INFORMATION

Psicothema was founded in Asturias (northern Spain) in 1989, and is published jointly by the Psychology Faculty of the University of Oviedo and the Psychological Association of the Principality of Asturias (Colegio Oficial de Psicología del Principado de Asturias).
We currently publish four issues per year, which accounts for some 100 articles annually. We admit work from both the basic and applied research fields, and from all areas of Psychology, all manuscripts being anonymously reviewed prior to publication.

PSICOTHEMA
  • Director: Laura E. Gómez Sánchez
  • Frequency:
         February | May | August | November
  • ISSN: 0214-9915
  • Digital Edition:: 1886-144X
CONTACT US
  • Address: Ildelfonso Sánchez del Río, 4, 1º B
    33001 Oviedo (Spain)
  • Phone: 985 285 778
  • Fax: 985 281 374
  • Email:psicothema@cop.es

Adaptation of the Teacher Efficacy Scale to Measure Effective Teachers’ Educational Practices Through Students’ Ratings: A Multilevel Approach

María-José Lera1, José-M. León-Pérez1, and Paula Ruiz-Zorrilla2

1 Universidad de Sevilla, and
2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Background: There is an increasing evidence of the role that teachers’ educational practices have for students’ school achievement and their well-being. However, there is a lack of valid measures in Spanish to address effective educational practices based on students’ perceptions. In response, this study aims to provide a valid, reliable scale for measuring educational practices in school settings: the Students’ ratings of Teachers’ Educational Practices Scale (STEPS). Methods: We analyzed the scale’s internal consistency and reliability, factor solution and invariance, and criterion validity, by using a multilevel approach in a sample of 2,242 students nested in 104 classrooms from 22 Spanish schools. Results: indicated that the scale exhibited good reliability according to the omega coefficient (within =.86 and between level =.98). The multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) revealed a hierarchical factor solution: classroom management, instructional strategies, and students’ engagement as first-order factors, and a general second-order factor labeled as effective educational practices. The scale demonstrated configural invariance by teaching level, sex, and region. Effective educational practices were associated with student self-esteem at the individual level. Conclusions: This study offers a reliable, valid instrument, STEPS, for measuring effective educational practices.

Escala de Autoeficacia del Profesorado según las Percepciones del Alumnado: Un Enfoque Multinivel. Antecedentes: existen evidencias del papel que las prácticas educativas de los docentes tienen en el rendimiento escolar y el bienestar de los estudiantes. Sin embargo, faltan medidas válidas en español que permitan estudiar las prácticas educativas efectivas a partir de las percepciones de los estudiantes. Por ello, este estudio tiene como objetivo proporcionar una escala válida y fiable para medir las prácticas educativas eficaces en entornos escolares (STEPS). Método: analizamos, en una muestra de 2.242 estudiantes anidados en 104 aulas de 22 escuelas españolas, la consistencia y fiabilidad interna de la escala, la solución e invariancia de factores y la validez de criterio mediante el uso de un enfoque multinivel. Resultados: los resultados indicaron que la escala exhibió una buena fiabilidad de acuerdo con el coeficiente omega (intra = .86, e inter = .98); el análisis factorial confirmatorio multinivel (MCFA) reveló una estructura jerárquica: gestión del aula, estrategias de instrucción y participación de los estudiantes, como factores de primer orden; y un factor general de segundo orden etiquetado como prácticas educativas efectivas. Además, las prácticas educativas efectivas se asociaron con mejor autoestima de los estudiantes. Conclusiones: este estudio ofrece un instrumento fiable y válido, STEPS, para medir prácticas educativas efectivas.

PDF

Impact factor 2022:  JCR WOS 2022:  FI = 3.6 (Q2);  JCI = 1.21 (Q1) / SCOPUS 2022:  SJR = 1.097;  CiteScore = 6.4 (Q1)