Upcoming Presentations 2018

Three presentations have just been accepted for 2018:

  • Froehlich, D. E. (2018a). Explanatory sequential research designs on autopilot: Using RMarkdown to increase research efficiency. Demonstration presented at the MMIRA International Conference, Vienna.
  • Froehlich, D. E. (2018b). Mixed Structural Analysis: A new method to inquire into social relationships in “a mixed way.” Paper presented at the MMIRA International Conference, Vienna.
  • Froehlich, D. E. (2018c). Supersize, please: Upgrading qualitative research efficiency using automated quantitative pre-studies. Paper presented at the XXXVIII Sunbelt 2018 Conference, Utrecht.
Get in touch with me to learn more about these research projects (or attend my session at the respective conferences 🙂 ).

New publication: Development and validation of the short-form employability five-factor instrument

A new publication that I co-authored was recently published. In this article, we validated a short version of Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden’s (2006) employability questionnaire.

Abstract

A 22-item short-form of the 47-item Employability Five-Factor instrument (Van der Heijde & Van der Heijden, 2006; Van der Heijden, De Lange, Demerouti, & Van der Heijde, 2009) was developed and validated across five empirical survey studies. The Short-Form Employability instrument has consistent and acceptable internal consistencies and a similar factor structure across all samples studied. The outcomes favor a five-dimensional operationalization of the employability construct over a one-dimensional higher-order construct, with good discriminant validity of the underlying employability dimensions. Moreover, since the five dimensions of employability all appeared to be significantly related to both objective and subjective career success outcome measures, the predictive validity of the shortened tool is promising. The Short-Form Employability instrument facilitates further scientific HRM and career research without compromising its psychometric qualities.

Full article

Access the full article here.

Cite as

Van der Heijden, B., Notelaers, G., Peters, P., Stoffers, J., De Lange, A., Froehlich, D. E., & Van der Heijde, C. M. (2018). Development and validation of the short-form employability five-factor instrument. Journal of Vocational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.02.003

Previous presentations

Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., Notelaers, G., Peters, P., Stoffers, J. M. M., De Lange, A. H., Froehlich, D. E., & Van der Heijde, C. M. (2017). Development and Validation of the Short-Form Employability Five-Factor Instrument. In Paper presented at the EAWOP 2017. Dublin.

New Online Course on Statistics in PSPP/PSPPIRE [in German]

My new online course on Statistics in PSPP/PSPPIRE has been launched. You can access it here.

New Online Course on Survey Creation [in German]

My new course on Survey Creation with LimeSurvey has been published. Register here to learn about how to create (online) surveys that are both efficient and meaningful.

Call for Papers: Special Issue on Social Networks in Education and Learning

Guest Editorial Team

Dr. Dominik E. Froehlich, University of Vienna

Dr. Jasperina Brouwer, University of Groningen

Aim of this special issue

This special issue proposed to Frontline Learning Research focuses on papers that use social network analysis (SNA) to understand how individuals involved in activities related to education and learning are affected by or use their social networks. We welcome papers that seek to make empirical, methodological, and/or theoretical contributions to our understanding of social networks in the context of learning and education. In that sense, the call is open to a wide variety of submissions. There are only two major requirements: the paper needs to discuss or apply SNA (as a method or a theory) and be related to the field of learning and education.

If you feel unsure about the suitability your submission, please get in touch with us to verify the suitability of your project — just drop us a line at dominik.froehlich@univie.ac.at!

Note: Papers with a strong methodological orientation in the domain of mixed-methods should better be submitted to a parallel call for chapters in an edited volume about mixed approaches to social network analysis. You can find this call here: https://goo.gl/XBZsxQ

Submit your proposal

Please submit a proposal (max. 1,500 words including references) to dominik.froehlich@univie.ac.at by 01.12.2017. Your proposal will be evaluated using the following criteria:

  • Responsiveness to the call
  • Applicability to the journal’s scope
  • Scientific merit (e.g., research design, sample, analyses)
  • Likelihood of successful completion within timeline
  • Fit with other submissions

Call for Chapters: Mixed Methods Approaches to Social Network Analysis

Editorial Team

Dr. Dominik E. Froehlich, University of Vienna
Dr. Martin Rehm, UNU-Merit & PH Weingarten
Prof. Bart Rienties, Open University

Aim of this edited volume

The main objective of this edited volume for Routledge is to establish an informed theoretical and methodological basis for research using Mixed Methods approaches to Social Network Analysis (MMSNA). This objective is achieved through two main innovations. First, the edited volume strives to provide an integrated and cohesive view of the affordances and limitations of integrating mixed-methods research (Creswell, 2014; Hesse-Biber & Johnson, 2015) with social network analysis. We strive to build a bridge that connects these two research communities that draw theoretically, conceptually, and analytically from each other, but that did not always engage in discussions very directly. Second, the edited volume features a wide range of MMSNA topics, ranging from theoretical and methodological discussions to hands-on “tutorials” of how MMSNA may be actually implemented.

Against this backdrop, we invite chapters that address pertinent questions with respect to MMSNA. Chapters can have a theoretical, methodological or empirical focus, or may be a combination of those three. Your final contribution will then be commented on by established mixed methods researchers.

If you feel unsure about your submission, please get in touch with us to verify the suitability of your project — just drop us a line.

