My newest article “Linking Quantitative and Qualitative Network Approaches: A Review of Mixed Methods Social Network Analysis in Education Research” is out. Get it here for free: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/0091732X20903311
A paper I have written with Judith Schoonenboom and Burke Johnson was published this week. It’s open access an you can find it here.
In the mixed methods literature over the past 25 years, purposes of mixing have typically been treated as characteristics of an overall mixed methods design. However, many purposes operate on a within-study basis rather than applying to the entire study. Furthermore, in perhaps the majority of studies, researchers rely on multiple purposes of mixing. For example, an explanatory-sequential design will often include more purposes than just “explanation.” Some purposes are identified at the beginning of the study, and other purposes emerge during the conduct of the study. We demonstrate how multiple purposes are identified and incorporated into a design by examining a published research study (Glewwe, Kremer, & Moulin, 2009). We emphasize that all mixed methods research (MMR) authors need to be explicit about the multiple “mixed methods purposes” operating in a research study. Following this recommendation will help MMR become more sophisticated about mixing and integration, and it will increase the transparency of our research.
For the first time, I have written about actual (my very own) Higher Ed practice! I turned my design based research project centered on the flipped learning concept (for which I also won the university-wide UNIVie Teaching Award 2018) into an academic publication. It’s open access, so you can check it out yourself. And it is also my first publication available in Spanish!
We live in a world permeated by digital technologies. Still, however, this digitization is not always reflected in the learning environments of higher education institutions, which raises questions about the adequacy of the instructional outcomes. In this paper, I maintain that the concept of the inverted or flipped classroom may be a fruitful path to including learning “hands-on” with technology even in learning environments absent of any technological resources. The rationale for this proposition is that flipped elements transfer the demand for technology from the teaching environment to the student. I report on a design-based research project to put this claim to a first test. The qualitative and quantitative data collected all support the idea that flipped classroom elements may help overcome differences in terms of availability of technology in different learning environments. The implications for universities and higher education teachers are discussed.
Froehlich, D.E. (2018). Non-technological Learning Environments in a Technological World: Flipping Comes to the Aid. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 7(2), 88-92. doi: 10.7821/naer.2018.7.304
My paper “Work in progress: the progression of competence-based employability” was just published in Career Development International.
Purpose: Employability and its components have received a lot of attention from scholars and practitioners. However, little is known about the interrelations between these different components of employability and how employees progress within their employability trajectories. Therefore, a model of such progression was constructed and tested using Van der Heijde and Van der Heijden’s (2006) employability measurement instrument. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
Design/methodology/approach: The propositions were tested empirically by applying a Rasch model using a sample of 167 Austrian business consultants.
Findings: The findings lend some support for the hypothesized progression model of employability. Specifically, the items measuring occupational expertise are largely located in the group of items that were relatively likely to be endorsed. Also, the items of personal flexibility and anticipation and optimization were, in general, less likely to be endorsed than the items of occupational expertise.
Research limitations/implications: The major thrust of this paper is a theoretical one. However, the empirical demonstration tentatively supports the proposed model, which implies that further, more robust longitudinal research in this direction may be a worthwhile endeavor.
Practical implications: By understanding which competences are important at which stage or across which stages of an individual’s career, career advisors and human resource management professionals can give more targeted advice concerning career management practices.
Originality/value: The present study contributes to the literature by investigating how employees may make progress within their employability trajectories.
Froehlich, D. E., Liu, M., & Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M. (2018). Work in Progress: The Progression of Competence-Based Employability. Career Development International, 23(2), 230–244.
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.
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.
Access the full article here.
The book Agency at Work, edited by Michael Goller andSusanna Paloniemi, has been published. It features two contributions from my side:
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.
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.