EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 202 (2024) SHS Web Conf., 202 (2024) 04008 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 202, 2024
The 1st International Conference on Environment and Smart Education (ICEnSE 2024)
Article Number 04008
Number of page(s) 12
Section Smart Learning Environment
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202420204008
Published online 14 November 2024
  1. T. Van Waeyenberg, R. Peccei, and A. Decramer, Performance management, and teacher performance: the role of affective organizational commitment and exhaustion. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., 33(4), pp. 623–646, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.175488. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. A. Milanowski, Strategic measures of teacher performance. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(7), pp. 19–25, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217110920. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. M. Singh and A. Sarkar, Role of psychological empowerment in the relationship between structural empowerment and innovative behavior. Manag. Res. Rev., 42(4), pp. 521–538, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-04-2018-015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. J. Zhu, J. Yao, and L. Zhang, Linking empowering leadership to innovative behavior in professional learning communities: the role of psychological empowerment and team psychological safety. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev., 20(4), pp. 657–671, 2019. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. G. Falloon, From digital literacy to digital competence: the teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 68(5), pp. 2449–2472, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. M. Danaher, K. Schoepp, and A. A. Kranov, Teaching and measuring the professional skills of information technology students using a learning-oriented assessment task. Int. J. Eng. Educ., 35(3), p. 795, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  7. A. Twum-Antwi, P. Jefferies, and M. Ungar, Promoting child and youth resilience by strengthening home and school environments: A literature review. Int. J. Sch. Educ. Psychol., 8(2), pp. 78–89, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2019.166028. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. E. Bouw, I. Zitter, and E. De Bruijn, Exploring co-construction of learning environments at the boundary of school and work through the lens of vocational practice. Vocat. Learn., 14(3), pp. 559–588, 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. D. N. Harris and T. R. Sass, Skills, productivity and the evaluation of teacher performance. Econ. Educ. Rev., 40, pp. 183–204, 2014. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. R. A. Zubaidah, S. Haryono, and U. Udin, The effects of principal leadership and teacher competence on teacher performance: The role of work motivation. Calitatea, 22(180), pp. 91–96, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  11. C. M. Shanti, I. Gunawan, and A. Y. Sobri, Relationship of school visionary leadership and organizational climate with teacher performance in 1st International Conference on Information Technology and Education (ICITE 2020), Atlantis Press, 2020, pp. 624–629. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201214.30. [Google Scholar]
  12. W. C. Borman and S. M. Motowidlo, Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  13. Y. Cai and C. Lin, Theory and practice on teacher performance evaluation. Front. Educ. China, 1, pp. 29–39, 2006. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. J. Yao, Y. You, and J. Zhu, Principal–teacher management communication and teachers’ job performance: the mediating role of psychological empowerment and affective commitment. Asia-Pacific Educ. Res., 29, pp. 365–375, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Qamari, I. N., & Shukor, S. A, Improving Teamwork Performance: An Empirical Study of Service Industry in Indonesia and Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(2), pp. 581–589. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  16. K. Kwon and T. Kim, An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev., 30(2), p. 100704, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.10070. [Google Scholar]
  17. J. De Jong and D. Den Hartog, “Measuring innovative work behavior,” Creat. Innov. Manag., 19(1), pp. 23–36, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. M. A. West, Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Appl. Psychol., 51(3), pp. 355–387, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.0095. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. R.-S. Chen, The Impacts of Workplace Advantage, Learning Intentions, and Technology Skills on the Use of Information Technology-Assisted Instruction by Early Childhood Pre-Service Teachers. Turkish Online J. Educ. Technol., 14(2), pp. 206–218, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  20. G. Peng, Y. Wang, and G. Han, Information technology and employment: The impact of job tasks and worker skills. J. Ind. Relations, 60(2), pp. 201–223, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. D. H. Autor, F. Levy, and R. J. Murnane, The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Q. J. Econ., 118(4), pp. 1279–1333, 2003. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. S. Pawirosumarto, P. K. Sarjana, and R. Gunawan, The effect of work environment, leadership style, and organizational culture towards job satisfaction and its implication towards employee performance in Parador Hotels and Resorts, Indonesia. Int. J. Law Manag., 59(6), pp. 1337–1358, 2017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. K. Kuusisto, “Project towards automatic invoicing: Case: Metso Minerals Inc.,” 2011. [Google Scholar]
  24. G. Russell, G. Finger, and N. Russell, Information technology skills of Australian teachers: Implications for teacher education. J. Inf. Technology Teach. Educ., 9(2), pp. 149–166, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939000020008. [Google Scholar]
  25. N. Bascia and C. Rottmann, What’s so important about teachers’ working conditions? The fatal flaw in North American educational reform. J. Educ. Policy, 26(6), pp. 787–802, 2011. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. A. Toropova, E. Myrberg, and S. Johansson, Teacher job satisfaction: the importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educ. Rev., 73(1), pp. 71–97, 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. S. P. Robbins and T. A. Judge, Essentials of organizational behavior. Pearson, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  28. D. Hasbay and E. Altındag, Factors that affect the performance of teachers working in secondary-level education. Acad. Educ. Leadersh. J., 22(1), pp. 1–19, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  29. A. Zaiţ and P. Bertea, Methods for testing discriminant validity. Manag. Mark. J., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 217–224, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  30. M. Thurlings, A. T. Evers, and M. Vermeulen, Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behavior: A literature review. Rev. Educ. Res., 85(3), pp. 430–471, 2015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. G. Pan and P.-S. Seow, Preparing accounting graduates for digital revolution: A critical review of information technology competencies and skills development. J. Educ. Bus., 91(3), pp. 166–175, 2016. https://ssrn.com/abstract=272816. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. P. P. Tampi, S. D. Nabella, and D. P. Sari, The Influence of Information Technology Users, Employee Empowerment, and Work Culture on Employee Performance at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights Regional Office of Riau Islands. Enrich. J. Manag., 12(3), pp. 1620–1628, 2022. https://doi.org/10.35335/enrichment.v12i3.62. [Google Scholar]
  33. S. Malakolunthu, A. R. Idris, and N. C. Rengasamy, Teacher professional experience and performance: impact of the work environment and general welfare in Malaysian secondary schools. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev., 11, pp. 609–617, 2010. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. R. Yan, The influence of working conditions on principal turnover in K-12 public schools. Educ. Adm. Q., 56(1), pp. 89–122, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.