Kesahan Kandungan Instrumen Pengukuran Tingkah Laku Inovatif Guru Menggunakan Kaedah Nisbah Kesahan Kandungan (CVR) (Content Validity of Teacher Innovative Behaviour Measurement Instruments Using Content Validity Ratio (CVR) Method)
Abstract
Tingkah laku inovatif dalam persekitaran hari ini merupakan salah satu aspek penting dalam menjamin keupayaan inovasi dalam sesebuah organisasi. Walaupun terdapat beberapa instrumen pengukuran yang telah dibangunkan untuk menilai tingkah laku inovatif, namun instrumen yang mempunyai kesahan yang baik didapati masih kurang dan terhad. Sehubungan dengan itu, kajian ini bertujuan untuk menguji aspek kesahan kandungan instrumen pengukuran tingkah laku inovatif khusus untuk guru di Malaysia menggunakan kaedah Nisbah Kesahan Kandungan (CVR) bagi memastikan instrumen pengukuran adalah sesuai untuk digunakan dalam konteks dan budaya tempatan. Kajian adalah berbentuk tinjauan soal selidik secara bertulis dan dalam talian. Sebelas orang pakar dalam bidang inovasi dipilih melalui teknik persampelan bertujuan yang terdiri daripada sembilan orang pakar profesional dan dua orang pakar lapangan yang masih aktif berkhidmat di Universiti Awam Malaysia dan Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. Proses kesahan instrumen melibatkan 34 item daripada empat konstruk. Dapatan kuantitatif kajian mendapati instrumen mempunyai kesahan kandungan yang baik dengan 27 item mencapai tahap minimum nilai CVR (N=11, CVRkritikal= 0.636). Empat item yang tidak mencapai nilai minimum CVR akan ditambah baik manakala baki tiga item digugurkan dari instrumen. Keseluruhan 31 item yang kekal akan dimurnikan sebagai instrumen akhir. Dapatan kualitatif kajian mendapati instrumen adalah sesuai dan relevan serta mempunyai potensi untuk menjadi instrumen yang baik bagi mengukur tingkah laku inovatif dalam kalangan guru. Dicadangkan agar kajian rintis dijalankan dan data dianalisis menggunakan analisis statistik seperti Model Rasch agar item – item dapat dianalisis dengan lebih mendalam.
Kata kunci: Kesahan kandungan; tingkah laku inovatif; guru; pakar; CVR
Abstract
Innovative behaviour in today’s environment is one of the most important aspects of ensuring innovation in an organization. Although there are several measurement instruments that have been developed to assess innovative behaviours, a good validity instruments are still lacking and limited. In this regard, this study aimed to test the validity of content validity of innovative behaviours measurement instruments specifically for teachers in Malaysia using the Content Validation Ratio (CVR) method to ensure that measurement instruments are appropriate for use in local contexts and cultures. The research is in the form of a written and online survey. Eleven experts in the field of innovation were selected through purposive sampling techniques consisting of nine professionals and two field experts who are still active in the Public University of Malaysia and the Ministry of Education Malaysia. The instrument validation process involved 34 items from four constructs. The quantitative study found that the instrument had good content validity with 27 items reaching the minimum level of CVR value (N = 11, CVRcritical= 0.636). Four items that do not meet the minimum CVR value will be purged while the remaining three items will be dropped from the instrument. The entire remaining 31 items will be purified as final instruments. The qualitative findings of the study found that the instrument is appropriate and relevant and has the potential to be a good instrument for measuring innovative behaviour among teachers. It is proposed that pilot studies be conducted, and the data should be analysed using more in-depth statistical analysis such as Rasch Model to obtain more detailed information about the items.
Keywords: Content validity; innovative behaviour; teachers; experts; CVR
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ali, N., Tretiakov, A. & Whiddett, D. 2014. A content validity study for a knowledge management systems success model in healthcare. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 15(2): 21–36.
Allahyari, T., Rangi, N.H., Khosravi, Y. & Zayeri, F. 2011. Development and evaluation of a new questionnaire for rating of cognitive failures at work. International Journal of Occupational Hygiene 3(1): 6–11.
Almanasreh, E., Moles, R. & Chen, T.F. 2019. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy 15(2): 214–221.
Amankwaa, A., Gyensare, M.A., Susomrith, P., Amankwaa, A., Gyensare, M.A. & Susomrith, P. 2019. Transformational leadership with innovative behaviour: Examining multiple mediating paths with PLS-SEM. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 40(1): 107–123.
Asurakkody, T.A. & Shin, S.Y. 2018. Innovative Behavior in Nursing Context: A Concept Analysis. Asian Nursing Research 12(4): 237–244.
Ayre, C. & Scally, A.J. 2014. Critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 47(1): 79–86.
Bond, T.G. & Fox, C.M. 2015. Applying the rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. 3rd Ed. New York: Routledge.
