Pengaruh kemahiran kepimpinan kendiri dan tingkah laku kerja inovatif terhadap pencapaian sekolah kluster di Sarawak

PENGARUH KEMAHIRAN KEPIMPINAN KENDIRI DAN TINGKAH LAKU KERlA INOVATIF TERHADAP PENCAPAIAN SEKOLAH KLUSTER OI SARAWAK. WONG SlEW LANG. TESIS INI OSERAHKAN UNTUK MEMENUHI KEPERLUAN PENGI1AZAHAN 11AZAH DOKTOR FALSAFAH • - I .~ . .... ~ ;~ :',; j. ,I ,s'".lt\. ".-. It"' ,,,,~. .. • o'. Si: i ~,;j:l!\'i · · '. ~ ~ .,-J. FAKULTI PSIKOLOGI DAN PENDIOIKAN UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH 2015. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

UNIVERSm MALAYSIA SABAH BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS. JUDUl:. PENGARUH KEMAH IRAN KEPIMPINAN KEN01RI DAN DNGKAH LAKU KERlA INOVADF TERHADAP PENCAPAIAN SEKOLAH KLUSTER 01 SARAWAK. UAZAH:. DOKTOR FALSAFAH (PENGURUSAN PENOID1KAN). Saya WONG SlEW LANG. Sesi Pengajian 2006-2016, mengaku membenarkan tesis Doktor Falsafah ini disimpan di Perpustakaan Univesiti Malaysia Sabah dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti berikut:1. Tesis ini adalah hak milik Universiti Malaysia Sabah. 2. Perpustakaan Universiti Malaysia Sabah dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk tujuan pengajian sahaja. 3. Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran antara institusi pengajian tinggi. 4~ Sila tandakan ( / ). D. SUlIT. (Mengandungi maklumat yang berdarjah keselamatan atau kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di dalam AKTA RAHSIA 1972). D. TERHAD. (Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD yang telah ditentukan oleh organisasi/badan di mana penyelidikan dijalankan). [ZJ. TIDAK TERHAD. Disahkan oIeh,. ~. WONG SlEW LANG PT20068537. Tarikh: 15 April 2016. UijUlAIN BINTI ISMAil LIBRARIAN YSIASABAH. (Tandatangan Pustakawan).

PENGAKUAN Saya mengakui penyelidikan ini adalah hasil kerja dan usaha saya sendiri kecuali nukilan, ringkasan dan rujukan yang tiap-tiap satunya telah saya jelaskan sumbernya. Saya juga mengakui bahawa penyelidikan ini tidak pernah dikemukakan terdahulu atau masa kini untuk penganugerahan mana-mana ijazah di Universiti Malaysia Sabah atau mana-mana institutsHnstitusi lain.. 15 Februari 2016 Wong Siew Lang PT20068537. ii. UMS. UNIVEASIll MALAYSIA SABAH.

PENGESAHAN. NAMA. : WONG SlEW LANG. NO MATRIKS : PT20068537. TAJUK. : PENGARUH KEMAH IRAN KEPIMPINAN KENDIRI DAN TINGKAH LAKU KERlA INOVATIF TERHADAP PENCAPAIAN SEKOLAH KlUSTER DI SARAWAK. DAZAH. : DOKTOR FALSAFAH (PENGURUSAN PENDIDlKAN). TARIKH VIVA : 03 OGOS 2015. DISAHKAN OLEH. 1. PENYELIA. Profesor Madya Dr Hamzah Md. Omar. Tandatangan. iii. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

PENGHARGAAN Bersyukur kepada Tuhan kerana dengan limpah kurnianya dapatlah saya menyiapkan tesis ini dengan jayanya. Walaupun proses "Getting a PhD is like playing a game with a moving goal post'; tetapi ilmu dan kemahiran yang diperolehi jauh bernilai dan memberi kesan mendalam terhadap perkembangan intelektual, emosi dan spiritual pengkaji. Setinggi-tinggi penghargaan dan terima kasih saya ucapkan kepada Profesor Dr Hamdan Said, Profesor Madya Dr Hamzah Md Omar dan para pensyarah Universiti Malaysia Sabah di atas segala tunjuk ajar, bimbingan dan nasi hat sepanjang tempoh penyiapan penyelidikan ini. Saya juga ingin merakamkan ribuan terima kasih kepada Pengarah, Jabatan Pelajaran Negeri Sarawak, Encik Abdillah Bin Adam dan Pengarah Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan, Putrajaya atas sokongan memberi surat kebenaran menjalankan kajian saya. Selain itu, saya juga mengucapkan ribuan terima kasih kepada semua pengetua dan semua guru yang terlibat. Terima kasih atas sokongan yang diberi dan kesudian menjadi responden kajian ini. Sekalung penghargaan ditujukan khas kepada ibu yang sentiasa mendoakan, saudara mara dan sabahat-sahabat yang sentiasa berdoa, memberi dorongan dan motivasi sepanjang perjalanan ini sehingga saya menyiapkan latihan ilmiah ini. Akhir sekali, penghargaan turut ditujukan kepada orang perseorangan dan pihak tertentu yang telah membantu saya sama ada secara langsung atau tidak langsung dalam menghasilkan tesis ini. Terima kasih.. Wong Siew Lang 15 Februari 2016. iv. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

ABSTRAK. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengenalpasti pengaruh Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri dan 1ingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif terhadap Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster di Sarawak. Kajian kuantitatif inl menunjukkan kaedah tinjauan guru sekolah kluster seramai 238 orang guru daripada empat buah sekolah kluster yang dipilih secara rawak menggunakan Quickscale. Empat set instrumen soal selidik digunakan untuk mendapatkan maklumbalas responden terhadap konstruk yang dikaji: Soal Selidik Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri, Soal Selidik Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif, Soal Selidik Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster dan Soal Selidik Efikasi Kendiri Guru. Analisis pengesahan faktor digunakan untuk mendapat indeks padanan model hipotesis dengan data kajian. Modifikasi model dilakukan untuk mendapatkan nilai indeks padanan yang baik (good fit) dalam menentusahkan model pengukuran semua konstruk kajian. Semua model pengukuran digabungkan untuk membentuk Model Persamaan Struktural. Nilai petunjuk padanan model akhir ialah "I) = 105.948, df=41, p=.OOO, CMIN/df=2.584, GFI=.928, CFI=.964 dan RMSEA=.004 menunjukkan padanan yang balk model modifikasi dengan data kajian. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri mempunyai hubungan yang positif dan signifikan dengan Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster di Sarawak (0.59). Selain itu, Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri juga mempunyai hubungan yang positif dan signifikan dengan Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif (0.49). Seterusnya, konstruk Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif mempunyai hubungan positif dan signifikan dengan Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster (0.60). Efikasi Kendiri Guru merupakan pengantara separa bagi hubungan antara Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri dengan Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster di Sarawak. Berdasarkan dapatan kajian, tujuh cadangan kajian lanjutan dikemukakan.. v. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

ABSTRACT. THE INFLUENCE of SELF-LEADERSHIP SKILL AND INNOVA TIVE WORK BEHAVIOR TOWARDS THE ACHIEVEMENT of CLUSTER SCHOOLS IN SARA WAK The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of Self-leadership Skill (SL) and Innovative Work Behavior ([W8) towards Achievement of Cluster Schools in Sarawak (Pe). Research design used was survey. A total of 238 teachers from four cluster schools in Sarawak were selected to participate in this study. Respondents were randomly chosen by using Quickscale. Data for this quantitative study were collected using Self-leadership Skill Survey, Innovative Work Behavior Survey, Achievement of Cluster School Survey and Teachers' Self-Efficacy Survey. The Model Fit Summary of Structural Equation Modeling showed that the goodness-offit in this study is fulfilled with x2=105.948, df=41, p=.OOO, CMIN/df= 2.584, GFI=.928, CFI=.964, RMSEA=.004. The results of this study indicated that Selfleadership Skill have positive and significant relationship with the Achievement of Cluster Schools in Sarawak (0.59). In addition, Self-leadership Skill also show positive and significant relationship with Innovative Work Behavior (0.49). ' Apart from that, Innovative Work Behavior also showed a positive and significant relationship with Achievement of Cluster School (0.60). Teachers'Self-Efficacy was proved to be a partial mediator among the relationship between Self-leadership Skill and Achievement of Cluster School in Sarawak. Based on the finding, seven suggestions for further research were suggested.. vi. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

SENARAIKANDUNGAN Halaman. TAlUK PENGAKUAN PENGESAHAN PENGHARGAAN. iv. ABSTRAK. v. ABSTRACT. vi. SENARAI KANDUNGAN SENARAIlADUAL SENARAI RAJAH SENARAISINGKATAN. vii. xvii. SENARAI LAMPIRAN. xix. ii iii. xiv xv. BAB1: PENDAHULUAN. 1. 1.1. Pengenalan. 1. 1.2. Latar Belakang Kajian. 2. a. Sekolah Kluster di Malaysia. 2. 1.3. Pernyataan Masalah. 5. 1.4. Soalan-soalan Kajian. 11. 1.5 1.6. Objektif kajian. 11. Hipotesis Kajian. 12. 1.7. Kerangka Konseptual Kajian. 12. 1.8. Definisi Operasi. 13. 1.8.1. Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri. 14. 1.8.2. Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster. 14. 1.8.3. llngkah Laku Kerja Inovatif. 14. 1.8.4. Efikasi Kendiri Guru. 14. 1.9. Kepentingan Kajian. 14. 1.10 Batasan Kajian. 15. 1.11 Kesimpulan. 16. vii.

