A CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS OF THE VOLUNTARY LEARNING BEHAVIOR SCALE AMONG SUPPORT STAFF IN AUTONOMOUS UNIVERSITIES IN BANGKOK AREA
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aimed to conduct a confirmatory factor analysis of the voluntary learning behavior (VLB) scale for supporting staff at autonomous universities in the Bangkok metropolitan area. This quantitative study involved 150 support staff members from autonomous universities in Bangkok. The research instrument comprised the voluntary learning behavior scale. The overall mean Item-Objective Congruence (IOC) was .98, and
the overall reliability coefficient was .837, indicating an acceptable level of reliability. Data were analyzed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with JAMOVI.
The results showed that the measurement model demonstrated a good fit with the empirical data ( = 19.10, df = 22, /df = .868, p = .640, RMSEA = .000, TLI = 1.010, CFI = 1.000, SRMR = .026). At the item level, most items had standardized factor loadings ranging from .483 to .812, indicating that they reflected the underlying construct of voluntary learning behavior to varying degrees. However, one item had a low standardized factor loading (β = .083, R² = .007) and was not statistically significant, indicating a weak relationship between this item and the latent variable. This finding suggested that further examination of the item was necessary to improve the measurement quality of the scale.
Overall, the findings provided empirical support for the overall fit of the voluntary learning behavior measurement model and suggested its potential use in assessing voluntary learning behavior among university support staff. The findings also provided useful information for designing approaches to promote employee learning, human resource development, and lifelong learning in higher education institutions. Further validation across different samples and organizational contexts was recommended to strengthen the construct validity of the scale and support its broader application.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
กรุงเทพมหานคร. (2556). แผนพัฒนากรุงเทพมหานคร ระยะ 4 ปี (พ.ศ. 2556–2560). https://surl.lt/dsqyrs
จีรัษติธร มุกดาเพชร. (2568). การพัฒนาองค์การแห่งการเรียนรู้ในสถานศึกษาและแนวทางและปัจจัยสู่ความสำเร็จ. วารสารนวัตกรรมการบริหารและการจัดการศึกษา, 3(3), 148–164. https://so11.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/IAEM/article/view/2219/948
นิสรา ใจซื่อ. (2564). แนวทางการพัฒนาองค์การแห่งการเรียนรู้เพื่อพร้อมรับความเปลี่ยนแปลง. วารสารการบริหารและสังคมศาสตร์ปริทรรศน์, 4(4), 126–135.
https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/assr/article/view/255877/171007
พวงรัตน์ ทวีรัตน์. (2540). วิธีการวิจัยทางพฤติกรรมศาสตร์และสังคมศาสตร์ (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 7). สำนักทดสอบทางการศึกษาและจิตวิทยา มหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินทรวิโรฒ.
สำนักงานปลัดกระทรวงการอุดมศึกษา วิทยาศาสตร์ วิจัยและนวัตกรรม. (2568). ข้อมูลสถิติบุคลากรในสถาบันอุดมศึกษา. https://info.mhesi.go.th/stat_stf.php?search_year=2568
Barney, J., Wright, M., & Ketchen, D. J., Jr. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27(6), 625–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700601
Deosthali, K. V., & Johnson, R. D. (2022). An empirical examination of voluntary development activities of employees. IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, 11(1), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/22779752211002925
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1997). Organizational Spontaneity in Context. HUMAN PERFORMANCE,10(2), 153-170. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_6
Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage. https://eli.johogo.com/Class/CCU/SEM/_Multivariate%20Data%20Analysis_Hair.pdf
Kim, S., Kim, M., & Lee, G. (2015). Employee self-concepts, voluntary learning behavior, and perceived employability. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(3), 264-279. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-01-2012-0010
Rana, S., Ardichvili, A., & Polesello, D. (2016). Promoting self-directed learning in a learning organization: Tools and practices. European Journal of Training and Development, 40(7), 470–489. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-10-2015-0076
Walumbwa, F. O., Cropanzano, R., & Hartnell, C. A. (2009). Organizational justice, voluntary learning behavior, and job performance: A test of the mediating effects of identification and leader-member exchange. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(8), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.611
Xiao, Y., & Wang, M. (2022). Will Abusive Supervision Promote Subordinates’ Voluntary Learning Behavior?. Behavioral Science, 12(9), 1-14. 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12090317
Yusoff, A. (2022). Learning at work: Maximising the potential of lifelong learners at the workplace. Journal of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development, 8(2), 170–178. https://doi.org/10.33736/jcshd.3735.2022
Maurer, T. J., Pierce, H. R., & Shore, L. M. (2002). Perceived beneficiary of employee development activity: A three-dimensional social exchange model. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 432–444. https://doi.org/10.2307/4134388
Sutha, J. (2024). Research agenda of employees’ voluntary learning behavior: A review. Asia Pacific Management Review, 29(2), 215–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2024.04.001