competence in a longitudinal study.
Job Demand-Resources model
personal initiative
professional competence
school development
teachers
Journal
The British journal of educational psychology
ISSN: 2044-8279
Titre abrégé: Br J Educ Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370636
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Nov 2023
13 Nov 2023
Historique:
revised:
14
08
2023
received:
22
03
2023
accepted:
24
10
2023
medline:
14
11
2023
pubmed:
14
11
2023
entrez:
14
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
In times of accelerating changes, teachers who proactively engage in activities towards school improvement and innovation are increasingly needed. Still, studies on factors that affect teachers' proactive behaviour are rare. Integrating previous research on proactive behaviour within the Job Demand-Resources (JD-R) Model, this paper investigates how job characteristics (time pressure, bureaucratic structures, participative climate, personal initiative of the team) and aspects of teachers' professional competence (self-efficacy, self-regulation skills and knowledge) contribute to and interact with their proactive behaviour. A total of 130 German secondary school teachers (M(SD) We employed a full two-wave panel design, with measurement points 5 months apart. The data were analysed with (moderated) single indicator modelling and a cross-lagged panel model. While teachers' self-efficacy in implementing change and self-regulation skills predicted their concurrent proactive behaviour, job characteristics and teachers' knowledge had no such cross-sectional effects. In addition, we found an interaction effect of time pressure and teachers' self-efficacy on proactive behaviour. Including the second measurement point, data indicated no cross-lagged effects of the job and personal factors on proactive behaviour. However, cross-lagged analysis revealed that teachers' proactive behaviour predicted their later self-efficacy in implementing change and the time pressure they perceive. Examining both cross-sectional and longitudinal effects, this study highlights the importance of measurements over time when analysing factors that influence teachers' proactive behaviour: While aspects of professional competence appear to be trainable concurrent resources, time pressure can limit their effect. Finally, cross-lagged effects of teachers' proactive behaviour on their later self-efficacy and time pressure appear as influential in the long run.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In times of accelerating changes, teachers who proactively engage in activities towards school improvement and innovation are increasingly needed. Still, studies on factors that affect teachers' proactive behaviour are rare.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
Integrating previous research on proactive behaviour within the Job Demand-Resources (JD-R) Model, this paper investigates how job characteristics (time pressure, bureaucratic structures, participative climate, personal initiative of the team) and aspects of teachers' professional competence (self-efficacy, self-regulation skills and knowledge) contribute to and interact with their proactive behaviour.
SAMPLE
METHODS
A total of 130 German secondary school teachers (M(SD)
METHODS
METHODS
We employed a full two-wave panel design, with measurement points 5 months apart. The data were analysed with (moderated) single indicator modelling and a cross-lagged panel model.
RESULTS
RESULTS
While teachers' self-efficacy in implementing change and self-regulation skills predicted their concurrent proactive behaviour, job characteristics and teachers' knowledge had no such cross-sectional effects. In addition, we found an interaction effect of time pressure and teachers' self-efficacy on proactive behaviour. Including the second measurement point, data indicated no cross-lagged effects of the job and personal factors on proactive behaviour. However, cross-lagged analysis revealed that teachers' proactive behaviour predicted their later self-efficacy in implementing change and the time pressure they perceive.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Examining both cross-sectional and longitudinal effects, this study highlights the importance of measurements over time when analysing factors that influence teachers' proactive behaviour: While aspects of professional competence appear to be trainable concurrent resources, time pressure can limit their effect. Finally, cross-lagged effects of teachers' proactive behaviour on their later self-efficacy and time pressure appear as influential in the long run.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e12642Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. British Journal of Educational Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.
Références
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage Publications, Inc.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands-resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273-285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056
Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 274-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274
Bakker, A. B., & van Wingerden, J. (2021). Do personal resources and strengths use increase work engagement? The effects of a training intervention. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 26(1), 20-30. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000266
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Binnewies, C., & Gromer, M. (2012). Creativity and innovation at work: The role of work characteristics and personal initiative. Psicothema, 24(1), 100-105.
Cerit, Y. (2017). The mediating effect of LMX in the relationship between school bureaucratic structure and teachers' proactive behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(6), 780-793. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-01-2016-0005
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 122(1), 155-159.
Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2012). School climate and social-emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1189-1204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029356
Crant, J. M. (2000). Proactive behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 26(3), 435-462. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600304
Crawford, E. R., Lepine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834-848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019364
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6
DiPaola, M. F., & Hoy, W. K. (2005). Organizational citizenship of organizational citizenship of faculty and achievement of high school students. The High School Journal, 88, 35-44.
