This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
The Teacher Behavior Checklist (TBC) is a worldwide valued instrument to measure teachers’ performance. Nonetheless, the studies about TBC in Brazil are still scarce, with samples mainly composed of psychology and civil engineering students. The aim of this study was to replicate the research by Keeley et al. (2010) to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the TBC with a new sample. Participants were 107 undergraduates from physical education courses from a Brazilian public university. Participants used the TBC to evaluate three types of teachers: the worst they had ever had, a regular one, and the best one. The order of evaluation of teacher types did not interfere with the response patterns, but as expected, statistically significant differences were found among the three types of teachers. Additionally, the two-factor model of the TBC was confirmed through Confirmatory Factor Analysis, providing additional evidence of construct validity. However evidence to advocate in favor of a one-factor solution was also found. McDonald’s Omega results provided evidence of reliability. These findings support the use of TBC in the formative evaluation of teachers
in Brazil.
Keywords:
References
Aggarwal, R., & Ranganathan, P. (2019). Study designs: Part 2 – Descriptive studies. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 10(1), 34-36. https://doi.org/10.4103/picr. PICR_154_18
Andrade, J. M. de, & Valentini, F. (2018). Diretrizes para a construção de testes psicológicos: a Resolução CFP n. 009/2018 em destaque [Guidelines for the Construction of Psychological Tests: Regulation CFP No: 009/2018 in Highlight]. Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão, 38(especial), 28-39. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-3703000208890
Boysen, G. A., Richmond, A. S., & Gurung, R. A. R. (2015). Model teaching criteria for psychology: initial documentation of teacher’s self-reported competency. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 48-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000023
Buskist, W., & Keeley, J. W. (2018). Searching for universal principles of excellence in college and university teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 156, 95- 105. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20321
Buskist, W., Sikorski, J., Buckley, T., & Saville, B. K. (2002). Elements of master teaching. In S. F. Davis & W. Buskist (Eds.), The teaching of psychology: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie and Charles L. Brewer (pp. 30-39). New York: Psychology Press.
Cunha, C. M., Neto, O. P. de A., & Stackfleth, R. (2016). Principais métodos de avaliação psicométrica da validade de instrumentos de medida [Main methods of psychometric evaluation of the validity of measuring instruments]. Revista de Atenção a Saúde, 14(47), 75-83. https://doi.org/10.13037/ras.vol14n47.3391
Damásio, B. F. (2013). Contribuições da Análise Fatorial Confirmatória Multigrupo (AFCMG) na avaliação de invariância de instrumentos psicométricos [Contributions of the Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis in the invariance evaluation of psychometric tests]. Psico-USF, 18(2), 211- 220. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-82712013000200005
Damásio, F. B., & Dutra, D. F. (2017). Análise fatorial exploratória: Um tutorial com o software Factor [Exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial with the Factor software]. In B. F. Damásio, & J. C. Borsa (orgs.), Manual de desenvolvimento de instrumentos psicológicos (pp. 241-265). Vetor.
Development Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2017). Program FACTOR at 10: Origins, development, and future directions. Psicothema, 29(2), 236-241. http://dx.doi. org/10.7334/psicothema2016.304
Field, A. (2009). Descobrindo a estatística usando o SPSS [Discovering Statistics Using SPSS] (2nd ed.). Artmed.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Análise multivariada de dados [Multivariate Data Analysis] (6th ed.). Bookman.
Hattie, J. (2015). The applicability of visible learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 79-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ stl0000021
Henklain, M. H. O., Carmo, J. S., Haydu, V. B., Muniz, M., Buskist, W., & Keeley, J. W. (2020). Teacher Behavior Checklist: Psychometric evidence in teacher evaluation by Brazilian university students. Paidéia, 30(e3025), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-4327e3025
Henklain, M. H. O., Muniz, M., Carmo, J. S., Haydu, V. B., Keeley, J. W., & Buskist, W. (in press). Teacher Behavior Checklist’s psychometric properties: A study with Brazilian undergraduates. CES Psicología.
Henklain, M. H. O., Carmo, J. S., & Haydu, V. B. (2018). Contribuições analítico-comportamentais para descrever o repertório de professores universitários eficazes [Behavior-analytical contributions to describe the repertoire of effective university teachers]. Revista Brasileira de Orientação Profissional, 19(2), 197-207. http://dx. doi.org/1026707/1984-7270/2019v19n2p197
Keeley, J. W., Furr, R. M., & Buskist, W. (2010). Differentiating psychology students’ perceptions of teachers using the teacher behavior checklist. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 16–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903426282
Keeley, J. W., Smith, D., & Buskist, W. (2006). The Teacher Behaviors Checklist: Factor analysis of its utility for evaluating teaching. Teaching of Psychology, 33(2), 84- 91. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top3302_1
Liu, S., Keeley, J., & Buskist, W. (2015). Chinese College Students’ Perceptions of Excellent Teachers Across Three Disciplines: Psychology, Chemical Engineering, and Education. Teaching of Psychology, 43(1), 83-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620888
Nosek, B. A., & Errington, T. M. (2017). Reproducibility in Cancer Biology: Making sense of replications. eLife, 6(e23383), Article e23383. https://doi.org/10.7554/ eLife.23383
Schneider, M., & Preckel, F. (2017). Variables associated with achievement in higher education: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 565-600. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000098
Volpato, G. L., & Barreto, R. E. (2011). Estatística sem dor!!! [Statistics without pain!!!]. Botucatu: Best Writing.