Submission

Please submit your brief abstract of 200-500 words by 31.10.2017 to dominik.froehlich@univie.ac.at. Please mention MMSNA in the subject. We will evaluate your proposal based on the responsiveness to the call, scientific merit, the likelihood of successful completion within the timeline, and the fit with other submissions.

Publication of the book is planned for 2019.

Agency at Work: Book published

The book Agency at Work, edited by Michael Goller andSusanna Paloniemi, has been published. It features two contributions from my side:

  • Harwood, J., & Froehlich, D. E. (2017). Proactive Feedback-Seeking, Teaching Performance, and Flourishing Amongst Teachers in an International Primary School. In M. Goller & S. Paloniemi (Eds.), Agency at work: An agentic perspective on professional learning and development (pp. 425–444). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60943-0_21
  • Damşa, C. I., Froehlich, D. E., & Gegenfurtner, A. (2017). Reflections on Empirical and Methodological Accounts of Agency at Work. In M. Goller & S. Paloniemi (Eds.), Agency at work: An agentic perspective on professional learning and development (pp. 445–461). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60943-0_22

Abstracts

Harwood, J., & Froehlich, D. E. (2017)

In this chapter, we consider teacher agency as an important concept amongst educators. We investigate individual agency in an educational setting in the form of workplace learning. Specifically, we argue that agentic, proactive feedback-seeking is an important way for teachers to engage in learning. Proactive feedback-seeking is hypothesised to improve both subjective teaching performance and general well-being in terms of flourishing. We present a case study of an international primary school located in Jakarta, Indonesia, that is based on both quantitative and qualitative data. The quantitative analyses revealed that there exists a positive relationship between proactive feedback-seeking and subjective teaching performance. No evidence was found for the hypothesised relationship between proactive feedback-seeking and flourishing in this study. Given these unexpected results, we turned to qualitative data to help better our understanding of the dynamics of proactive feedback-seeking in an educational setting. In the discussion, in which we integrate the results of both streams of research, we point out several contextual elements that most likely inhibited the relationship between proactive feedback-seeking and flourishing whilst providing a list of circumstances and conditions in which the positive relationship between proactive feedback-seeking and subjective teacher performance can be founded on. We then offer implications both for further research and teaching practice.

Damşa, C. I., Froehlich, D. E., & Gegenfurtner, A. (2017)

This chapter provides a reflective account of the studies in Part II of this volume, with a focus on discussing their empirical and methodological contributions to research on agency at work. Agency at work is a crucial component of how individuals engage with work and learning in a way that enables them to develop. Until recently, research on agency at work has had a distinct conceptual stance. These empirical chapters, therefore, provide an important contribution to the literature, by both employing different conceptualisations and examining agency at work in various contexts. In this chapter, we provide some descriptive and reflective accounts of the variety and nature of the empirical work and the methodologies employed based on a framework inspired by conceptual depictions of agency in the literature. Emirbayer and Mische’s (Am J Sociol 103(4):962–1023, 1998) framework that indicates three facets of agency—iterative, practical-evaluative, and projective—has been complemented by characteristics emerging from the analysed studies, indicating the relational versus transformative nature of agency at work. We engage in a discussion on the focus of these studies and operationalisations of agency, the units of analysis, analytical approaches and main findings. We then reflect upon the nature of agency at work and discuss the heterogeneity that is distinctly featured among the studies: Heterogeneity of terms of operationalisations and methodologies employed and also of findings considered defining for agency at work has stood out as an important characteristic of these empirical works. Based on this analysis and reflection, we delineate avenues that may drive the further consolidation of the field. Our reflective account highlights that the studies reviewed have provided an understanding of agency beyond disciplinary boundaries and beyond exclusively individual or collective actions. They reflect the complexity at the empirical level, where agency is expressed in heterogeneous ways and drives actions that trigger further learning processes.

 

Most downloaded article of the decade

My article Great Expectations has been announced to be among the top-5 downloaded papers since the inception of Vocations and Learning.

“Constant Evaluation” – Article in “Die Presse”

I was recently interviewed for a commentary on the subject matter of constant peer evaluation, a practice on the rise in several organizations. Here is the link (the article is in German, though!).

By the way, this is linked to a talk I will give at the upcoming Personal Austria conference for HR; expect another post on this!

The Writing Workflow: Pick a project to focus on

I am currently musing with applying a more stringent framework on my publication efforts. This ties into the debate of systems vs. goals and–if nothing else–should outsource some of the more mundane work to checklists and trackers.

Productivity can usually be increased tremendously by having one focal project. With such a laser-like focus, we do not need so much time changing tasks or projects; we might not even need a todo-list, as the project is so present in our mind.

This begs one question: what project to start with? There might be different points to look at, such as general importance of a particular paper, the estimated impact it has, the difficulty of analysis, etc. The number one decision-criteria, however, is more process focused: pick the lowest hanging fruit first. The idea behind this simple recommendation is that you get the projects that you can finish relatively quickly out of your way. Then focusing on particular projects will be even easier for you.

So how to choose which one to work on once you find time? To aid with that question, I designed a simple spreadsheet that can be used as a tracker for your research projects. The general rule here is that the farther to the right your status bar goes, the “lower the fruit is hanging”. So just screen your tracking sheet from the right to the left and handle the papers in the order they appear! In brief, this gives priority of requested revisions over editing your drafts, and of editing your drafts over drafting new text.

« Older posts