DiPaola, M. F., & Mendes da Costa Neves, P. M. (2009). Organizational citizenship behaviors in American and Portuguese public schools: Measuring the construct across cultures. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(4), 490-507. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230910967464
Drechsler, J. (2015). Multiple imputation of multilevel missing data-Rigor versus simplicity. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 40(1), 69-95. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614563393
Eid, M., & Schmidt, K. (2014). Testtheorie und Testkonstruktion. [test theory and test construction] Bachelorstudium Psychologie. Hogrefe.
Fay, D., & Frese, M. (2001). The concept of personal initiative: An overview of validity studies. Human Performance, 14(1), 97-124. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327043HUP1401_06
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research: Correction to Frazier et al. (2004). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(2), 157. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.2.157
Frese, M., Fay, D., Hilburger, T., Leng, K., & Tag, A. (1997). The concept of personal initiative: Operationalization, reliability and validity in two German samples. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70(2), 139-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1997.tb00639.x
Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. T. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069
Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 43(6), 495-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2005.11.001
Hakanen, J. J., Perhoniemi, R., & Toppinen-Tanner, S. (2008). Positive gain spirals at work: From job resources to work engagement, personal initiative and work-unit innovativeness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(1), 78-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.01.003
Hanfstingl, B., Andreitz, I., Müller, F. H., & Thomas, A. (2010). Are self-regulation and self-control mediators between psychological basic needs and intrinsic teacher motivation? Journal for Educational Research Online, 2(2), 55-71.
Harris, A. (2011). System improvement through collective capacity building. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(6), 624-636. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111174785
Hayduk, L. A., & Littvay, L. (2012). Should researchers use single indicators, best indicators, or multiple indicators in structural equation models? BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12, 159. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-159
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337-421. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00062
Holzberger, D., Philipp, A., & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 774-786. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032198
Huang, X., Lam, S. M., Wang, C., & Xu, P. (2023). Striving for personal growth matters: The relationship between personal growth initiative, teacher engagement and instructional quality. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 658-675. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12583
Hubers, M. D. (2020). In pursuit of sustainable educational change - introduction to the special section. Teaching and Teacher Education, 93, 103084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103084
Hüttges, A., & Fay, D. (2019). Proaktives Verhalten: Schlüsselkompetenz für die Karriereentwicklung [proactive behavior: Key competence for career development]. In S. Kauffeld & D. Spurk (Eds.), Springer Reference Psychologie. Handbuch Karriere und Laufbahnmanagement (pp. 487-509). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48750-1_20
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software International; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Klusmann, U. (2013). Occupational self-regulation. In M. Kunter (Ed.), Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers: Results from the COACTIV project Mathematics teacher education (Vol. 8, pp. 291-308). Springer.
Krause, A. (2004). Fragebogen zur Arbeitssituation an Schulen (FASS). Dokumentation der Skalen und Aussagen: Unveröffentlichte Dokumentation zum Forschungsprojekt Psychische Belastungen im Unterricht [Questionnaire on the work situation at schools (FASS). Documentation of the scales and statements. Unpublished documentation on the research project psychological stress in the classroom.]. Universität Freiburg i. Br., Universität Flensburg.
Kühnel, J., Sonnentag, S., & Bledow, R. (2012). Resources and time pressure as day-level antecedents of work engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(1), 181-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02022.x
Kunter, M., Klusmann, U., Baumert, J., Richter, D., Voss, T., & Hachfeld, A. (2013). Professional competence of teachers: Effects on instructional quality and student development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 805-820. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032583
Lazarides, R., Watt, H. M., & Richardson, P. W. (2020). Teachers' classroom management self-efficacy, perceived classroom management and teaching contexts from beginning until mid-career. Learning and Instruction, 69, 101346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101346
Lazarides, R., Watt, H. M. G., & Richardson, P. (2023). Does school context moderate longitudinal relations between teacher-reported self-efficacy and value for student engagement and teacher-student relationships from early until midcareer? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 72, 102136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102136
LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815-852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642
LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & Lepine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor-hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764-775. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005.18803921
Linninger, C., Kunina-Habenicht, O., Emmenlauer, S., Dicke, T., Schulze-Stocker, F., Leutner, D., Seidel, T., Terhart, E., & Kunter, M. (2015). Assessing teachers' educational knowledge. Zeitschrift Für Entwicklungspsychologie Und Pädagogische Psychologie, 47(2), 72-83. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000126
Llorens, S., Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W., & Salanova, M. (2006). Testing the robustness of the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 13(3), 378-391. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.13.3.378
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Erlbaum.