BAB 2: SOROTAN UTERATUR. 17. 2.1 2.2. Pengenalan. 17. Sekolah Kluster. 18. 2.2.1. Model Sekolah Kluster di Malaysia. 18. 2.2.2. Tujuan dan Fungsi Penubuhan Sekolah Kluster. 19. 2.2.3. Pemilihan Pemimpin dan Guru Sekolah Kluster. 19. 2.2.4. Konsep, Falsafah dan Autonoml Sekolah KLuster. 20. 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. Definisi Kepimpinan. 22. 2.3.1. Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri. 23. 2.3.2. Definisi Kepimpinan Kendiri. 23. Sejaran Kepimpinan Kendiri. 25. 2.4.1. Latar Belakang Kepimpinan Kendiri. 26. 2.4.2. Perubahan dari Kepimpinan Tradisi ke Kepimpinan Kendiri. 28. 2.4.3. Asas Teoritikal Kepimpinan Kendiri. 29. 2.4.4. Strategi-strategi Kepimpinan Kendiri. 34. a. Strategi Berfokus Tingkah Laku. 35. b. Strategi Ganjaran Semula Jadi. 36. c. Strategi Corak Pemikiran Konsruktif. 36. 2.4.5. Proses Pembentukan Kepimpinan Kendiri. 37. 2.4.6. Model Kepimpinan Kendiri. 39. 2.4.7. Sejarah Pengukuran Kepimpinan Kendiri. 42. 2.4.8. Latihan Kepimpinan Kendiri. 44. lingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif Guru. 46. 2.5.1. Definisi lingkah Laku Kerja Inovaif. 47. 2.5.2. Dimensi Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif. 48. a. Penerokaan Peluang. 49. b. Penjanaan Idea. 50. c. Mempromosikan Idea. 50. d. Pelaksanaan Idea. 51. Penentu Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif. 51. a. Tahap Guru Sekolah Kluster. 52. b. Tahap Kumpulan Guru Sekolah Kluster. 52. 2.5.3. viii.

c. Tahap Sekolah Kluster. 53. 2.5.4. Teori Inovasi Difusi. 54. 2.5.5. Elemen-elemen Teori Inovasi Difusi. 55. a. Inovasi. 56. b. Saluran Komunikasi. 56. c. Jangka Waktu. 56. d. Sistem Sosial. 57. 2.5.6. Faktor - faktor Penerimaan Inovasl. 57. 2.5.7. Lima Langkah Penyesuaian Inovasi. 59. 2.5.8. Proses Membuat Keputusan dalam Inovasi. 61. a. Peringkat Pengetahuan Inovasi. 62. b. Peringkat Kepercayaan Inovasi. 64. c. Peringkat Membuat Keputusan terhadap Inovasi. 64. d. Peringkat Pelaksanaan Inovasi. 65. e. Peringkat Pengesahan Invovasi. 65 67. 2.5.9 2.6. Penamatan Inovasi. 2.5.10 Kajian-Kajian Lepas Berkaitan dengan Inovasi. 67. Efikasi Kendiri. 69. 2.6.1. Definisi Efikasi Kendiri. 69. 2.6.2. Definisi Efikasi Kendiri Guru. 70. 2.6.3. Sejarah Efikasi Kendiri. 71. 2.6.4. Konsep Efikasi Kendiri. 72. 2.6.5. Pembentukan Efikasi Kendiri Guru. 74. a. Pemujukan Lisan. 76. b. Pengalaman Vikarius. 76. c. Penguasaan Pengalaman. 76. d. Kebangkitan Emosi dan Fisiologi. 77. Perkembangan Teori Efikasi Kendiri. 79. a. Kajian Awal Tentang Efikasi Kendiri: Rotter dan RAND. 79. b. Lembaran Konseptual Kedua Efikasi Kendiri: Kajian. 83. 2.6.6. Bandura. 2.6.7. Ciri-ciri Guru yang mempunyai Efikasi Kendiri Tinggi. ix. 90.

2.6.8. 91. Kajian Lepas Efikasi Kendiri. 2.7. Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster. 95. 2.8. Kajian-kajian Lepas Konstruk-konstruk kajian. 96. 2.8.1. Pengantara (EKG) terhadap hubungan antara Kemahiran. 96. Kepimpinan dengan Pencapaian (SL-EKG-Pe) 2.8.2. Pengaruh Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri dengan Pencapaian. 99. 2.8.3. Hubungan antara Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri dengan. 99. Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif 2.8.4. Pengaruh Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif dengan Pencapaian. 102. 2.8.5. Kajian Lepas berkaitan Hubungan antara Tingkah Laku. 102. Kerja. Inovatif dengan Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster 2.8. Kesimpulan. 103. BAB 3: METODOLOGI. 104. 3.1. Pengenalan. 104. 3.2. Reka Bentuk Kajian. 104. 3.3. Populasi. 105. 3.4. Sam pel Kajian. 106. 3.4.1. 106. 3.5. 3.6. Instrumen Kajian. 107. 3.5.1. Profil Responden. 109. 3.5.2. Soal Selidik Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri (SSSL). 109. 3.5.3. Soal Selidik Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster (SSPe). 110. 3.5.4. Soal Selidik Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif Guru (SSIWB). 110. 3.5.5. Soal Selidik Efikasi Kendiri Guru (SSEKG). 111. Kesahan dan Kebolehpercayaan Instrumen 3.6.1. 3.6.2 3.7. Kaedah Persampling Secara Rawak. Kesahan Soal Selidik. 112. 113. a. Kesahan Muka dan Kesahan Kandungan. 113. b. Kesahan Hubungan-Kriteria. 114. c. Kesahan Konstruk. 115. Kebolehpercayaan Instrumen. 117. Kajian Rintis. 117. x.

3.8. 3.9. 119. Pengumpulan Data 3.8.1. Prosedur Pengumpulan Data. 119. 3.8.2. Teknik Pengumpulan Data. 119. Penganalisisan Data. 120. 3.9.1. Analisis Data Deskriptif. 3.9.2. Analisis. data. dengan. 120 menggunakan. Model. Persamaan. 120. 3.9.3. Darjah Kebagusan Penyesuaian Model (Goodness-or-fit, GOF). 123. 3.9.4. Faktor Analisis Pengesahan (Confirmatory Factor Analysis,. 124. Struktur (SEM). CFA). 3.10. 3.11. 3.9.5. Model Pengukuran CFA Keseluruhan. 129. 3.9.6. Model Persamaan Struktur (SEM)-Peringkat 2. 130. Analisis Pengantaraan Kajian. 133. 3.10.1. Proses Pengantaraan. 133. 3.10.2. Pengantaraan Kajian dalam SEM. 134. a. Pengantaraan Peringkat 1, 2 dan 3. 135. b. Peringkat 4. 136. Kesimpulan. 137. BAB 4: DAPATAN KAlIAN. 138. 4.1. Pendahuluan. 138. 4.2. Analisis Data Deskriptif. 138. 4.3. Penapisan Data. 140. 4.4. 4.3.1. Data tidak Lengkap (Missing Data). 140. 4.3.2. Pengujian Unsur Luaran yang tidak Berkaitan (Test of Outliers). 140. 4.3.3. Penyemakan Percanggahan ( Violation) Andaian-andaian SEM. 141. a. Kenormalan Data. 141. b. Linearliti Data. 142. c. Ketidakhadiran Ralat-ralat Korelasl. 143. Keputusan Model Pengukuran. 143. 4.4.1. Sub-hipotesis Kajian. 143. 4.4.2. Model CFA bagi Konstruk Latent. 144. xl.

a. Keputusan CFA bagi Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri (SL). 144. b. Keputusan CFA bagi Konstruk Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster. 145. (Pe). 4.4.3. c. Keputusan CFA bagi Konstruk 1ingkah Laku Inovatif (IWB). 146. d. Keputusan CFA bagi Pengantara Kajian (EKG). 147. Pengujian Sub-hipotesis. 149. a. Sub-hipotesis 4a-4c : Konstruk Kemahiran Kepimpinan. 149. Kendiri b. Sub-hipotesis 5a-5e: Konstruk Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster. 150. c. Sub-hipotesis 6a-6d: Konstruk Tingkah laku Kerja Inovatif. 151. d. Sub-hipotesis 7a-7c: Konstruk Efikasi Kendirl Guru. 152. 4.4.4. Keputusan Kesahan Model Pengukuran Keseluruhan. 155. 4.4.5. Keputusan Model Struktur Persamaan. 159. 4.4.6. Perbandingan Kebagusan. 4.5. CFA. Model. Kebagusan. dengan. Model. 160. SEM. 4.4.7. Analisis Post Hoc. 162. 4.4.8. Pengujian Hipotesis Indikator-indikator Kajian. 166. Keputusan Pengantara Kajian. 168. 4.5.1. Keputusan Syarat Pertama Proses Pengantaraan. 168. 4.5.2. Tahap. Pengantaraan. Kajian. (pengantaraan. penuh. atau. 171. separa). 4.5.3 4.6. a. Model Struktur asas. 171. b. Keputusan dari Model Alternatif (The Nested Model). 172. Pengujian Hipotesis dalam SEM. 175. Rumusan Keputusan Hipotesis-hipotesis Kajian Selepas Analisis Post. 176. Hoc. 4.7. Rumusan Keputusan Analisis Secara Kuantitatif dari SEM. 177. 4.8. Kesimpulan. 177. BAB 5: PERBINCANGAN. 178. 5.1. Pendahuluan. 178. 5.2. Perbincangan. (Perbincangan tentang. xii. faktor. lain yang. mungkin. 178. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

mempengaruhi hubungan dalam kajian) 5.2.1. Faktor Pemimpin Sekolah Kluster. 178. 5.2.2. Faktor Pemilihan Guru Sekolah. 180. 5.2.3. Perbincangan tentang Cross Validation Data kajian. 181. 5.2.4. Perbincangan tentang Keputusan Kajian. 181. Kesimpulan. 181. BAB 6: CADANGAN. 183. 6.1. Pengenalan. 183. 6.2. cadangan Untuk Kajian Lanjut. 183. 5.3. RU1UKAN. 186. LAMPIRAN. 216. xiii. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

SENARAI JADUAL Halaman. Jadual1.1:. Bilangan Sekolah Rendah dan Menengah di Negeri. 3. Sarawak JaduaI2.1:. Pengukuran Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif-Kajian Uteratur. 51. JaduaI2.2:. Pengukuran bagi Konstruk Efikasi Kendiri Guru. 82. JaduaI2.3:. Rumusan Instrumen Efikasi Kendiri Guru Era Bandara. 88. JaduaI3.1:. Bilangan Guru Sekolah Kluster Kajian. 105. JaduaI3.2:. Item Setiap Indikator dalam Kemahiran kepimpinan. 110. Kendiri JaduaI3.3:. Item bagl Setlap Indikator dalam Pencapalan Sekolah. 110. Kluster (SKPM 2013) JaduaI3.4:. Item dalam Soal Selidik Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif Guru. 111. JaduaI3.5:. Item Soal Selidik Efikasl Kendiri Guru. JaduaI3.6:. Pekali Alfa bagi Semua Konstruk Kajian. 111 119. JaduaI3.7:. Kriteria-kriteria Goodness-of-fit (GOF). 124. JaduaI4.1:. Profil Responden Kajian. 139. JaduaI4.2:. Ujian Normaliti. 142. JaduaI4.3:. Keputusan CFA Model Pengukuran. 149. JaduaI4.4:. Rumusan Sub-hipotesis Indikator dalam Semua Konstruk. 153. Latent Kajian JaduaI4.5:. Indikator-indikator Pengukuran yang Dikekalkan untuk. 155. Kajian Selanjutnya JaduaI4.6:. Perbandingan Faktor Muatan antara Model CFA dan. 161. Model Struktur Persamaan Kajian JaduaI4.7:. Rumusan Pengujian Hlpotesis Utama Dalam SEM. 168. JaduaI4.8:. Rumusan Indeks Model Struktural (SEM)-Perbandingan. 174. JaduaI4.9:. Hipotesis-hipotesis Kajian. 176. xiv.

