Design and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Educational Innovations in Primary and Pre-Primary Schools

  1. María Ángeles Turrado-Sevilla 1
  2. Isabel Cantón-Mayo 2
  1. 1 Universidad Internacional Isabel I de Castilla

    Universidad Internacional Isabel I de Castilla

    Burgos, España


  2. 2 Universidad de León

    Universidad de León

    León, España


NAER: Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research
  1. Muñoz Rodríguez, José Manuel (coord.)
  2. Pessoa, Teresa (coord.)

ISSN: 2254-7339

Year of publication: 2022

Issue Title: Youth and Screens in the Age of Hyperconnectivity. Educational Practices, Challenges and Opportunities

Volume: 11

Issue: 1

Pages: 79-96

Type: Article

DOI: 10.7821/NAER.2022.1.727 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: NAER: Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research


Cited by

  • Scopus Cited by: 1 (15-02-2024)
  • Dialnet Métricas Cited by: 1 (09-02-2024)
  • Web of Science Cited by: 0 (19-10-2023)
  • Dimensions Cited by: 2 (24-12-2023)

SCImago Journal Rank

  • Year 2022
  • SJR Journal Impact: 1.034
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: Education Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 185/1438

Índice Dialnet de Revistas

  • Year 2022
  • Journal Impact: 3.150
  • Field: EDUCACIÓN Quartile: C1 Rank in field: 5/232


  • Social Sciences: A

Scopus CiteScore

  • Year 2022
  • CiteScore of the Journal : 9.4
  • Area: Education Percentile: 97

Journal Citation Indicator (JCI)

  • Year 2022
  • Journal Citation Indicator (JCI): 2.59
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 19/759


(Data updated as of 24-12-2023)
  • Total citations: 2
  • Recent citations (2 years): 2


The creation and implementation of innovation proposals in education can provide a new key towards sustainable development. We are aware that schools perform very different innovations but often, with very low levels of impact and dissemination in their community. There are not many studies that describe, put a value on, categorize or analyse the innovations. This study sought to gain insight into the ICT innovations produced in Spanish primary and pre-primary schools. A quantitative approach based on a questionnaire was used to collect the data, named MANEDUIN, completed by 86 teachers selected by stratified random sampling (public - private, rural - urban). The reliability and the construct-related validity was evaluated from the questionnaire and the validity of content decided by means of experts’ judgment. Our findings point to a good consistency in the questionnaire (Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.848). The descriptive statistics and the analysis were made by factorial categories. The results of the factorial analysis confirm the dimensions proposed in the design of the questionnaire in the categories of the factors included in the innovation (social cohesion, interaction with the community, technologies, and success), the innovative schools and their characteristics, the topic and the type of innovation (on resources, direction, materials and time), as well as the obstacles to the innovation. This paper concludes that the questionnaire MANEDUIN is a valid and reliable tool to measure the management of schools’ innovations

