Psychometric properties of The Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices (TEIP) questionnaire : adapting the czech version of the scale for pre-school teachers
Vol.27,No.1(2022)
Studia paedagogica
Widely used internationally, the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices questionnaire (TEIP, Sharma et al., 2012) was one of the first instruments to be developed to evaluate teacher self-efficacy in the implementation of inclusive practices in education. While the psychometric properties of the questionnaire have been verified in a number of validation studies, the properties have not yet been subjected to a detailed analysis in the Czech research context. The aim of this study was to provide information on the development and results of the adaptation of the TEIP questionnaire for use in the Czech environment. To this end, the study presents empirical evidence of the construct validity (factor structures), reliability, and measurement invariance of the tool, which was administered on an accessible sample of 628 pre-school teachers based in 160 schools. The results obtained by confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the existence of a hierarchical structure in the Czech version of the instrument. The 18-item questionnaire, modeled on the original English version, measures the teacher-respondent's subjective perceived selfefficacy in using inclusive instructions, in managing children's disruptive behavior in teaching, and in collaboration. These three specific factors in turn represent one general higher order dominant factor. The high reliability of the tool, the strict invariance of measurements for the compared groups of pre-school teachers in terms of their age and highest level of education, and the relatively high level of self-efficacy of the teachers in relation to the implementation of inclusive practices were demonstrated. The questionnaire can be recommended both for purposes of pedagogical research and for pedagogical diagnostics in practice. Further uses of the tool, suggestions for future research, and study limitations are discussed.
inclusive education; self-efficacy; questionnaire; TEIP; adaptation; pre-school teachers
[1] Aiello, P., Sharma, U., Dimitrov, D., Di Gennaro, D., Pace, E., Zollo, I., & Sibilio, M. (2016). Indagine sulle percezioni del livello di efficacia dei docenti e sui loro atteggiamenti nei confronti dell'inclusione. L'Integrazione Scolastica e Sociale, 15(1), 64–87.
[2] ALLEA. (2017). The European code of conduct for research integrity. All European Academies.
[3] Alnahdi, G. (2019). The Arabic version of the teacher efficacy for inclusive practices (TEIP-AR) scale: A construct validity study. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1–12. | DOI 10.1080/2331186X.2019.1618516
[4] Alnahdi, G., & Yada, A. (2020). Rasch analysis of the Japanese version of teacher efficacy for inclusive practices scale: Scale unidimensionality. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1725. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01725 | DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01725
[5] Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.
[6] Bendová, P., & Fialová, K. (2017). Inkluzivní vzdělávání dětí se speciálními vzdělávacími potřebami z pohledu pedagogů "mainstreamových" mateřských škol. In M. Hutyrová & V. Růžičková (Eds.), Koheze speciální pedagogiky v současnosti. IV. Olomoucké speciálněpedagogické dny (s. 179–189). Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci.
[7] Byrne, B. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.4324/9780203805534
[8] Chen, F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1080/10705510701301834 | DOI 10.1080/10705510701301834
[9] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. L. Erlbaum Associates.
[10] Dawson, H., & Scott, L. (2013). Teaching students with disabilities efficacy scale: Development and validation. Inclusion, 1(3), 181–196. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1352/2326-6988-1.3.181 | DOI 10.1352/2326-6988-1.3.181
[11] De Vaus, D. (2002). Analyzing social science data: 50 key problems in data analysis. Sage.