SENARAIRAJAH Halaman. Rajah 1.1:. Kerangka Konseptual Kajian. 13. Rajah 2.1:. Model Sekolah Kluster di Malaysia. 19. Rajah 2.2:. Rangka Kerja Konsep Sekolah Kluster di Malaysia. 22. Rajah 2.3:. Kontinum Pengaruh Kendiri. 31. Rajah 2.4:. liga Strategi Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri. 35. Rajah 2.5:. Proses Pembentukan Kepimpinan. 39. Rajah 2.6:. Model Kepimpinan Kendiri. 41. Rajah 2.7:. Faktor Mempengaruhi Penerimaan Inovasi. 59. Rajah 2.8:. Lima Langkah Penyesuaian Inovasi. 60. Rajah 2.9:. Model Proses Membuat Keputusan Inovasi. 62. Rajah 2.10:. Sumber Kepercayaan Efikasl Kendlrl. 75. Rajah 2.11:. Konsep Triad Bersalingan (Triadic Reciprocality). 78. Rajah 2.12:. Model Efikasi Kendiri Guru. 92. Rajah 3.1:. Persampelan Kebarangkalian Secara Rawak mudah. 106. Rajah 3.2:. Model Pengukuran CFA. 116. Rajah 3.3:. CFA dalam Pengukuran Konstruk Kajian. 127. Rajah 3.4:. Model Pengukuran Keseluruhan CFA Kajian (Overall CFA. 130. Model). Rajah 3.5:. Model Persamaan Struktur (SEM). 131. Rajah 3.6:. Rajah Lintasan Pengantaraan (Peringkat 1 &2 ). 136. Rajah 4.1:. Rajah Lintasan CFA Konstruk Kemahiran Self-leadership (SL). 144. Rajah 4.2:. Rajah Lintasan CFA bagi Konstruk Pencapaian Sekolah. 145. Kluster (Pe) Rajah 4.3:. Rajah Lintasn CFA bagi Konstruk lingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif. 146. Rajah 4.4:. Rajah Lintasn CFA bagi Konstruk Efikasi Kendiri Guru (EKG). 147. Rajah 4.5:. Model Pengukuran CFA Keseluruhan (Peringkat Awal). 156. Rajah 4.6:. Model Pengukuran CFA Keseluruhan. 157. Rajah 4.7:. CFA Model Pengukuran Keseluruhan ( Fasa 1). 158. xv.

Rajah 4.8:. Rajah Lintasan SEM. 159. Rajah 4.9:. Rajah Lintasan sebelum Analisis Post Hoc. 162. Rajah 4.10:. Rajah Lintasan Analisis Post Hoc (Peringkat Awal). 163. Rajah 4.11:. Rajah Lintasan SEM (Sebelum Proses Analisis Post Hoc). 165. Rajah 4.12:. Rajah lIntasan SEM (Proses Analisis Post Hoc). 167. Rajah 4.13:. Rajah Untasan SEM Peringkat Akhir ( Selepas Analisis Post. 169. Hoc). Rajah 4.14. Rajah Lintasan pengantaraan Efikasi Kendiri (EKG). 170. Rajah 4.15. Model Struktur Asas. 171. Rajah 4.16. Model Alternatif ( The Nested Mode~. 173. xvi. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

KATA SINGKATAN AGFI. - Adjusted Goodness of Fit Indexes. AMOS. - Analysis of Moment Structures. ANOVA. - Analysis of Variance. CFA. - Confirmatory Factor Analysis (Analisis Faktor Pengesahan). CFI. - Comparative Fit Index. DF. - Degree of Freedom (Darjah Kebebasan). DV. - Pemboleh ubah bersandar. EKG. - Efikasi Kendiri Guru. GFI. - Goodness -Of -Fit Index. GOF. - Goodness-of-fit (Nilai Kebagausan). GTE. - General Teacher Efficacy. ICT. - Information and Communication Technology. IFM. - Incremental Fit Measures. IV. - Pemboleh Ubah Tak Bersandar. IWB. - 1ingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif. lERIS. - Jasmani, emosi, rohani, intelek dan sahsiah. KPI. - Indeks Prestasi Utama. KPM. - Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. MLE. - Maximum Likelihood Estimation. NGO. - Non Government Body. PIPP. - Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan. PISA. - Programme for International Student Assessment. PTE. - Personal Teaching Efficacy. RMKe-8. - Rancangan Malaysia Ke-Lapan. RMKe-9. - Rancangan Malaysia Ke-Sembilan. RMKe-l0. - Rancangan Malaysia Ke-Sepuluh. RMSEA. - Root Mean Square Error ofApproximation (Ralat Anggaran Punca Kuasa Dua Min). PMSR. - Root Mean Square Residual. RSLQ. - Revised Self-leadership Questionnaire. xvii. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

SEM SBP SBT SBTL. - Structural Equation Modeling. - Sekolah Berasrama Penuh - Sekolah Berprestasi Tinggi - Strategi Berfokus Tingkah laku. SCPK. - Strategi Corak Pemikiran Konstruktif. SGS SKPM. - Strategi Ganjaran Semula Jadi. SL SPSS SSEKG SSPKS. - Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri. SSTKIG TIMSS Pe. - Soal Selidik Tingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif Guru. UMS UTM. - Universiti Malaysia Sabah. YB. - Yang Berhormat. - Standard Kualiti Pendidikan Malaysia. - Statistical Package For Social Sciences. - Soal Selidik Efikasi Kendiri Guru - Soal Selidik Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster. - Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. - Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster. - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. xviii. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

SENARAI LAMPIRAN Halaman Lampiran A:. Borang Soal Selidik. 216. Lampiran B:. Surat Kebenaran Menjalankan Kajian Dari Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan, Putrajaya. 230. c:. Surat Kebenaran Menjalankan Kajian Dari Jabatan Pelajaran Negeri Sarawak. 231. Lampiran D:. Surat Pengesahan Status Pelajar Pascasiswazah Sekolah Pendidikan dan Pembangunan Sosial, Universiti Malaysia Sabah Sedang Menjalankan Penyelidikan. 233. Lampiran. Lampiran E Komputer Graph Pad (QuickCalcs). xix. 234.

BAB 1 PENDAHULUAN. 1.1. Pengenalan. Tesis ini mengkaji pengaruh Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri (SL) dan lingkah Laku Kerja Inovatif terhadap Pencapaian Sekolah Kluster di Sarawak. Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri merupakan proses pengaruh kendiri yang mana individu cuba menggunakan kognisi dan tindakan demi mencapai matlamat (Manz dan Sims, 1996; Manz dan Neck, 2004). Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri adalah berkaitan dengan cara meningkatkan pencapaian organisasi melalui pemikiran dan tindakan individu (DiLiello dan Houghton, 2006). Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri merupakan penyumbang utama kepada peningkatan pencapaian (Steward, Courtright dan Manz, 2011). Kajian Ie pas menunjukkan pekerja yang mengamalkan Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kendiri menjadi lebih yakin dan boleh menyesuaikan dirl dalam pelbagai situasi (Stajkovic dan Luthans, 1998) serta lebih menikmati kejayaan dalam kerjayanya (Murphy dan Ensher, 2001; Raabe, Frese dan Beehr, 2007).. Kajlan. lepas. membuktikan. tingkah. laku. kerja. inovatif. merupakan. penyumbang utama kepada peningkatan prestasi (Bjornali dan Storen, 2012; Chan dan Amran, 2014; Nik Azida, Tengku Ahmad Badrul dan Kamaruzaman, 2009; Messmann dan Mulder, 2012 ). Dalam konteks pendidikan, kajian terhadap aktiviti yang menjurus kepada tingkah laku inovatif dan penyertaan guru dalam proses dan pembangunan inovasi masih kurang (Messmann dan Mulder, 2012). Guru menghadapi kekangan untuk meletakkan tingkah laku inovatif sebagai pen cetus kreativiti dan inovasi dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran di bilik darjah. Nemerzitskl, Loogma, Heinla, dan Eisenschmidt (2013) menyatakan bahawa faktor yang menjadi penghalang kepada guru mempamerkan tingkah laku kerja inovatif ialah persepsi terhadap keyakinan mereka cenderung untuk tidak inovatif.. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Bab ini bermula dengan menggariskan latar belakang kajian diikuti dengan pernyataan masalah, soalan kajian, objektif kajian serta hipotesis kajian. Selain itu, bab ini juga mengemukakan kepentingan kajian, batasan kajian, kerangka konseptual kajian dan kerangka teori kajian serta definisi operasional kajian. Bab ini diakhiri dengan kesimpulan.. 1.2. Latar Belakang Kajian. Malaysia berhasrat menjadi sebuah negara yang maju berasaskan industri dengan acuan yang tersendiri pada tahun 2020. Pada lima dekad yang lalu, terdapat banyak perubahan dalam polisi pendidikan (MoEM, 2009: ms 50). Contohnya, Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan (PIPP) pada tahun 2006-2010 serta Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan 2013-2025 (MoEM, 2009: ms 50) telah dirangka untuk mengupayakan pelaksanaan berkesan inisiatif yang mendokong usaha transformasi sistem pendidikan kebangsaan secara menyeluruh.. a.. Sekolah Kluster di Malaysia. Penubuhan sekolah kluster sejajar dengan teras Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan. (PIPP). dalam. usaha. melonjakkan. institusi-institusl. pendidikan.. Penubuhan sekolah kluster telah dilancarkan pad a 16 Januari 2006. Kewujudan sekolah ini memberikan pendekatan untuk mengembangkan potensi sekolah dalam kluster kecemerlangan institusi pendidikan. Penubuhan sekolah kluster merupakan inovasi slstem. pendidikan. dengan. memfokuskan. bidang. kebitaraan. dalam. akademik, kokurikulum dan sukan supaya sekolah kluster dapat menjadi model penandaarasan (http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com .• 2013).. Sekolah. Kluster telah. diiktiraf sebagai. strategi. utama. Kementerian. Pendidikan Malaysia (KPM) bagi meningkatkan pencapaian murid. Penubuhan sekolah kluster bertujuan untuk melonjakkan kecemerlangan sekolah dalam sistem Pendidikan Malaysia. Tujuan kedua adalah untuk membangunkan sekolah yang boleh dijadikan teladan dalani kelompok yang sarna dan juga di luar kelompok. Tujuan ketiga ialah harapan supaya sekolah kluster akan menjadi penanda aras pada peringkat antarabangsa (Hussein Ahmad, 2008).. 2. UMS. UNIVEASITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Pengenalan sekolah kluster di Malaysia berdasarkan komitmen KPM untuk memberikan perhatian khusus terhadap sekolah yang telah mencapai tahap cemerlang. KPM memastikan sekolah ini bukan sahaja dapat mempertahankan kecemerlangan malah mampu mempertingkatkan tahap kecemerlangan tersebut kepada tahap yang lebih tinggi lagi. Sehubungan dengan itu, KPM sentiasa mengenalpasti sekolah-sekolah yang layak diiktiraf sebagai sekolah kluster.. Data statistik dalam aplikasi EM IS online menunjukkan bilangan sekolah (sekolah menengah dan sekolah rendah) setiap negeri di Malaysia. Dalam kajian ini, tumpuan diberi kepada bilangan sekolah menengah di negeri Sarawak. Bilangan sekolah menengah sehingga sehingga 31 Oktober 2014 adalah seperti dalam Jadual 1.1 berikut:-. Jaduall.l: Bilangan Sekolah Menengah di Negeri Sarawak Bilangan sekolah di Sarawak Sekolah menengah. Jumlah sekolah. 187. 1452. Sumber: Aplikasi EMIS Online, KPM. Data menunjukkan bahawa hanya terdapat em pat buah (0.02 peratus) sekolah menengah di Sarawak yang berjaya memperoleh anugerah sekolah kluster seta kat ini. Manakala bagi sekolah rendah pula, hanya terdapat 5 buah (0.39%) sekolah kluster di Sarawak mendapat anugerah yang sama. Ini menunjukkan bahawa masih terdapat ruang dan peluang untuk mentransformasikan sekolah menengah biasa kepada tahap yang lebih tinggi. Memang tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa proses mentransformasikan dan melestarikan sekolah kepada tahap sekolah kluster bukan perkara yang mudah. Malah usaha. ini memerlukan penglibatan seluruh warga sekolah. Selain itu, bukan mudah apabila pengetua sebagai pemimpin memperkenalkan perubahan dalam sekolah (Hussein Ahmad, 2008).. 3.