Bibliographic References

  • Aguilar, G., Eduardo, H. & Berganza, C. E. (1996). Self-esteem and depression in Guatemalan adolescents. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 28(2), 341–366.
  • Almandoz, M. R. (2008). Management of innovations in secondary education. Santillana-Serie Aula XXI/OEI.
  • Anguita, J. C., Labrador, J. R. R. & Campos, J. D. (2003). Surveys as a research technique. Composition of questionnaires and statistical processing of data (I) Atención Primaria, 31(8), 527–565.
  • Bakhru, K. M. (2018). Aligning teaching methods for learning outcomes: a need for educational change in management education using quality function deployment approach. International Journal of Learning and Change, 10(1), 54–69.
  • Batllé, R. (2015). Teachers do great things in unfair anonymity. Tiching, Education and ICT blog. Retrieved from
  • Berrocoso, J. V., Arroyo, M. C. G. & Diaz, M. J. S. (2010). Educational policies for the ICT integration in Extremadura and their effects about innovation and teaching-learning process: teachers´ perceptions. Revista de Educación, 352, 99–124.
  • Bocconi, S., Kampylis, P. & Punie, Y. (2012). Innovating Learning: Key Elements for Developing Creative Classrooms in Europe. EUR 25446 EN. Publications Office of the European Union.
  • Buendía, J. & Alba, V. (1994). Aging and heaths psycohology. Siglo XXI.
  • Carbonell, J. (2015). XXI century's pedagogies. Alternatives for educational innovation. Octaedro.
  • Cattell, R. B. (1966). The meaning and strategic use of factor analysis. In Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology. Rand McNally.
  • Cerrillo, Q. M. M.-M. (2000). Leaders' dilemmas in the face of innovation. In A. Estebaranz (Ed.), Building change: perspective and proposals for educational innovation (pp. 393-410). Universidad de Sevilla. Retrieved from
  • Cuenca, L. G., Gorospe, J. M. C., Aberasturi, E. J. D. & Etxebarria, A. I. (2009). The reflexive model in teacher training and narrative thinking: study of a case of educational innovation in the Teaching Practicum. Revista de Educación, 350, 493–505.
  • Einola, K. & Alvesson, M. (2021). Behind the Numbers: Questioning Questionnaires. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(1), 102–114.
  • Evans, R. & Leppmann, P. (1970). Resistance to Innovation in Higher Education. Jossey-Bass Publishers Inc.
  • Ferrando, P. J. & Anguiano-Carrasco, C. (2010). El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 18–33.
  • Frías-Navarro, D. & Soler, M. (2012). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) practices in consumer behavior and marketing research. Suma Psicológica, 19, 45–58.
  • Gairín, J., Armengol, C. & Moreno, J. L. M. (2010). Educational innovation in the Autonomous communities of Catalonia and Aragon. Revista del Curriculum y Formación del Profesorado, 14(1).
  • García-Martín, S. & Cantón-Mayo, I. (2020). Validation of a questionnaire to evaluate the use of technologies for knowledge management in secondary school students. Revista Fuentes, 21(2), 16–28.
  • George, D. & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A Simple Guide and Reference. 11.0 Update (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon
  • Gibbons, S. & Silva, O. (2011). School quality, child well-being and parents’ satisfaction. Economics of Education Review, 30(2), 312–331.
  • Gobo, G. & Mauceri, S. (2014). Constructing survey data: An interactional approach. Sage.
  • Halász, G. (2021). Measuring innovation in education with a special focus on the impact of organizational characteristics. Hungarian Educational Research Journal, 23–27.
  • Hardy, B. & Ford, L. R. (2014). It’s not me, it’s you: Miscomprehension in surveys. Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 138–162.
  • Hoffman, A. & Holzhuter, J. (2012). The evolution of higher education: innovation as natural selection. In A. Hoffman & S. Spangehl (Eds.), Innovation in Higher Education: Igniting the Spark for Success (pp. 3-15). American Council on Education/Rowman & Litttlefield Publishers Inc.
  • Jauregui, A. & P. (2010). Educational innovation in the Basque Country: inclusion, equity and European integration. Revista de curriculum y formación del profesorado, 14(1), 135–152.
  • Jauregui, A., Vidales, P. B. & K. (2012). Educational innovation in Cantabria and the Basque Country: a comparative study. Revista de Pedagogía, 64(1), 39–58.
  • Jimenez, G., Flores, E. G., Gómez, J. R. & G. (2000). Factorial analysis. Cuadernos de Estadística, 7.