Mensmann, M., & Frese, M. (2016). Proactive behavior training: Theory, design, and future directions. In Proactivity at work (pp. 452-486). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315797113-26
Morad, S., Ragonis, N., & Barak, M. (2021). The validity and reliability of a tool for measuring educational innovative thinking competencies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 97, 103193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103193
Oberski, D. (2014). Lavaan.Survey: An R package for complex survey analysis of structural equation models. Journal of Statistical Software, 57(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v057.i01
Paniagua, A., & Istance, D. (2018). Teachers as designers of learning environments. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085374-en
Peariasamy, S. D., Omar, Z., Basri, R., & Alias, S. N. (2020). Teacher proactive work behavior: A preview at the influencing factors. Journal of Critcial Reviews, 19(7), 10080-10096.
Podsakoff, N. P., Lepine, J. A., & Lepine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438-454. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.438
Porath, C. L., & Bateman, T. S. (2006). Self-regulation: From goal orientation to job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.185
Runhaar, P., Konermann, J., & Sanders, K. (2013). Teachers' organizational citizenship behaviour: Considering the roles of their work engagement, autonomy and leader-member exchange. Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 99-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.10.008
Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W. (2014). A critical review of the job demands-resources model: Implications for improving work and health. In G. F. Bauer & O. Hämmig (Eds.), Bridging occupational, organizational and public health (pp. 43-68). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5640-3_4
Schuster, J., Hartmann, U., & Kolleck, N. (2021). Teacher collaboration networks as a function of type of collaboration and schools’ structural environment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 103, 103372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103372
Schwarzer, R., & Schmitz, G. S. (1999). Kollektive Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern: Eine Längsschnittstudie in zehn Bundesländern [Teachers' collective self-efficacy expectations: A longitudinal study in ten states.]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 30(4), 262-274. https://doi.org/10.1024//0044-3514.30.4.262
Schweizer, K. (2011). On the changing role of cronbach's α in the evaluation of the quality of a measure. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(3), 143-144. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000069
Selig, J. P., & Little, T. D. (2012). Autoregressive and cross-lagged panel analysis for longitudinal data. In B. Laursen, T. D. Little, & N. A. Card (Eds.), Handbook of developmental research methods (pp. 265-278). The Guilford Press.
Silan, M. A. (2019). A Primer on Practical Significance. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/zdhfe
Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. Oxford University Press, Incorporated.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2018). Job demands and job resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Social Psychology of Education, 21(5), 1251-1275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9464-8
Somech, A. (2016). The cost of going the extra mile: The relationship between teachers’ organizational citizenship behavior, role stressors, and strain with the buffering effect of job autonomy. Teachers and Teaching, 22(4), 426-447. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1082734
Somech, A., & Oplatka, I. (2015). Organizational citizenship behavior in schools: Examining the impact and opportunities within educational systems. Routledge research in education (Vol. 128). Routledge, Taylor et Francis Group.
Somech, A., & Ron, I. (2007). Promoting Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Schools: The impact of individual and organizational characteristics. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(1), 38-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x06291254
Sonnentag, S., Dormann, C., & Demerouti, E. (2010). Not all days are created equal: The concept of state work engagement. In Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 25-38). Psychology Press.
Sonnentag, S., & Spychala, A. (2012). Job control and job stressors as predictors of proactive work behavior: Is role breadth self-efficacy the link? Human Performance, 25(5), 412-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2012.721830
Thommen, D., Grob, U., Lauermann, F., Klassen, R. M., & Praetorius, A.-K. (2022). Different levels of context-specificity of teacher self-efficacy and their relations with teaching quality. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 857526. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.857526
Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2013). The impact of job crafting on job demands, job resources, and well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18(2), 230-240. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032141
Tornau, K., & Frese, M. (2013). Construct clean-up in proactivity research: A meta-analysis on the nomological net of work-related proactivity concepts and their incremental validities. Applied Psychology, 62(1), 44-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00514.x
Ulber, D. (1998). Survey-Feedback-Instrument zur Organisationsdiagnose an Schulen [Survey feedback instrument for organizational diagnosis at schools]. Freie Universität, Institut für Allgemeine Pädagogik.
van den Broeck, A., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). Not all job demands are equal: Differentiating job hindrances and job challenges in the job demands-resources model. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 735-759.
Wolf, K., Ehlers, S., Maurer, C., & Kunter, M. (2017). Die Verhaltenscheckliste: Ein verhaltensnahes Maß zur Erfassung der Eigeninitiative von Lehrkräften [The Behavior Checklist: A behavioral measure of teachers' personal initiative, Poster Presentation]. PAEPSY conference 2017, Münster, Germany.
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2009). Reciprocal relationships between job resources, personal resources, and work engagement. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(3), 235-244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.11.003
Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., & Fischbach, A. (2013). Work engagement among employees facing emotional demands. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(2), 74-84. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000085
Zacher, H., & Frese, M. (2011). Maintaininga focus on opportunities at work: The interplay between age, job complexity,and the use of selection, optimization, and compensation strategies. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 291-318. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.683
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981-1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801