Proses pengiktirafan sekolah kluster dijalankan dari semasa ke semasa (http: emoe.gov.my, 2007). Sehingga tahun 2015, pengiktirafan sekolah kluster telah sampai ke Fasa 9. Jumlah sekolah kluster di seluruh negara ialah 467 buah; terdiri daripada pelbagai jenis sekolah. Setiap sekolah diberi peruntukan khas sebanyak RM500 000 berserta dengan kuasa autonomi dalam membangunkan dan memperkembangkan bidang kebitaraan masing-masing (http:emoe.gov.my, 2007 ). Dengan terlaksananya sekolah kluster dalam sistem pendidikan negara, maka semua pihak berkepentingan menaruh harapan bahawa pencapaian murid dapat dipertingkatkan. kepada. tahap. yang. membanggakan. (PIPP,. 2006; · http:. moe.gov.my, 2007). Oleh itu, menjadikan Malaysia sebagai pusat kecemerlangan pendidikan.. Cabaran utama KPM ialah usaha melahirkan kepimpinan berkesan di sekolah-sekolah kluster. Pengetua haruslah bertindak mengikut tuntutan semasa. Hussein Ahmad (2008) menyatakan bahawa pengetua di sekolah perlu mempunyai sifat kepimpinan terunggul terutamanya dari segi kapasiti profesional dalam menangani dan menyelesaikan masalah, berintegriti tinggi, berwibawa dan berpengetahuan. Ciri-ciri tersebut diperlukan untuk mengurus organisasi pendidikan secara berkesan serta berkebolehan memimpin dalam membangunkan sumber manusia ke arah peningkatan berterusan dan reformasi sekolah secara berkesan. Salah satu strategi dalam proses desentralisasi adalah dengan berdasarkan Model Penilaian Berasaskan Sekolah (PBS).. Dalam konteks sekolah kluster, guru sekolah dituntut mengamalkan Kepimpinan Kendiri (Ahmad Mappaenre, 2014; Hussein Ahmad, 2008) supaya sekolah berkenaan dapat menyerlahkan bentuk perwatakan institusi berdasarkan kebitaraan. Kepimpinan dan pengurusan yang lemah dan rendah kualitinya tidak akan melahirkan pelajar/sekolah yang cemerlang. Sebaliknya sekolah tersebut harus dipimpin oleh pengetua Super/eaders. Ini ialah cabaran yang perlu dihadapi oleh pengetua sekolah kluster (Hussein Ahmad, 2008).. 4. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

