Teaching Effectiveness as a Determinant of Teacher Innovation: A Structural Model Approach
Abstract
The demands of 21st-century learning and the characteristics of vocational education place teacher innovation as a key factor in improving the quality of learning. One important determinant of teacher innovation is teaching effectiveness, which reflects the teacher's ability to plan, implement, and evaluate learning systematically and adaptively. This study aims to analyze the influence of teaching effectiveness on teacher innovation in private vocational high schools (SMK) in Bekasi Regency. The study used a mixed methods approach with a sequential exploratory design. The qualitative phase was conducted through structured interviews with 30 teachers in five private vocational high schools to explore in-depth the practice of teaching effectiveness and its contribution to the emergence of learning innovation. The qualitative findings were used as the basis for developing a conceptual model and formulating research hypotheses. The quantitative phase involved 124 permanent foundation teachers selected through multistage random sampling and proportional random sampling techniques from a population of 180 teachers in nine accredited private vocational high schools. Quantitative data were collected using a closed-ended questionnaire and analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling–Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS). The analysis results show that teaching effectiveness has a positive and significant effect on teacher innovation with a path coefficient value of 0.514, a T-statistic of 6.100, and a p-value of 0.001. This finding confirms that teachers with a high level of teaching effectiveness tend to be more innovative in developing learning strategies, methods, and media. This study provides theoretical contributions by strengthening the role of teaching effectiveness as a determinant of teacher innovation, as well as practical implications for teacher professional development and policies to improve the quality of learning in vocational schools.
References
Ahmad, R., & Suryana, B. (2020). Teacher instructional effectiveness in modern classrooms. Journal of Education Research, 12(2), 45–58.
Andini, M., & Saputra, E. (2023). Formative assessment practices in improving learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Assessment, 5(2), 33–49.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–336). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dasmo, D., Notosudjono, D., & Sunardi, O. (2022). Tantangan guru dalam menghadapi revolusi industri 4.0. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Teknologi, 5(2), 112–120.
Fitriyani, N. (2023). Instructional flexibility and learner-centered teaching. Journal of Learning Development, 10(4), 115–128.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Danks, N. P. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Halim, S., & Prasetyo, H. (2023). Intrinsic motivation and teaching productivity. Educational Psychology Review, 18(3), 101–119.
Handayani, T. (2023). Time management in effective instruction. Journal of Classroom Management, 9(2), 55–68.
Hapsari, D., & Kurniawan, I. (2021). Teacher–student interaction and learning engagement. Journal of Instructional Practice, 7(1), 20–34.
Hardianto, F., Mulyani, S., & Wahyuni, A. (2021). Studi literatur tentang keinovatifan di dunia pendidikan. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan dan Pengajaran, 8(1), 55–63. https://jseahr.jurnal.unej.ac.id/index.php/JIPSD/article/view/1141
Hidayat, R. (2024). Collaborative learning facilitation by teachers. Journal of Active Learning, 8(1), 77–89.
Ismail, A., & Rahmawati, F. (2022). Interpersonal communication in teaching effectiveness. Journal of Pedagogic Interaction, 4(2), 128–143.
Kurniasih, E. (2022). Differentiated instruction for diverse learners. Journal of Learning Strategies, 6(1), 13–27.
Marlina, S., & Yusuf, M. (2021). Systematic lesson planning for effective teaching. Journal of Teaching Studies, 3(2), 144–159.
Nugroho, D., Santoso, A., & Hartono, W. (2022). Technology integration in modern pedagogy. Journal of Digital Education, 5(3), 90–104.
Pradana, R., & Erlina, L. (2022). Conceptual understanding and critical thinking in learning. Journal of Cognitive Education, 11(2), 201–216.
Putra, A., & Lestari, S. (2020). Classroom management for effective learning outcomes. Education Today, 4(3), 99–113.
Ramadhan, A. (2021). Instructional success measured through student performance. Journal of Learning Achievement, 2(4), 15–29.
Sari, K., & Widodo, P. (2023). Logical material organization in classroom instruction. Instructional Design Journal, 7(3), 98–112.
Syafii, A. (2022). Constructive feedback as a component of effective teaching. Journal of Teacher Development, 8(4), 120–134.
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 14 Tahun 2005 tentang Guru dan Dosen. (2005). https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/39204/uu-no-14-tahun-2005
Wahyono, H., Sumintono, B., & Winarno, W. (2020). Keinovatifan guru dalam pembelajaran era industri 4.0. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 14(1), 85–97. https://ejournal.unesa.ac.id/index.php/jpep/article/view/38735
Wahyudi, H., Siregar, M., & Putri, L. (2023). Interactive learning environments and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Interactive Pedagogy, 5(2), 40–58.
Wijaya, R. (2021). Meaningful learning experiences in modern classrooms. Journal of Instructional Design, 9(1), 22–37.
World Intellectual Property Organization. (2020). Global innovation index 2020: Who will finance innovation? https://www.wipo.int/global_innovation_index/en/
Yusrina, A., & Maulana, S. (2024). Comprehensive evaluation in teaching practice. Journal of Assessment and Instruction, 10(1), 29–44.