[12] Dunn, T., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399–412. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1111/bjop.12046 | DOI 10.1111/bjop.12046
[13] Forlin, Ch., Loreman, T., Sharma, U., & Earle, Ch. (2009). Demographic differences in changing pre-service teachers' attitudes, sentiments and concerns about inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(2), 195–209. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1080/13603110701365356 | DOI 10.1080/13603110701365356
[14] Gavora, P., Mareš, J., Svatoš, T., & Wiegerová, A. (2020). Self efficacy v edukačních souvislostech II. Univerzita Tomáše Bati ve Zlíně, Fakulta humanitních studií. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.7441/978-80-7454-949-6
[15] George, D., & Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide and reference. Routledge. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.4324/9781315545899
[16] Goldan, J., Lambrecht, J., & Loreman, T. (Eds.). (2021). Resourcing inclusive education. Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1108/S1479-363620210000015008
[17] Gray, Ch., Wilcox, G., & Nordstokke, D. (2017). Teacher mental health, school climate, inclusive education and student learning: A review. Canadian Psychology, 58(3), 203–210. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1037/cap0000117 | DOI 10.1037/cap0000117
[18] Guo, Y., Justice, L., Sawyer, B., & Tompkins, V. (2011). Exploring factors related to preschool teachers' self-efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 961–968. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1016/j.tate.2011.03.008 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2011.03.008
[19] Hecht, P., Aiello, P., Pace, E., & Sibilio, M. (2017). Attitudes and teacher efficacy among Italian and Austrian teachers: A comparative study. Formazione & Insegnamento, 15(1), 269–282. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/107346/-fei-XV-01-1_20
[20] Hedrih, V. (2020). Adapting psychological tests and measurement instruments for cross-cultural research: An introduction. Routledge. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.4324/9780429264788
[21] Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1080/10705519909540118 | DOI 10.1080/10705519909540118
[22] Janoušek, J. (1992). Sociálně kognitivní teorie Alberta Bandury. Československá psychologie, 36(5), 385–398.
[23] Jordan, A. (2018). Teacher beliefs and practices: Introduction to the special issue. Exceptionality Education International, 28(3), 5–9. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.5206/eei.v28i3.7768 | DOI 10.5206/eei.v28i3.7768
[24] Kiel, E., Braun, A., Muckenthaler, M., Heimlich, U., & Weiss, S. (2020). Self-efficacy of teachers in inclusive classes. How do teachers with different self-efficacy beliefs differ in implementing inclusion? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(3), 333–349. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1080/08856257.2019.1683685 | DOI 10.1080/08856257.2019.1683685
[25] Kline, R. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
[26] Li, K., & Cheung, R. (2021). Pre-service teachers' self-efficacy in implementing inclusive education in Hong Kong: The roles of attitudes, sentiments, and concerns. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 68(2), 259–269. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1080/1034912X.2019.1678743 | DOI 10.1080/1034912X.2019.1678743
[27] Lukas, J. (2012). Připravenost školy k inkluzivnímu vzdělávání: dotazník pro učitele. Národní ústav pro vzdělávání.
[28] Main, S., & Hammond, L. (2008). Best practice or most practiced? Pre-service teachers' beliefs about effective behaviour management strategies and reported self-efficacy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 33(4), 28–39. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.14221/ajte.2008v33n4.3 | DOI 10.14221/ajte.2008v33n4.3
[29] Malinen, O., Savolainen, H., & Xu, J. (2012). Beijing in-service teachers' self-efficacy and attitudes towards inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(4), 526–534. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1016/j.tate.2011.12.004 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2011.12.004
[30] Malinen, O., Savolainen, H., & Xu, J. (2013). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy for inclusive practices among mainland Chinese pre-service teachers. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 16(2), 82–93. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.9782/2159-4341-16.2.82 | DOI 10.9782/2159-4341-16.2.82
[31] Martins, B., & Chacon, M. (2020). Escala de eficácia docente para práticas inclusivas: Validação da Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices (TEIP) Scale. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, 26(1), 1–16. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1590/s1413-65382620000100001 | DOI 10.1590/s1413-65382620000100001
[32] Miesera, S., DeVries, J., Jungjohann, J., & Gebhardt, M. (2018). Correlation between attitudes, concerns, self–efficacy and teaching intentions in inclusive education evidence from German pre–service teachers using international scales. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 19(2), 103–114. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1111/1471-3802.12432 | DOI 10.1111/1471-3802.12432
[33] Narkun, Z., & Smogorzewska, J. (2019). Studying self-efficacy among teachers in Poland is important: Polish adaptation of the teacher efficacy for inclusive practice (TEIP) scale. Exceptionality Education International, 29(2), 110–126. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.5206/eei.v29i2.9405 | DOI 10.5206/eei.v29i2.9405
[34] Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement: A sociological approach. Macmillan.