RUlUKAN Abdul Ghani Abdullah. 2005. Kepimpinan Transformasi Pengetua dan Penggantian Kepimpinan sebagai Penentu Komitmen terhadap Organisasi dan Perlakuan Warga Organisasi Pendidikan. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan. 20:53-68. Abel. Rahim Bakar, Zaitol Akmaliah Lope Pihie, Mohd. Majid Konting & Genevieve Klang Angking. 2001. The Perceived Entrepreneurial Characteristics of Malaysian Uving Skill Teachers: Implication for Teachers Preparation Programme. Pertanica J. Soc. Sci. & Hum. 9(2):123-129. Abdul. Ghani Kanesan Abdullah. 1997. Hubungan Persepsi Kepemimpinan Transformasi dengan Kepuasan dan Komitmen Kerja. Laporan Praktikum Ijazah Sarjana Pendidikan Universiti Sains Malaysia.. Abdul Rahman Abdul Rahim. 2008. Predidors of Workplace Deviant Behaviour in Malaysia. Shah Alam: University Teknologi MARA. Abraham, C., Ravit, M. & Jacob, W. 2006. Self-leadership Skills and Innovative Behavior at Work. International Journal of Manpower. 27(1):75-89. Ahmad Rahman an-Nahlawi. 1995. Pendidikan Islam di Rumah, Sekolah dan Masyarakat Jakarta: Penerbit Gema Insani. Alias Baba. 1992. Statistik untuk Penyelidikan dalam Pendidikan dan Sains Sosial. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Allinder, E. M. 1994. The Relationship between Efficacy and the Instructional Practices of Special Education Teachers and Consultants. Teacher Education and Secial Education. 17(2):86-95. Allinder, R. M. 1995. An Examination of the Relationship Between Teacher Efficacy and Curriculum-based Measurement and Student Achievement. Remedial and Special Education. 16(4):247-254. Allison, Paul. 1999. Comparing Logit and Probit Coefficients across Groups. Sociological Methods and Research. 28(2):186-208. Alves, J. C., Lovelace, K. J., Man, C. C., Matsypura, D., Toyasakl, F. & Ke, K. 2006. A Cross-cultural Perspective on Self-leadership. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 21(4) :338-359. 186. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. 1992. On the Idea of Emancipitation in Management and Organisation Studies. Academy of Management Review. 17(3):432-464. Amabile, T. M. 1988. A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organisations. In B.M. Shaw & Cummings (Eds.). Research In Organizational BehaVior. 10(3):123167. Amabile, T. M. 1996. Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Boulder: Westview Press.. Analisis Laporan TIMSS 2011 dan Pencapaian htto:llwww.freemalaysiatoday.com/. 29 Januari 2013.. Malaysia. dalam. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1988. Structural Equation Modelling In Practice:A Review and Recommended Two Steps Approach. Psychological Bulletin. 103(3):411-423. Anderson, J. 5., & Prussia, G. E. 1997. The Self-leadership Questionnaire: Preliminary Assessment of Construct Validity. The Journal of Leadership Studies. 4(2):119-143. Andrasik, F., & Heimberg, J. S. 1982. Self-management Procedure. In l. W. Freserikson (Ed). Handbook of Organisational Behavior Management New York: Wiley. Andressen, P., & Konradt, U. 2007. Measuring Self-leadership: Psychometric Test of the German Version of RSlQ. Journal of Leadership dan Organisational Studies. 6(3):117-128. Aniza Dahri. 2014. Hubungan Kepimpinan Transformasional Ketua Jabaan dengan Kepuasan Kerja Pensyarah di Politeknik Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin. Arau, Perlis: Politeknik Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Appelbaum, S. H. & Hare, A. 1996. Self-efficacy as a Mediator of Goal Setting and Simposium Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran UTM 2007 (SSlITM 07). Kecemerlangan Pendidikan Menerusi Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Berkualiti, Performance Some Human Resource Applications. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 11(30):32-47. Armor, D., Conroy-Oseguera, P., Cox, ~., King, N., McDonnell, L., .Pascal, A., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. 1976. AnalYSIS of the School Preferred Reading Programs in Selected Los Angeles Minority Schools (Rep. No R-2007. LAUSD). Santa Monica, CA: RAND (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 130243). Ary, D., Jacobs, l. C., & Razavieh, A. 2002. Introduction to Research in Education (6 th Eds.). Belmont: Wadsworth.. 187. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Ashford, S. L., & Tsui, A. S. 1991. Self-regulation for Managerial Effectiveness, the Role of Active Feedback Seeking. Academy of Management Journal. 31(2): 251-280. Ashton, P. T., Olejnik, S., Crocker, L. & McAuliffe, M. 1982. Measurement Problem in the Study of Teachers' Sense of Efficacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. Ashton, P. T. & Webb, R. B. 1986. Making A Difference: Teacher Sense of Efficiency and Student Achievement Aldine: Chicago. Axtell, C. M., Holman, D. J. Ushworth, K. l. T. D., Waterson, P. E. & Harring, E. 2000. Shopfloor Innovation:Facilitating the Suggestion and Implementation of Ideas. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology. 39(5):599-617. Aziah Ismail & Abdul Ghani Abdullah. 2011. Cluster Schools for Diverse Students' Needs in Malaysia:A System View. International Journal of Education. 3(2):1-15. Azizi Yahaya, Shahrin Hashim, Jamaludin Ramli, Yusof Boon· & Abdul Rahim Hamdan. 2007. Menguasai Penye/idikan Da/am Pendidikan, 2007. Malaysia: PTS Professional Publishing Sdn. Bhd. Azlin Norhaini Mansor, Jamalullail Abd Wahab, Mohd Izham Mohd Hamzah & Norhayati Yusoff. 2011. Aktiviti Kepimpinan Pengetua di Asia Tenggara: Ana/isis Data Kajian ITMSS 2011. Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia dan Universiti MultiMedia, Melaka. Azzara, C. V. 2010. Questionnaire Design for Business Research: Beyond Linear Thinking-An Interactive Approach. Tate Publishing & Enterprises, LLC. Oklahoma USA. Bacilious,Z. F., & Nelson, B. J. 1997. Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder: Teachers' Self-efficacy, Empowering and Perceptions of Support. Http://www. aca. appatate. edu/ orgs/afcab/round971.htm Baharuddin Yaccob. 2009. Respective Approaches In Promoting Distributive Leadership in School. Seminar Nasional Pengurusan dan Kepimpinan Pendidikan ke-16. Anjuran Institut Aminuddin Baki, KPM. 21-24 Julai. Genting Highlands. Bandura, A. 1969. Principles of Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Bandura, A. 1971. Social Learning Theory. New Jersey: General Learning Press.. 188. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Bandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behaviourial Change. Psychological Review. 84(2):191-215. Bandura, A. 1977a. Social Learning Theory. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Englewood. Cliff. Bandura, A. 1977b. Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press. Bandura, A. 1978. Reflections on Self-efficacy. Oxford: Pergamon. In Rachman (Eds.). Advances in Behavior Research and Therapy. 1(4):237-269. Bandura, A. 1982. Self-efficacy Mechanism Psychologist 37(2):122-147.. in. Human. Agency.. American. Bandura, A. 1986. Social Foundations of 7hought and Action: A Social Cognitive 7heory. Englewood Cliggs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall. Bandura, A. 1991. Social Cognitive Theory of Self-Regulation. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes. 50(2):248-287. Bandura, A. 1992a. Exercise of Personal Agency Through the Self-Efficacy Mechanism. In R. Schwarzer (Eds.) Self-efficacy: 7hought Control of Action. Washington: Hemisphere Publishing. Bandura, A. 1993. Perceived Self-efficacy in Cognitive Functioning. Educational Psychologist 28(2):117-148.. Development. and. Bandura, A. 1994. Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Human Behaviour. 4: 71-81. New York: Academic Press. Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: the Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman. Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. 1983. Self-evaluation and Self-efficacy Mechanisms Governing the Motivational Effects of Goal Systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 45(5):1017-1028. Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. 1986. Differential Engagement of Self-Reactive Influences in Cognitive Motivation. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes. 38(1):92-113. Bandura, A' I & Wood, R. E. 1989. Effect of Perceived Controllability and Performance Standards on Self-regulation of Complex Decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 56(5):805-814. 189. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Barling, )., & Abel, M. 1983. Self-efficacy Beliefs and Tennis Performance. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 7(3):265-272. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction In Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 51(6):11731182. Basadur, M. 2004. leading Others to Think Innovatively Together: Creative leadership. Leadership Quarterly. 15(1):103-121. Basu, R., & Green, S. G. 1997. leader-Member Exchange and Tranformational leadership: An Empirical Examination of Innovation Behaviors in leaderMember Dyads. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 27(6):477-499. Batteman T. S., & Grant M. 1999. Proactive Behavior: Meaning, Impact, ecommendations. Business Horizons. 63-70 Bedeian, A. G. & Day, D. V. 1997. Correcting for measurement Error Attenuation in Structural Equation Models: Some Important Reminders. · Educational and Psychological Measurement 57(5):787-799. Bentler, P. 1989. EOS Structural Equation Programs Manual. BMDP Software, Inc. los Angeles, CA. Berman, P., Mclaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, F., & Zellman, G. 1977. Federal 7. Factor Affecting Programs Supporting Educational Change: Implementation and Continuation (Rep. No R-1589/7-HEW. Santa Monica, CA: RAND (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 1404320). Bjomali, E. S., & Storen, l. A. 2012. Examing Competence Factors that Encourage Innovative by European Higher Education Graduate Professionals. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. 19(3):403-423. Bollen, K. A. 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Vanables. New York: John Wiley dan Sons. Bong, M., & Oark, R. E. 1999. Comparison Between Self- Efficacy in Academic Motivation Research. Educational Psychology. 34(2):139-153. Bunce, D., & We&. M. A. 1995. Changing Wor1< Environment Imovative Coping RespoIlSeS to 0alJpati00a15tress. Work and Stress. 8 (4): 319-331. Bray, M. 1984. Educational Planning in a Decentralized System: The Papua New Guinean Experience. University of Papua New Guinea Press, Port Moresby/Sydney University Press Sydney.. 190. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Byrne, B. M. 2010. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS-Basic Concepts, Application and Programming (2nd Eds.). New York: Routledge.. Burstow, B. 2009. Effective Profesional Development as Cultural Exchange: Opportunities Offered by Visits of Headteacher Groups from Malaysia to the UK. Teacher Development 13(4):349-361. Cameron, K., & Caza, A. 2004. Introduction, Contribution to the Discipline of Positive Organisational Scholarship. American Behavioral Scientist.. 47(6):731-739. Carmeli A., Meitar, R., & Weisberg, J. 2006. Self-leadership Skills and Abilities. Journal of Manpower. 27(1):75-90. Carver, C. S. 1975. Physical Aggression as a Function of Objective Self-awareness and Attitudes Toward Punishment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 11(6):510-519. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. 1981. Attention and Self-Regulation. A Control Theory Approach to Human Behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. 1982. Control theory: A Useful Conceptual Framework for Personality, Social, Clinical and Health Psychology. Psychological Bulletin. 92(1): 111-135. Cautela, J. R. 1969. Behavior Therapy and Self-control: Techniques and Applications. In C. M. Franks (Eds). Behavior Therapy: Appraisal and Status. New York: Mc-Graw-Hili. Chall, J. S., & Dale, E. 1995. Readability Revisited: The New Dale-Chal Readability Formula. Cambridge, MA: Bookline Books. Chan, T. L., & Amran Rasli. 2014. The Relationship Between Innovative Work Behaviour on Work Performance: An Empirical Study. Social and Behavioral Science. 129(2014): 592-600 Chester, M. D., & Beaudin, B. Q. 1996. Efficacy Beliefs of Newly Hired Teachers in Urban Schools. American Educational Reserach Journal. 33(1):233-257. Chin, W. W. 1998. Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling, MIS Quarterly, March. Ching, C. 2007. The Relative Effectiveness of Comparative and Non-comparative Advertising: Evidence of Gender Difference in Information Processing Strategy. Journal ofAdvertising. 36(1):21-35. Churchill, G. A. 1979. A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs. Journal of Marketing Research. 16(1):64-73.. 191. UMS. UNIVEASIll MALAYSIA SABAH.

Cockburns, A. D. 1996. Primary Teachers Knowledge and Acquisation of Stress Relieving Strategies. British Journal of Education Psychology. 66(3):399410. Coleman, J. S., Katz, E., & Menzel, H. 1966. Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. Bosss- Merrill: Indianapolis. Colodarci, T. 1992. Teachers' Sense of Efficacy and Commitment to Teaching. Journal of Experimental Education. 60(4):323-337. Conger, J., & Kanungo, R. 1988. The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory and Practice. T77e Academy of Management Review. 13(3): 471-482 Cox, J. F. 1993. T77e Effects of Superleadership Training on Leader Behavior, Subordinat Self-leadership Behavior and Sub-ordinate Citizenship. M0: University of Maryland College Park. Curral, L & Marques-Quinteiro, P. 2009. Self-leadership and Work Role Innovation: Testing a Mediation, Model with Goal Orientation and Work Motivation. Journal of Psychology of Work and Organizational. 25(2): 163-174. Creswell, J. W. 2002. Educational Research: Planning, Conduding and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (2nd Eds.). Upper Saddle River, N.J:Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. W. 2005. Educational Research: Planning, Conduding and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3 nd Eds.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. W. 2005. Educational Research: Planning, Conduding and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4 nd Eds.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. Cronbach, L 1946. Response Sets and Test Validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement 6:672-683. Damanpour, F. 1991. Organisational Innovation: A Meta Analysis of Effects of Determinant and Moderators. Academy of ManagemenVoumal. 34(3):555590. Deci, E. I. 1975. Intrinsic Motivation. New York: Plenum Press. Deci, E. I. 1976. Notes on the Theory and Metatheory of Intrinsic Motivation. Organisational Behavior and Human Performance. 15(1):169-183. Deci, E. I., Nezlek, J., & Sheinman, I. 1981. Characteristics of the Rewarder and Intrinsic Motivation of the Rewarded. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 40( 1): 1-10.. 192. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Decl, E. I., &. Ryan, R. M. 1980. The Empirical Exploration of Intrinsic Motivational Processes. In L. Berkowitz (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 13(1980):39-80. New York: Academic. Decker, P. J. 1984. Effects of Different Symbolic Coding Stimulus in Behavior Modeling Training. Personnel Psychology. 37(4):711-720. De Jong, J. P. J. 2007. Individual Innovation: The Connection Between Leadership and Employees' Innovative Work Behavior. Academisch Proefschrift Zoetermeer, 27 November. De Jong, J. P. J., &. Den Hartog, D. N. 2007. How Leaders Influence Employees' nnovative Behavior. Europe Journal of Innovation Management 10(91): 41-. 64. De Jong, J. P. J., &. Den Hartog D. N. 2008. Innovative ' Work BehaVior: Measurement and Validation. ElM Research Reports. De Jong, J. P. J., &. Kemp, R. 2003. Determinants of Co-workers' Innovative Behaviour: An Investigation into Knowledge Intensive Services. International Journal of Innovation Management 7(2):189-212. De Run, E. C. 2007. Ethnically Targeted Advertising: Views of Those Not Targeted. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. 19(3):265-285. Dembo, M. H. &. Gibson, S. 1985. Teacher's Sense of Efficacy: An Important Factor In School Important Elementary School Journal. 86(2):173-184. DeMoulin, D. F. 1992. Demographic Characteristics Associated with Perceived Se/fefficacy Levels of Elementary, Middle and Secondary Principals. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association Knoxville, TN, November 11-13, 1992. EO 357506. Diamantopoulus, A. 1994. Modelling with LlSREL: A Guide for the Uninitiated. Journal of Marketing Management 10(1-3): 105-136. D1ntino, R. S., Goldsby, M. G., Houghton, J. D., &. Neck, C.P. 2007. Self-leadership: A Process for Entrepreneurial Success. Journal of Leadership and Organisational Studies. 13(4): 105-120. D!Uello T. C., &. Houghton J. D. 2006. Maximizing Organizational Leadership capacity for the Future Toward a Model of Self-leadership, Innovation and Cr eativity. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 21(4):319-337. Dogan, S., &. Sahin, F. 2008. A Study of Reliability, Validity and Adaptation of Revised Self-leadership Questionnaire-RSLQ to Turkish Context. Journal of Economics and Administrative Science. 26(1):139-164.. 193. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

