Article citationsMore >>

Hammond, M.M., Neff, N.L., Farr, J.L., Schwall, A.R., & Zhao, X. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: a meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 90-105.

has been cited by the following article:

Article

Individual Innovativeness of Pre-service Elementary Grade Teachers

1College of Teacher Education, Quirino State University, Philippines


American Journal of Educational Research. 2018, Vol. 6 No. 6, 617-620
DOI: 10.12691/education-6-6-6
Copyright © 2018 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Romiro G. Bautista, Cynthia Grace T. Valdez, Eleanor G. Garingan, Jamina G. Camayang, Dennis Norfel P. Horlador, Jefferson N. Manait, Elfie S. Reyes. Individual Innovativeness of Pre-service Elementary Grade Teachers. American Journal of Educational Research. 2018; 6(6):617-620. doi: 10.12691/education-6-6-6.

Correspondence to: Romiro  G. Bautista, College of Teacher Education, Quirino State University, Philippines. Email: romiro.bautista@qsu.edu.ph

Abstract

Individual innovativeness, as applied among teachers who are agents of change and innovations, centers the idea of being adaptive and adoptive to radical changes through risk-taking. Innovativeness is the teachers’ tendency to adapt and adopt innovations earlier than other members of their niche, in particular, and the society, in general. This study is designed to determine the individual innovativeness of pre-service elementary grade teachers as a basis in proposing an intervention program to boost their morale of being an innovative professional teacher. Using 42 senior pre-service elementary grade teachers of the SY 2017-2018 under Descriptive-Comparative Research Design, the following are known: (1) The respondents were late majority innovative with a general index of 55.70, interpreted as lowly innovative (late majority); (2) Males had higher index than their female counterparts although the mean difference of .50 is almost negligible – both males and females fall in the index range for late majority innovative; (3) The age group of 21-22 had the highest index than their 23 and above and 19-20 age group-counterparts although the mean differences of .08 and 1.50, respectively, are almost negligible – all age groups fall in the index range for late majority innovative; and (4) The Ilocanos had the highest index when compared to their Ifugao/Igorot and other ethno-linguistic group-counterparts although the mean differences of 1.63 and 1.38, respectively, are almost negligible – all ethnicity groups fall in the index range for late majority innovative.

Keywords