Mohammed Afandi Zainal,Mohd Effendi @ Ewan Mohd Matore,




Innovative Behavior,Psychometric,Rash Model,Teacher,Instrument,


The purpose of the study is to analyze the psychometric properties of a survey questionnaire, Malaysian Teachers’ Innovative Behavior Instrument (MTIB) using Rasch Measurement Model aided by Winstep software Version 3.73. The questionnaire was administered on 109 school teachers from Melaka. The data were analyses to examine the items functional accordingly from the aspect of items fit in measuring constructs, items polarity, unidimensionality, local independence and the reliability and separation of item and respondent. The Rasch analysis showed satisfying psychometric properties of MTIB after removal of some misfitting items. Fit statistic evaluation discovered that a sum of 10 items were out of range and leaving only 20 items remaining that are appropriate to measure the four constructs of the innovative behavior in the MTIB. Further analysis with the remaining 20 items revealed that each PTMEA Corr is in positive values and met the assumptions of unidimensionality and local independence. Reliability and separation index were also within acceptable range. As for future research, it is recommended that different studies should be organized by using a various sample to generate much better, detailed and comprehensive information which can be represented more extensively.


I. Ariffin, T. F. T., Bush, T., & Nordin, H. “Framing the roles and responsibilities of excellent teachers: Evidence from Malaysia”. Teaching and Teacher Education, Volume: 73, pp. 14–23, 2018

II. Balsamo, M., Giampaglia, G., & Saggino, A. “Building a new Rasch-based self-report inventory of depression”.Neuropsychitric Disease and Treatment, Volume: 10, pp. 153–165. 2014

III. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. Applying the rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge. 2015

IV. Brem, A., Maier, M., & Wimschneider, C. “Competitive advantage through innovation: the case of Nespresso” European Journal of Innovation Management, Volume: 19, Issue: 1, pp. 133–148. 2016

V. De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. “Innovative Work Behavior: Measurement and Validation”. EIM Business and Policy Research, Volume: 8, Issue: 1,pp. 1–27. 2008

VI. Fisher, W. P. “Rating scale instrument quality criteria”. Rasch Measurement Transactions, Volume: 21, Issue: 1,pp. 1095. 2007

VII. George, L., & Sabapathy, T. “Work motivation of teachers: Relationship with organizational commitment”. Canadian Social Science, Volume: 7, Issue: 1,pp. 90–99. 2011

VIII. Hadi, F. H., Mohd, F., Ismail, N., & Nair, P. K. “Importance of Commitment in Encouraging Employees’ Innovative Behavior Introduction”. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, Volume: 8, Issue: 1,pp. 1–25. 2016

IX. Hattie, J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta‐analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge. 2009

X. Hon, A. H. Y., & Lui, S. S. “Employee creativity and innovation in organizations”. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Volume: 28, Issue: 5,pp. 862–885. 2016

XI. Lee, W.-G., Jeon, Y.-H., Kim, J.-W., & Jung, C.-Y. “Effects of job security and psychological ownership on turnover intention and innovative behavior of manufacturing employees”. Journal of the Korea Safety Management and Science, Volume: 16, Issue: 1, pp. 53–68. 2014

XII. Linacre, J M. “A user’s guide to WINSTEPS: Rasch Model Computer Programs”. Chicago: Mesa-Press. 2016

XIII. Linacre, John M. “What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? ” Rasch Measurement Transactions, Volume: 16, Issue: 2,pp. 878. 2002

XIV. Messmann, G., & Mulder, R. H. “Development of a measurement instrument for innovative work behaviour as a dynamic and context-bound construct”. Human Resource Development International, Volume: 15, Issue: 2, pp.43–59. 2012

XV. Naqshbandi, M. M. “Managerial ties and open innovation: examining the role of absorptive capacity”. Management Decision, Volume: 54, Issue: 9, pp.2256–2276. 2016

XVI. Ngann, S. W. “Hubungan Antara Pembelajaran Berorganisasi Dengan Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif Dalam Kalangan Guru Sekolah Rendah Bai’ah”. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris. 2016

XVII. Noorsafiza, M. S. “Pembelajaran di Organisasi dan Persekitaran Kerja terhadap pembentukan tingkah laku kerja inovatif. ” Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. 2016

XVIII. Nur Atiqah, A. Modal Psikologi Positif & Nilai Kerja sebagai Peramal kepada Tingkah Laku Inovatif. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. 2014

XIX. Serdyukov, P. “Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? ” Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, Volume: 10, Issue: 1, pp. 4–33. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1108/jrit-10-2016-0007

XX. West, M. A., & Farr, J. L. “Innovation at work: Psychological perspectives” Social Behaviour, Volume: 4, Issue: 1, 15–30. 1989.

XXI. Wu, M., & Adams, R. Applying the Rasch model to psycho-social measurement: A practical approach. Melbourne: Educational Measurement Solutions. 2007.

XXII. Zainal, M. A., & Matore, M. E.E. M. “Tingkah Laku Inovatif Sebagai Pemangkin Dalam Meneroka Idea Kamikaze Guru Pada Masa Depan”. Prosiding Seminar Kebangsaan Pendidikan Negara (SKEPEN) Ke-6. 2019, pp. 2337–2350. 2019

XXIII. Zhu, C. “Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher education”. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, Volume: 24, Issue: 1, pp.65–79. 2015

View Download