Dorenbosch, L W, Van Engen, M. L., & Verhagen, M. 2005. On the Job Innovation: The Impact of Job Design and Human Resource Management through Production Ownership. Creativity and Innovation Management.. 14(2): 129-. 141. Drucker, P. F. 1985. Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. London: Heinemann. Edwards, J. L., Green, K. E.,& Lyons, C. A. 1996. Teacher Efficacy and School and Teacher Characteristic. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Research Association (New York: April 8-12, 1996). ED 397055. Elisa F. T. 2009. Self-leadership Road to Personal Excellence. New Library World.110(11/12):561-S63. Evans, E. 0., & Tribble, M. 1986. Perceived Teaching Problems, Self-efficacy, and Commitment to Teaching among Preservice Teachers. Journal of Teacher Education. 80(2):81-85. Eveland, J. 1979. Issues in Using the Concer of Adoption of Innovation. Baltimore, Maryland. Paper presented to the American Society for Public Administration. Farr, J., & Ford, C. 1990. Individual Innovations. In West, M. and Farr, J. (Eds.). Managing Innovation. Sage: London Retcher, S. 1990. The Relation of the School Environment to Teacher Efficacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychology Association (Boston, MA, Sugust 10-14, 1990). ED329551. FranCiS, D. G., & E. M. Rogers. 1960. Adoption of Non-Recommenden Innovation: The Grass Incubator. Paper presented at the Rural Sociological SOCiety, University Perk, Pennsylvania. Frayne, C. A., & Lathan, G. P. 1987. Application of Social Learning Theory to Employee Self-management Attendance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 72(3):387-392. Furtner, M. R., Rauthmann, J. F., & Sachse, P. 2011. The Self-loving Self-leader: An Examination of the Relationship between Self-leadership and the Dark Triad. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal.39(3):369-380.. Furtner M. R., Sachse P., & Exenberger S. 2012. Learn to Influence Yourself: Full Range Self-leadership Training. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology. 38(2):294-304.. 194. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

Gable, R. K., & Wolf, M. B. 1993. Instrument Development in the Effective Domain. (2nd Eds.) Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher. Galbraith, J. R. 1982. Designing the Innovating Organization. Organizational Dynamics. 10(3):4-25. Garger, J., & Jacques, P. 2007. Self-leadership and Academic Performance. Academic Exchange, Summer. Gibson, S. & Oembo, M. 1984. Teacher Efficacy: A Construct Validation. Journal of Educational Psychology. 76(4):569-582. Gist, M. 1989. The Influence of Training Method on Self-efficacy and Idea Generation among Managers. Personal Psychology. 42(4):787-805.. Godfried, M. R., & Merbaum, M. 1973. A Persepctive on Self-control. In M. R. Godfried & M. Merbaum (Eds.), Behavior Change through Self-control. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Grant,. J. M. 2000. Proactive Behavior Management. 26(3): 435-462.. in. Organizations.. Journal. of. Greenwood, G., Olejnik, S., & Parkay, F. 1990. Relationship between Four Teacher Efficacy Belief Patterns and Selected Teacher Characteristics. Journal of Research and Development in Education. Gribben, J. J. 1972. Effective Managerial Leadership. New York: American Management Association. Guskey, T. R. 1981. Measurement of Responsibility Teachers Assume for Academic Successes and Failures in the Classroom. Journal of Teacher Education.. 32(3):44-51 Guskey, T. R. 1988. Teacher Efficacy, Self-concept and Attitudes Toward the Implementation of Instructional Innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education. 4(1):63-69. Guskey, T. R. & Passaro, P. D. 1994. Teacher Efficacy: A Study of Construct Dimensions. American Educational Research Journal. 31(3):627-643. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th Eds.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tathman, R.L., & Black, W. C. 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis (6 th Eds.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.. 195. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Hambrick, D. C. 2007. Upper Echelons Theory and Update. Academy of Management Review. 32(2):334-343. Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. 1994. Competing for the Future. Cambridge, ,M. A.: Harvard Business School Press. Harris, A. 1999. Teaching and Learning in the Effective School. Vermont: Ashgate Publishing Company. Hartmann, H. 1958. Ego, Psychology and the Problem of Adaptation. New York:International Universities Press.. Hassinger, E.. 1959. Stages in the Adoption Process. Rural Sosiology.. Heckhausen, H. 1967. Academic Press.. 24: 52-53.. n,e Anatony of Achievement Motivabo/l. New York:. Heckhausen, H. 1991. Motivation and Action. New York: Springer. Heckhausen, H., & Schulz, R. 1998. Development Regulation in Adulthood Seletion and Compensation via Primary and Secondary Control. In H. Heckhausen dan C. S. Dweck (Eds.). Motivation and Self-regulation across the Life Span. UK: Cambridge University Press. Henson, R. K. 2001. Teacher Self-efficacy: Substantive Implications and Measurement Dilemma. Invited Keynote Address given at the Annual Meeting of the Educational Research Exchange on Jaunary 26, 2001, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas. http://222.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/EREkeynote.PDF. Hemphill, J. K., & Coons, A. E. 1957. Development of the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire. In R. M. Stodgill and A. E. Coons (Eds.). Leader Behavior: Its Desaiption and Measurement Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University. pp 6-38. Herzberg, F., Mausner B., & Snydermann, B. B. 2003. n,e Motivation to Work. New Brunnswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Hipps, K. A. 1997. Documenting the Effects of Transformational Leadership Behavior. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association on April 8-12 1996. New York. ED396409. Ho, J. & Nesbit, P. L 2009. A Refinement and Extension of the Self-leadership Scale for the Chinese Context. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 24(5): 450-476. Hom, P. W., Griffeth, R. W., Palich, L E. & Bracker, J. S. 1995. Realistic Job Previews for New Profesionals: A Two-occupationan Test of Mediating Processes. Manuscript Submitted for Publication.. 196.

Houghton, J. D. 2000. The Relationship between Self-leadership and Personality: A Comparison of Hierarchical Factor Structures. Dissertion Submitted to the Faculty of Virginia Polytechnis Institute and State University. Houghton, J. 0, Dawley, D., & Diliello, T. C. 2012. The Abbreviated Self-leadership Questionnaire (ASLQ). A More Concise Measure of Self-leadership. International Journal of Leadership Studies. 7(2):216-232. Houghton, J. D., & Jinkerson, D. L. 2007. Constructive Thought Strategies and Job Satisfaction: A Preliminary Examination. Journal of Business and Psychology. 22(1):45-53. Houghton, J. D., & Neck, C. P. 2002. The Revised Self-leadership Questionnaire: Testing a Hierarchical Factor Structure for Self-leadership. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 17(8):672-691. Houghton, J. D., Neck, C. P., & Manz, C. C. 2003. Self-leadership and Superleadership: The Heart and Art of Facilitating Shared Leadership. In Pearce, C. L and Conger, J. A. (Eds.), Shared Leadership: Refraining the How's and Why's of Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication (pp123-140). Houghton, J. D., & Yoho, S.K. 2005. Toward a Contingency Model of Leadership and Psychological Empowerment: When Should Self-leadership be Encouraged? Journal of Leadership and Organisational Studies. 11(4):65-84. Howell, J. M. 2005. The Right Stuff: Identifying dan Developing Effective Champions of Innovation. Academy of Management Executive. 19(2):108109. Howell, J. M., & Higgins, C. A. 1990. Champions of Technological Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly. 35(2):317-341. Hussein Ahmad. 2008. Pendekatan Pengurusan Sekolah Kluster. Institusi Pengajian Kepengetuaan, Universitl Malaya. Majalah Pendidik. 44(28-29). Ishak Sin. 2001. Pengaruh Kepimpinan Pengajaran, Kepimpinan Transformasi dan Gantian Kepada Kepimpinan ke atas Komitmen terhadap Organisasi, Efikasi dan Kepuasan Kerja Guru. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Jamelaa Bibi Abdullah & Jainabee Md. Kassim. 2011. Amalan Kepimpinan Instruksional dalam Kalangan Pengetua Sekolah Menengah di Negeri Pahang: Satu Kajian Kualitatif. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.. 197. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Janssen, O. 2000. Job Demands, Perceptions of Effort-reward Fairness and Innovative Work Behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 73(3):287-302. Janssen, O. 2003. Innovative Behaviour and Job Involvement at the Price of Conflict and less Satisfaction with Co-workers. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology. 76(3):347-364. Janssen, O. 2004. How Fairness Perceptions make Innovative Behavior More or less Stressful. Journal of Organisational Behavior. 25(3):201-213. Janseen, 0., Van De Vliert, E., & West, M. 2004. The Bright and Dark Sides of Individual and Group Innovations: A Special Issue Introduction. Journal of Organisational8ehaviour. 5(2):129-145. Jong, J. E., & Hartof, D. 2010. Measuring Innovative Work Behavior, Creativity dan Innovation Management 19(1):23-26. Kanter, F. H. 1970. Self-regulation: Research, Issues, and Speculation. In C.Neuringer & J. l. Michale (Eds). Behavioral Modification in Clinical Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Kanter, R., & Ackerman, P. l. 1989. Motivation and Cognitive Abilities: An Integrative Aptitude-treatment Interaction Approach to Skills Acquisition. Journal ofApplied Psychology. 32 (4): 263-271. Kanter, R. 1983. The Change Masters. New York: Simon dan Schuster. Kanter, R. 1988. When a Thousand Flowers Bloom: Structural, Collective and SOCial Conditions for Innovation in Organisation. In Staw, B. M and Cummings, l.L (Eds). Research in Organizational Behavior. 10. JAI Press, Greenwich, (pp. 169-211).. cr.. Kellenberger, D. W. 1996. Preservice Teachers' Perceived Computer Self-efficacy. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. Kerlinger, F.N. & lee, H.B. 2001. Foundation of Behavioral Research. Fort Worth , USA: Harcourt College Publishers Kerr, S., & Jermier, J. M. 1978. Substitute for Leadership: Their Meaning and Measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 22(3):375-403. Khalid Johar\. 2009. Pola Efikasi Guru-guru Novis Sekolah Menengah. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction. 6(2009): 141-151.. 198. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Khalid, J., lurida, I., Shuki, O. & Ahmad Tajuddin, O. 2009. Pengaruh Jenis Latihan Guru dan Pengalaman Mengajar Terhadap Efikasi Guru Sekolah Menengah. Jumal Pendidikan Malaysia. 34(2):3-14. King, N., & Anderson N. 1995. Innovation and Change in Organisations. New York: Routledge. King, N., & Anderson N. 2002. Managing Innovation and Change: A Critical Guide for Organizations. Thomson: London. Kleysen, R. F., & C. T. Street. 2001. Towards a Multi-dimensional Measure of Individual Innovative Behavior. Journal of Intellectual Capita/. 2(3):284-296. Klenke, K. 1996. Women dan Leadership. New York: Springer Publishing. Kline, R. B. 1998. Principles and Practices of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Kline, R. B. 2005. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling (2 nd Eds.). New York: Guilford. Kohl, J. W. 1966. Adoption Stages and Perceptions of Characteristic of Educational Innovation. Eugene: University of Oregon. Konradt, U., AndreBen, P., & Ellwart, T. 2009. Self-leadership in Organizational Teams: A Multilevel Analysis of Moderators and Mediators. European Journal of Wor*' and Organizational Psychology. 18(3):322-346. Kuvaas, B., & Oysuik, A. 2009. Perceived Investment in Employee Development, Intrinsic Motivation and Work Performance. Human Resource Management Journal. 19(3):217-236. laMar, R. V. 1966. In- Service Education Needs Related to the Diffusion of an Innovation. Berkeley: University of California.. Laporan Kebangsaan nMSS 2011. Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (ms: 218-221). Lathan, G. P., & Frayne, C. A. 1989. Self-management Training for IncreaSing Job Attendance: A Follow-up and Replication. Journal of Applied Psychology. 74(3):411-416. Latham, G. P. 1989. Behavioral Approaches to the Training and Learning Process. In Goldstein (Ed.), Training and Development in Work Organisations: Frontiers of Industrial and Organisational Psychology. San Francisco: Jessey Bass. Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. 1991. Self-regulation through Goal Setting. Organisational Behavior and Human DeciSion Processes. 50(2):212-572. 199. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