[35] Park, M., Dimitrov, D., Das, A., & Gichuru, M. (2016). The teacher efficacy for inclusive practices (TEIP) scale: Dimensionality and factor structure. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 16(1), 2–12. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1111/1471-3802.12047 | DOI 10.1111/1471-3802.12047
[36] Pivarč, J. (2020). Na cestě k inkluzi: Proměny pedagogických procesů ve vzdělávání a jejich pojetí učiteli a zástupci vedení ZŠ. Univerzita Karlova, Pedagogická fakulta.
[37] Ptáček, R., Vňuková, M., Raboch, J., Smetáčková, I., Harsa, P., & Švandová, L. (2018). Syndrom vyhoření a životní styl u učitelů českých základních škol. Česká a slovenská psychiatrie, 114(5), 199–204.
[38] Raftery, A. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.2307/271063 | DOI 10.2307/271063
[39] Ruble, L., Toland, M., Birdwhistell, J., McGrew, J., & Usher, E. (2013). Preliminary study of the autism self-efficacy scale for teachers (ASSET). Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(9), 1151–1159. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1016/j.rasd.2013.06.006 | DOI 10.1016/j.rasd.2013.06.006
[40] Saloviita, T. (2020). Attitudes of teachers towards inclusive education in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(2), 270–282. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1080/00313831.2018.1541819 | DOI 10.1080/00313831.2018.1541819
[41] Sharma, U., & Jacobs, K. (2016). Predicting in-service educators' intentions to teach in inclusive classrooms in India and Australia. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55(3), 13–23. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.004 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2015.12.004
[42] Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, Ch. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12–21. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01200.x | DOI 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01200.x
[43] Smetáčková, I., Topková, P., & Vozková, A. (2017). Vývoj a pilotáž škály učitelské self-efficacy. Lifelong Learning, 7(2), 26–46. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.11118/lifele2017070226
[44] Štech, S. (2018). Inkluzivní vzdělávání – obtížné zvládání "rozmanitosti" v praxi. Pedagogická orientace, 28(2), 382–398. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.5817/PedOr2018-2-382 | DOI 10.5817/PedOr2018-2-382
[45] Tannenbergerová, M. (2016). Průvodce školní inkluzí aneb Jak vypadá kvalitní základní škola současnosti? Wolters Kluwer ČR, a. s.
[46] Tanriverdi, A., & Özokçu, O. (2018). The psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive practices (TEIP) scale. Educational Research and Reviews, 13(18), 654–663. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.5897/ERR2018.3504 | DOI 10.5897/ERR2018.3504
[47] Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1 | DOI 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
[48] Urbánek, T., & Čermák, I. (1997). Vliv self-efficacy na agresi a depresi u dětí. Československá psychologie, 41(3), 193–199.
[49] Urbánek, T., Denglerová, D., & Širůček, J. (2011). Psychometrika: Měření v psychologii. Portál.
[50] Yada, A., Tolvanen, A., & Savolainen, H. (2018). Teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy on implementing inclusive education in Japan and Finland: A comparative study using multigroup structural equation modelling. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 343–355. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.011 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2018.07.011
[51] Zákon č. 82/2015 Sb., kterým se mění zákon č. 561/2004 Sb., o předškolním, základním, středním, vyšším odborném a jiném vzdělávání (školský zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů, a některé další zákony. (2015).
[52] Zákon č. 561/2004 Sb., o předškolním, základním, středním, vyšším odborném a jiném vzdělávání (školský zákon). (2004).
[53] Záleská, K., & Leix, A. (2018). Učitelská self-efficacy při práci s dětmi-cizinci v širších souvislostech. Pedagogická orientace, 28(2), 328–356. https://doi-org.ezproxy.muni.cz/10.5817/PedOr2018-2-328 | DOI 10.5817/PedOr2018-2-328
Studie vznikla v rámci projektu IPs Společné vzdělávání a podpora škol krok za krokem. Implementace akčního plánu inkluzivního vzdělávání – metodická podpora (APIV A). Projekt APIV A je spolufinancován Evropskou unií. Registrační číslo projektu: CZ.02.3.61/0.0/0.0/16_020/0004410.
Copyright © 2022 Studia paedagogica