  • Lambriex-Schmitz, P., Van Der Klink, M. R. & Beausaert, S. (2020). Towards successful innovations in education: Development and validation of a multi-dimensional Innovative Work Behaviour Instrument. Vocations and Learning, 13, 313–340. Retrieved from
  • Law, N., Yuen, A. & Fox, R. (2011). Educational innovations beyond technology - Nurturing leadership and establishing learning organizations. Springer.
  • Ledesma, R., Ibañez, G. M. & Mora, P. V. (2002). Internal consistency analysis by means of Cronbach’s Alpha: a computer program based on dynamic graphics. Psico-USF, 7(2), 143–152.
  • Licht, A. H., Tasiopoulou, E. & Wastiau, P. (2017). Open Book of Educational Innovation. European Schoolnet.
  • Lucas, E. F. D., Rodríguez, M. S. G. & Mayo, I. (2020). Assessment of Knowledge Management and Satisfaction in Future Teachers. Aula Abierta, 49(1), 75–82.
  • Lueg, C. F. & Vila, R. R. (2016). Diseño y validación de una escala de autoevaluación de competencias digitales para estudiantes de pedagogía. Revista de Medios y Educación, 48, 209–224.
  • Marcelo, C., Aramendi, P., Arencibia, S., Armengol, C., Ayala, C. & Cotillas, C. (2009). Study on educational innovation in Spain. Government of Spain, Ministry of Education, Institute of Teacher Training, Educational Research and Innovation (IFIIE)/National Center for Innovation and Educational Research (CNIIE).
  • Marcus, J. (2012). Old school: four-hundred years of resistance to change. In Wildavsky, B., Kelly, A. & Carey, K. (Eds.), Reinventing Higher Education: The Promise of Innovation (pp. 41-72). Harvard Education Press.
  • Martín, S. C., González, M. & Costillas, L. N. (2013). Educational innovation in schools. Revista Galego-Portuguesa de Psicoloxía e Educación, 21(1).
  • Mayo, C., Martínez, I. T. & S. (2017). Satisfaction in the professional performance of Pre-Primary and Primary Education teachers. A case study. Profesorado. Revista de Currículum y Formación de Profesorado, 21(4), 279–292.
  • Muñoz-Repiso, A.-G.-V., Martín, S. C. & Gómez-Pablos, V. B. (2020). Validation of an Indicator Model (INCODIES) for Assessing Student Digital Competence in Basic Education. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9(1), 110–125.
  • OECD (2013). Innovative Learning Environments, Educational Research and Innovation. OECD Publishing.
  • OECD (2017). Handbook for innovative learning environments. OECD Publishing.
  • Ortega, A., Sicilia, A. & González-Cutre, D. (2013). Preliminary validation of the Parent-Initiated Motivational Climate Questionnaire-2 (PIMCQ-2) Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 45(1), 35–45.
  • Paniagua, A. & Istance, D. (2008). Teachers as designers of learning environments: the importance of innovative pedagogies. Educational Research and Innovation. OECD Publishing.
  • Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2020). Challenges for Open Education with Educational Innovation: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability, 7053.
  • Rikkerink, M., Verbeeten, H., Simons, R. J. & Ritzen, H. (2016). A new model of educational innovation: Exploring the nexus of organizational learning, distributed leadership, and digital technologies. Journal of Educational Change, 17(2), 223–249.
  • Rochovská, I., Droščák, M. & Šilonová, V. (2020). Comparison of Preferred Didactic Forms and Methods in Homeschooling. The New Educational Review, 61(3), 13–25.
  • Rodríguez, M. U., Cantabrana, J. L. L. & Cervera, M. G. (2021). Validation of a tool for self-evaluating teacher digital competence. Educación XXI, 24(1), 353–373.
  • Scherbaum, C. & Meade, A. (2009). Measurement in the organizational sciences: conceptual and technological advances. In The SAGE handbook of organizational research methods (pp. 636-653). Sage.
  • Serdyukov, P. (2017). Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1), 4–33.
  • Tójar, J. C. & Mena, E. (2011). Educational innovations in the Andalusian context. Multicase analysis of experiences in pre-primary and primary education. Revista de Educación, 354, 499–527.
  • Turrado-Sevilla, M. A., Mayo, I. & Lucía, A. (2020). Characterising innovative primary schools and their teachers in Spain. International Journal of Learning and Change, 12(3).
  • Vincent-Lancrin, S., Urgel, J., Kar, S. & Jacotinet, G. (2019). Measuring innovation in education 2019: What has changed in the classroom. OECD Publishing.
  • Wiersema, L. D. (2001). Conceptualization and development of the sources of enjoyment in youth sport questionnaire. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 5(3), 153–157.