Lay, Y. F., & Khoo C. H. 2010. Introdudion To Statistical Analysis In Social Science Research (Sin 3). Selangor: Venton Publishing (M) Setn. Bhd.. Lee, C. 1983. Self-efficacy and Behaviour as Predictors of Subsequent Behaviour in an Assertiveness Training Programme. Behaviour Research and Therapy.. 21(3):225-232. leuthold, F. O. 1967. Discontinuance of Improved Farm Operators. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin. Urn, B. L, & Poon, M. l. 1997. Kesan Efikasi Diri terhadap Komitmen, Daya Usaha dan Prestasl Kerja dl Kalangan Guru Sekolah. Jurnal Pendidikan 18:37-55.. lo Klm Seng & Sabariah Sharif. 2014. Pengaruh Kepemimpinan Transformasi Pengetua, Kepercayaan Warga dan Komitmen Organisasi terhadap Kelakuan Kewargaan Organisasl Guru. Proceeding International Conference on Education. Sabah, Malaysia.. loy Uang Hut. 2002. Hubungan Kepimpinan Transformasional Ketua Jabatan Kepuasan Ketja Guru. Penang: Universiti Sains Malaysia. luthans, F., & Davis, T. 1979. Behavioral Self-management (BSM): The Missing Unk In Managerial Effectiveness. Organisational Dynamics. 8(1):42-60. Maddux, J. E., & Stanley, M. A. 1986. Self-efficacy Theory in Contemporary Psychology: An Overview. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology. 4(3):249-255. Mahoney, M. J., & Amkoff, D. B. 1978. Cognitive and Self-Control Therapies. In S. L. Garfield dan A. E. Borgins (Eds). Handbook of Psychotherapy and Therapy Change. New York: Wiley. Mahoney, M. J., & Arnkoff, D. B. 1979. Self-management: Theory, Research and Application. In J. P. Brady & D. Pomerleau (Eds). BehaVioral Medicine: Theory and Pradice. Baltimore: Williams and Williams. Mahoney, M. J., & Thoresen, C. E. 1974. Self-control: Power to the Person. Monterey. CA : Brooks/Cole. Mahyuddin, R., Elias, H., Cheong, L., Muhamad, M., Noordin, N., & Abdullah, M. 2006. The Relationship between Students Self-efficacy and their English language Achievement. Jurnal Penyelidikan Pendidikan. 21:61-71.. 200. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Malmum Allz. 2002. Hubungan Efikasl Kendirl dan Motivasi Pencapaian dengan Pencapaian Akademik Guru-guru Pelatih Maktab Perguruan Perempuan Melayu. Projek Penyelidikan Ijazah Sarjana Pendidikan (tidak diterbitkan). Bangl: Unlversitl Kebangsaan Malaysia. Manz, C. C. 1983. The Art of Self-leadership: Strategies for Personal Effectiveness In Your Ufe and Walt. Englewood Oiffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Manz, C. C. 1983a. Improving Performance through Self-leadership. National Productivity Review. Summer. pp. 297. Manz, C. 1986. Self-leadership: Toward an Expanded Theory of Self-influence Processes In Organisations. Academy of Management Review. 11(3):585-. 600. Manz, C. 1990. Beyond Self-managing Work Teams: Towards Self-leading Teams in the Work Place. In Woodman, R. and Pasmore, W (Eds.), Research in Organisational Change and Development JAI Press, GreenWich, pp 273-. cr,. 299. Manz, C. C. 1991. Developing Self-leaders through Superleadership. Supervisory Management. 36(9):3. Manz, C. 1992. Self-leadership: The Heart of Empowerment. Journal for Quality and Participation. July! August. 80-85.. c.. Manz, C. 1992a. Mastering Self-leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Manz, C. C. 1993a. The Art of Positive Psyching: Skills for Establishing Constructive Thinking Patterns. King of Prussia, PA: Organization Design and Development. PMCld: 182271. Manz, C. C. 1993b. Becoming a Self-manager: SkHls for Addressing Difficult Unattractive, but Necessary Tasks. King of Prussia, PA: Organization Desig~ and Development. PMOd: 182271. Manz, C. C. 1993c: R:designing the Way. You Do Y~ur Job: Skills for Building Natural Motivation Into Your Work. King of PrussIa, PA: Organization Design and Development. PMCid: 182271. Manz, C. C. 2001. Developing Self-leaders through Superleadership. Supervisory Management 36(9):3.. 201. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

Manz, C. C., &. Neck, C. P. 1999. Mastering Self-leadership Empowering Yourself For Personal Excellence (2 nd Eds.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Manz, C. C., &. Neck, C. P. 2004. Mastering Self-leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Manz, C. C., Be. Sims H.P. 1980. Self-management as a Substitute for Leadership: A Socialleaming Perspective. Academy of Management Review. 5(3):361-367. Manz, C. C., Be. Sims H. P. 1986. leading Self-managed Groups: A Conceptual Analysis of a Paradox. Economic and Industrial Democracy. 7(2):141-165. Manz, C. C., Be. Sims H. P. 1987. leading Workers to lead Themselves. The External leadership of Self-managing Work Teams. Administrative Excellence. Quarterly. 3 2( 1): 106-128. Manz, C. C., Be. Sims, H. P. 1989. Super/eadership: Leading Others to Lead Themselves. New York: Prentice Ha". Manz, C. C., Be. Sims, H. P. 1990. Super/eadership: Leading Others to Lead Themselves. New York: Berkley Books. Manz, C. C., Be. Sims H.P. 1996. Company of Heroes: Unleashing the Power of Self-. leadership. New York: Wiley~ Manz, C. C., Be. Sims H. P. 2001. The New Super/eadership-Leading Others To Lead Themselves. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Manz, C. C., Be. Sims H. P. 2002. The New Super/eadership. San Francisco BerretKoehler. Markham, S. E., Be. Markham, I. S. 1998. Self-management and Self-leadership Reexamined. A level of Analysis Perspective. In Dansereau &. F. J. Yammarino (Eds). Leadership: The Multiple-level Approaches, ClaSSical and New Wave. Standors, CT: JAI Press. Markham, S. E. Be. Markham, I. S. 1995. Self-management and Self-leadership Reexamined: A levels of Analysis Perspective. Leadership Quarterly. 6(3): 343-359. Http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(9S)90013-6. Mason, R. G. 1966. Information Sources and the Adoption of Innovations. Gazette. 12: 112-116. . Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interadive Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.. 202. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