Boynton, P.M. & Greenhalgh, T. 2004. Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. BMJ 328(7451): 1312–1315.
Brinkman, W.P. 2009. Design of a questionnaire instrumenthandbook of mobile technology research methods. Handbook of Mobile Technology Research Methods 31–57.
Choi, B.C.K. & Pak, A.W.P. 2005. Peer reviewed: a catalog of biases in questionnaires. Preventing Chronic Disease 2(1): 1–13.
Cohen, R.J. & Swerdlik, M.E. 2013. Psychological Testing and Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and Measurement. 9th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.
Connell, J., Carlton, J., Grundy, A., Taylor Buck, E., Keetharuth, A.D., Ricketts, T., Barkham, M., Robotham, D., Rose, D. & Brazier, J. 2018. The importance of content and face validity in instrument development: lessons learnt from service users when developing the Recovering Quality of Life measure (ReQoL). Quality of Life Research 27(7): 1893–1902.
DeVellis, R.F. 2017. Scale Development Theory and Applications. 4th Ed. London: SAGE Publication Inc.
Dorenbosch, L., Engen, M.L. van & Verhagen, M. 2005. On the job innovation: The impact of job design and human resource management through production ownership. Creativity and Innovation Management 14(2): 129–141.
Doustmohammadian, A., Omidvar, N., Keshavarz-Mohammadi, N., Abdollahi, M., Amini, M. & Eini-Zinab, H. 2017. Developing and validating a scale to measure Food and Nutrition Literacy (FNLIT) in elementary school children in Iran. PLoS ONE 12(6): 1–18.
Fanning, E. 2005. Formatting a paper-based survey questionnaire: Best practices. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 10(12): 1–14.
Felin, T., Foss, N.J. & Ployhart, R.E. 2015. The Microfoundations Movement in Strategy and Organization Theory. Academy of Management Annals 9(1): 575–632.
Field, A. 2018. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. 5th Ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Furr, R.M. 2014. Scale Construction and Psychometrics for Social and Personality Psychology. London: SAGE Publications Inc.
George, N., Barrett, N., McPeake, L., Goett, R., Anderson, K. & Baird, J. 2015. Content validation of a novel screening tool to identify emergency department patients with significant palliative care needs. Academic Emergency Medicine 22(7): 823–837.
Ghazali Darusalam & Sufean Hussin. 2016. Metodologi Penyelidikan Dalam Pendidikan: Amalan Dan Analisis Kajian. Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit Universiti Malaya.
Gogol, K., Brunner, M., Goetz, T., Martin, R., Ugen, S., Keller, U., Fischbach, A. & Preckel, F. 2014. “My questionnaire is too long!” The assessments of motivational-affective constructs with three-item and single-item measures. Contemporary Educational Psychology 39(3): 188–205.
Janssen, O. 2000. Job demands, perceptions of effort–reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 73: 287–302.
Janssen, O. 2004. How fairness perceptions make innovative behavior more or less stressful. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25(2): 201–215.
De Jong, J. & Den Hartog, D. 2008. Innovative Work Behavior: Measurement and Validation. EIM Business and Policy Research 8(1): 1–27.
De Jong, J. & Den Hartog, D. 2010. Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management 19(1): 23–36.
De Spiegelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., De Witte, H., Niesen, W. & Van Hootegem, G. 2014. On the relation of job insecurity, job autonomy, innovative work behaviour and the mediating effect of work engagement. Creativity and Innovation Management 23(3): 318–330.
June, S. & Kheng, Y.K. 2014. Innovative Work Behavior (IWB) in the Knowledge Intensive Business Services (KIBS) Sector in Malaysia: The Effect of Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and Social Capital (SC). Asian Social Science 10(2): 172–182.
Kazi, A.M. & Khalid, W. 2012. Questionnaire designing and validation. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association 62(5): 514–516.
Khairul Anuar, A.R. 2012. Disposisi Guru Berkesan: Personaliti dan Kemahiran Komunikasi. Akademika 82(2): 37–44.
Laursen, K. & Foss, N.J. 2003. New human resource management practices, complementarities and the impact on innovation performance. Cambridge Journal of Economics 27(2): 243–263.
Lawshe, C.H. 1975. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology 28(4): 563–575.
Leong, C.T. & Rasli, A. 2014. The Relationship between Innovative Work Behavior on Work Role Performance: An Empirical Study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 129(2014): 592–600.
Lukes, M. & Stephan, U. 2017. Measuring employee innovation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 23(1): 136–158.
Manso, G. 2017. Creating incentives for innovation. California Management Review 60(1): 18–32.
Messmann, G. & Mulder, R.H. 2012. Development of a measurement instrument for innovative work behaviour as a dynamic and context-bound construct. Human Resource Development International 15(1): 43–59.