McOelland, D. C. 1975. Power, the Inner Experience. New York: Irvington Press. Mcloughlin, I. &. M. Harris. 1997. Innovation, Technology. London: Thompson.. Organizational Change and. McShane, S. L, &. Von Glinow, M. A. 2005. Organisational Behavior. Irwin/McGraw-HilI.. Boston. Mediation (Statistics) (atas talian) https:llen.wikipedia.ora/wikil. Dicetak ada 3 Jula12014. Messmann, G., &. Mulder, R. H. 2012. Development of a Measurement Instrument for Innovative Work Behavior as a Dynamic and Context-bound Construct. Human Resource Development International. 15(1):43-59. Messmann, G., Mulder, R. H., &. Gruber, H. 2010. Relations between Vocational Teachers' Characteristics of Professionalism and their Innovative Work Behavior. Emperical Research in Vocational Education and Training. 2(1): 21-40. Meyer L 5., Gamst, G., &. Gunnino, A. California: Sage Publications Inc.. J. 2006. Applied Multivariate Research. .. Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., &. Eccles, J. S. 1989. Change in Teacher Efficacy and Student Self- and Task-related Beliefs in Mathematics during the Transition to Junior High School. Journal of Educational Psychology. 81:247-258.. Ministry of Education Malaysia. 2006. Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan (PIPP) 2006-2010. Putrajaya Malaysia: Ministry of Education. Ministry of Education Malaysia. 2009. Education in Malaysia: Towards Excellence. Putrajaya: Minsitry of Education Malaysia Moe, K. 0., &. ZeiSS, M. 1982. Measuring Self-efficacy Expectations for Social Skills: A Methodological Inquiry. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 6(2):191-205. Mohammad Abdillah Samsuiman, Asma Benjaman &. Zamri Arifin. 2014. Hubungan antara Kualiti Guru Bahasa Arab dan Kecenderungan Minat Pelajar dalam Bahasa Arab. Jumal Kemanusiaan. 22: 1-8. Mohd Majid Konting. 1990. Kaedah Penyelidikan Pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa &. Pustaka.. 203. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Mood Nor Jaafar & Mohamad Haris Shakroni. 2013. Principal's Instructional Leadership and Teachers' Work Place WeI/-being: A Comparative and Relationship Study Between Sekolah Menengah Agama Bantuan Kerajaan and Sekolah Menengah Agama Rakyat Kertas Kerja Seminar Kebangsaan Kall ke IV. Kuala Lumpur. 23-25 September. Anjuran Majlis Dekan Pendidikan IPTA Dengan Kerjasama Institut Pendidikan (lNSTED).. c.,. & Benbasat, 1. 1991. Development of an Instrument to Measure the Moore, G. Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research. 2(3):192-222. . Moore, W., & Esselman, M. 1992. Teacher Efficacy, Power, School Climate and Achievement A Desegregating District's Experience. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Franisco, CA. Mohd Zainl Ismail. 2009. Amalan Kepimpinan Instruksional Pengetua Sekolah Menengah Berprestasi Tinggi dengan Sekolah Menengah Berprestasi Rendah di daerah Kota Setar, Kedah Darul Aman. Kedah: Universiti Utara Malaysia. Muhamad Suhaiml Taat & Mazlan Minhat. 2013. Pengaruh Dimensi Kepimpinan Instruksional Pengetua terhadap Komitmen Ketja Guru di Sabah . Kertas Kerja Seminar Kebangsaan Kali ke IV. Kuala Lumpur. 23-25 September. Anjuran Majlis Dekan Pendidikan IPTA Dengan Kerjasama Institut Pendidikan (INSTED). . Muller, G. F., & Wiese, B. S. 2010. Selbstmanagement and seldstfuhrung bei der Arbeit. In U. Kleinbeck & K.-H. Schmidt (Hrsg.). Enzyklop die der Psychologie, Themenbereich D. Serie III. Bd. 1: Arbeitspsychologie pp 623667. Gottingen: Hogrefe. Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D. & Lent, R. W. 1991. Relation of Self-efficacy Beliefs to Academic Outocmes: A Meta-analytic Investigations. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 38(1):30-38. Munton, A. G., & West, M. A. 1995. Innovations and Personal Change: Petterson Adjustment to Relocation. Journal of Organisational Behavior. 16 (4): 363-. 375. Mumford, M. D. 2003. Where Have We Been, Where Are We Going? Taking Stock In Creativity Research. Creativity Research Journal 15(2&3):107-120. Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B. & Strange, J. M. 2002. Leading Creative People: Orchestrating Expertise and Relationaship. Leadership Quarterly.. 13(6):705-750.. 204. UMS. UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH.

Mumford, M., &. Licuanan, B. 2004. Leading for Innovation: Conclusion, Issues and Directions. Teleadership Quarterly. 15(1): 163-171. Murphy, S. E., &. Ensher, E. A. 2001. The Role of Mentoring Support and SelfManagement Strategies on Reported career Outcomes. Journal of Career Development. 27(4):229-246. Myers,. J. E. 1991. Empowerment for Later http://WWN.ed.qov/databases/ ERIC_digests/ed323428html.. Life.. Napolitano, C. S., &. Henderson, L. J. 1998. The Leadership Odyssey: A SelfDevelopment Guide to New Skills for New nmes. San Francisco: Jossey-. Bass. Nahavansi, A., &. Malekzadeh, A. R. 1999. Organisational Behavior: The PersonOrganisation fit. Upper Saddle River, NJ :Prentice Hall. Neck, C. P. 1996. Thought Self-leadership: The Impact of Self-talk and Mental Imagery on Performance. Journal of Organisational Behaviour. 17(5):445467. Neck, C. P., Ashcraft, R., &. VanSandt, C. 1998. Employee Self-leadership Theory and Research: Enhancing the Effectiveness of Non-profits. International Journal of Organisation Theory and Behavior. 1(4):521-552. Neck, C. P., &. Houghton, J. D. 2006. Two Decades of Self-leadership Theory and Research: Past Developments, Present Trends, and Future. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 21:270-295. Neck, C. P., &. Manz, C. C. 1992. Thought Self-leadership: The Impact of Self-talk and Mental Imagery on Performance. Journal of Organisational Behavior. 12:681-699. Neck, C. P., &. Manz, C. C. 1996. Thought Self-leadership: The Impact of Mental Strategies Training in Employee Behavior, Cognitive and Emotion. Journal of Organisational Behavior. 17:445-467. Neck, C. P., &. Manz, C. C. 1996a. Total Leadership Quality: Integrating Employee Self-leadership and Total Quality Management. In S. Goush and D. Fedor. (Eds.). Advances in the Management of Organisational Quality. 1:39-77. Greenwich, Cf: JM Press. Neck, C. P., &. Manz, C. C. 1996b. Thought Self-leadership: The Impact of Mental Strategies on Employee Behavior, Cognition and Emotion. Journal of Organisational Behavior. 17:445-467.. 205. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

Neck, C. P., & Manz, C. C. 2007. Mastering Self-leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence (4th Eds.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Neck, C, P., & Manz, C. C. 2010. Mastering Self-leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence (stn Eds.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Neck, C. P., Steward, G. L, & Manz, C. C. 1995. Thought Self-leadership as a Framework for Enhancing the Performance Appraisers. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 31(3}:278-302. Nemerzitskl, S., Loogma, K., Heinla, E., & Eisenschmidt, E. 2013. Constructing Model of Teachers' Innovative Behaviour in School Environment. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. 19(4}:398-418. Neubert, M. J & Wu 1. C. 2006. An Investigation of the Generalizability of Houghton and Neck Revised Self-leadership Questionnaire to a Chinese Context. Joumal Management Psychology. 21(4):360-373. Newsman, F. M., Rutter, R. A., & Smith, M. S. 1989. Organisational Factors that Affect School Sense of Efficacy, Comunity and Expectation. Sociology of Education. 62(4):221-238. Nik Azida Abet Ghani, Tengku Ahmad Badrul Raja Hussin & Kamaruzaman Jusoff. 2009. The Impact of Psychological Empowerment on lecturers' Innovative Behaviour in Malaysian Private Higher Education Institutions. Canadian Social Science. 5(4):54-63. Nor Aznl Abdul Aziz, Foo Say Fooi, Soaib Asimiran & Aminuddin Hassan. 2014. Kepimpinan Instruksional Pengetua dalam Pelaksanaan Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah (PBS). Proceeding of the Global Summit on Education (GSE). March 4-5, 2014. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Noraini Idris. 2010. Penyelidikan da/am Pendidikan. Kuala lumpur: Mc Graw Hill Education. Norusis, M. J. 1977. SPSS Professional Statistic 7.5. Avenue.. Chicago: North Michigan. Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory (2 nd Eds.). New York: McGraw Hill. O'Leary, A. 1985. Self-efficacy and Health. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 23(4}:437-451.. 206. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.

Oldham, G. R., & Cummings. 1996. Employee Creativity: Personal Reseach and Therapy. Academy of Management Journal. 39(3):607-634. Othman Md. Johan & Ishak Mad Shah. 2008. Impak Tingkah Laku Transaksi dan Tranformasi Pengetua terhadap Kepuasan Kerja dan Komitmen Guru Terhadap Sekolah. Jurnal Pendidikan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. 13:31-. 43. Ozgen, E., & Baron, R. A. 2007. Social Sources of Information in Opportunity Recognition: Effects of Mentors, Industry Networks and Professional Forums. Joumal of Business Venturing. 22(2): 174-192. Pajares, F. 2001. OvelView of Self-Efficacy (Atas talian). htto:/Iwww.emorv.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/eff.html. Dicetak pada Jun 2008. Pajeras, F., & Miller, M. D. 1994. The Role of Self-efficacy and Self-concept Beliefs in Mathematical Problem Solving: A Path Analysis. Journal of Educational . Psychology. 86(2):193-203. Pallant, J. 2001. SPSS Survival manual- A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis using SPSS for Windows (Version 10). Buckingham: Open University Press. Pencapaian Seko/ah Kluster (atas talian) http://moe.gov.my. Dicetak 20 November. 2010. Peter, P. J. 1981. Construct Validity: A Review of Basic Issues and Marketing Practices. Joumal of Marketing Research. 18(2):133-145. PetrOSki, H. 1992. Form follows Failure, Invention and Technology. Fall 8(2):54-61. Phelan,S., & Young, A. M. 2003. Understanding Creativity in the Workplace: In Examination of Individual Styles and Training in Relation to Creative Confidence and Creative Self-leadership. Journal of Creative BehaVior. 37(4): 266-81. Pieterse, N. J. 2010. Development Theory: Deconstruction/ Reconstructions. London: Sage. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. 1996. Motivation in Education: Theory, Research and Application. Englewood Cliff, NJ : Merill/Prentice-Hall. Powell, J. C., & Anderson, R. 2002. Changing Teachers' Practice: Curriculum Material and Science Education Reform in the USA. Studies in SCience Education. 37(1):107-136. Prussia, G. E., Anderson, J. 5., & Manz, C.C. 1998. Self-leadership and Performance Outcomes: The Mediating Influence of Self-efficacy.Journal of Organisational Behavior. 19(5):523-538.. 207. UMS. UNIVERSITI MAlAYSIA SABAH.