Mishra, S. & Panda, S. 2007. Development and factor analysis of an instrument to measure faculty attitude towards e-learning. Asian Journal of Distance Education 5(1): 27–33.
Mohammad Rahim, K., & Rohany N., 2017. Kesahan Kandungan dan Muka. Teknik Kesahan dan Kebolehpercayaan Alat Ujian Psikologi. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Mohammad Rahim, K., Rohany, N., Wan Shahrazad, W.S., Rozainee, K. & Zainah, A.Z. 2017. Validity and Psychometric Properties of Malay Translated Religious Orientation Scale-Revised among Malaysian Adult Samples. Akademika 87(2): 133–144.
Mohammad Rahim, K., Rohany, N., Wan Shahrazad, W.S., Sarah Waheeda, M.H., Janetter Marcial@Nur Atiqah, A., Rozainee, K. & Zainah, A.Z. 2018. Validity and Reliability of Malay Version Financial Well-Being Scale among Malaysian Employees. Akademika 88(2): 109–120.
Mohd Effendi Ewan Mohd Matore, Hisyamsani Idris, Normawati Abdul Rahman & Ahmad Zamri Khairani. 2017. Kesahan Kandungan Pakar Instrumen IKBAR Bagi Pengukuran AQ Menggunakan Nisbah Kesahan Kandungan. Proseeding of International Conference On Global Education V (ICGE V) (May): 979–997.
Ngann Sook Wei. 2016. Hubungan Antara Pembelajaran Berorganisasi Dengan Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif Dalam Kalangan Guru Sekolah Rendah Bai’ah. Ph.D Thesis, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.
Noorsafiza Mohd Sapie. 2016. Pembelajaran di Organisasi dan Persekitaran Kerja terhadap pembentukan tingkah laku kerja inovatif. Ph.D Thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Nur Atiqah Abdullah. 2014. Modal Psikologi Positif & Nilai Kerja sebagai Peramal kepada Tingkah Laku Inovatif. Ph.D Thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Nur Atiqah Abdullah, Norazila Mat, Roshayati Abdul Hamid & Noor Hasni. 2016. Tingkah Laku Inovatif Dalam Kalangan Pelajar Pascasiswazah : Satu Kajian Rintis di Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Jurnal Personalia Pelajar 19(2): 41–48.
Örnek, A.Ş. & Ayas, S. 2015. The relationship between intellectual capital, innovative work behavior and business performance reflection. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 195: 1387–1395.
Polit, D.F. & Beck, C.T. 2006. The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing and Health 29: 489–497.
Powell, C. 2003. The Delphi technique: myths and realities. Methodological Issues in Nursing Research 41(4): 376–382.
Rubio, D.M.G., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S.S., Lee, E.S. & Rauch, S. 2003. Objectifyng content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research 27(2): 94–104.
Schleicher, A. 2012. Preparing Teachers and Developing School Leaders for the 21st Century: Lessons from around the World. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Scott, S.G. & Bruce, R.A. 1994. Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal 37(3): 580–607.
Shrotryia, V.K. & Dhanda, U. 2019. Content Validity of Assessment Instrument for Employee Engagement. SAGE Open 9(1): 1–7.
Stan, D.S., Gyes, G. Van & Hootegem, G. Van. 2014. The concept of Innovative Work Behavior: Definition and orientation. Gedrag & Organisatie 27(2): 139–156.
Standing, C., Jackson, D., Larsen, A.C., Suseno, Y., Fulford, R. & Gengatharen, D. 2016. Enhancing individual innovation in organisations: A review of the literature. International Journal of Innovation and Learning 19(1): 44–62.
Taherdoost, H. 2016. Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument; How to Test the Validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a Research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management (IJARM) 5(3): 28–36.
Thurlings, M., Evers, A.T. & Vermeulen, M. 2015. Toward a Model of Explaining Teachers’ Innovative Behavior: A Literature Review. Review of Educational Research 85(3): 430–471.
Tojib, D.R. & Sugianto, L.-F. 2006. Content validity of instruments in IS research. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA) 8(3): 31–56.
Wilson, F.R., Pan, W. & Schumsky, D.A. 2012. Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 45(3): 197–210.
Yaghmaie, F. 2009. Content validity and its estimation. Journal of Medical Education 3(1): 870.
Yuan, F. & Woodman, R.W. 2010. Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. Academy of Management Journal 53(2): 323–342.
Zamanzadeh, V., Ghahramanian, A., Rassouli, M., Abbaszadeh, A., Alavi-Majd, H. & Nikanfar, A.-R. 2015. Design and Implementation Content Validity Study: Development of an instrument for measuring Patient-Centered Communication. Journal of Caring Sciences 4(2): 165–178.
Zhang, M. & Zhang, L. 2012. Teacher’s innovative work behavior and innovation climate. Chinese Journal of Ergonomics 18: 1–6.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
ISSN: 0126-5008
eISSN: 0126-8694