Teacher’s Self-Efficacy Scale: structural analysis and measurement invariance in Peruvian teachers of public schools
Main Article Content
Abstract
The aim was to analyze the internal structure and measurement invariance of the Teacher’s Self-Efficacy Scale (TSES) in Peruvian teachers from public schools (n = 347; 64.3% females; Mage = 46.96 years old; SDage= 9.05 years old). The internal structure was analyzed with confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). The measurement invariance analysis was based on multi-group factor analysis, and self-efficacy scores and reliability were estimated. Results show no evidence for the three-factor model, whereas the bifactor model is invariant, suggesting that the construct is one-dimensional in men (CFI = .983; RMSEA = .051; WRMR = .577) and women (CFI = .986; RMSEA = .041; WRMR = .620); also, the reliability indices were strong. We conclude that the TSES has appropriate psychometric properties.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
La RACC aplicará la licencia internacional de atribuciones comunes creativas (Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Bajo esta licencia, se permite cualquier explotación de la obra, incluyendo la explotación con fines comerciales y la creación de obras derivadas, la distribución de las cuales también está permitida sin ninguna restricción. Esta licencia es una licencia libre según la Freedom Defined. La única condición es que siempre y en todos los casos se cite a los autores y a la fuente original de publicación (i.e., RACC). Esta licencia fue desarrollada para facilitar el acceso abierto, gratuito y libre a trabajos originales científicos y artísticos.
How to Cite
References
Alessandri, G., Borgogni, L., Schaufeli, W. B., Caprara, G. V., & Consiglio, C. (2015). From positive orientation to job performance:The role of work engagement and self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16, 767–788. doi: 10.1007/s10902-014-9533-4.
Ato, M., López, J. J., & Benavente, A. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología, 29(3), 1038-1059. doi: 10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511
Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397-438. doi: 10.1080/10705510903008204
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thoughts and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Chang, M.L. & Engelhard, G. (2016). Examining the teachers´ Sense of Efficacy Scale at the Item Level with Rasch Measurement Model. Journal of Psychoeducational Assesment, Vol. 34(2), 177-191, doi: 10.1177/0734282915593835
Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504. doi: 10.1080/10705510701301834
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.
DiStefano C, Liu J, Jiang N, Shi D. Examination of the weighted root mean square residual: Evidence for trustworthiness? Struct Equ Modeling. 2018; 25(3): 453-66. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2017.1390394
Dominguez-Lara, S. & Merino-Soto, C. (2015). ¿Por qué es importante reportar los intervalos de confianza del coeficiente alfa de Cronbach? Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, niñez y Juventud, 13(2), 1326-1328. Recuperado de: http://revistaumanizales.cinde.org.co/rlcsnj/index.php/Revista-Latinoamericana/article/view/2030
Dominguez-Lara, S. & Rodriguez, A. (2017). Índices estadísticos de modelos bifactor. Interacciones, 3(2), 59-65. doi: 10.24016/2017.v3n2.51
Duffin, L., French, B., & Patrick, H. (2012). The Teacher´s Sense of Efficacy Scale: confirming the factor structure with beginning pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 827 – 834. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.03.004
Fernández, M. (2008). Desempeño docente y su relación con orientación a la meta, estrategias de aprendizaje y autoeficacia: un estudio con maestros de Lima, Perú. Universitas Psychologica, 7(2), 385-401. Recuperado desde: https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/revPsycho/article/view/385
Fernández, M., & Merino, C. (2012). Resultados psicométricos preliminares de la Escala de Autoeficacia Percibida en maestros de Lima. Psicogente, 15(28), 314 – 322. Recuperado de: revistas.unisimon.edu.co/index.php/psicogente/article/view/1878
Fives, H., & Buehl, M. (2010). Examining the factor structure of the Teacher´s Sense of Efficacy Scale. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 118-134. doi: 10.1080/00220970903224461
Fleming, J., & Merino, C. (2005). Medidas de simplicidad y ajuste factorial: Un enfoque para la construcción y revisión de escalas derivadas factorialmente. Revista de Psicología, 23(2), 252-266. Recuperado de: http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/psicologia/article/view/2150
Graham, J. M. (2006). Congeneric and essentially tau-equivalent estimates of score reliability: What they are and how to use them. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 930– 944. doi: 10.1177/0013164406288165
Khairani, A.Z. & Razak, N. (2012). An Analysis of the Teacher´s Sense Efficay Scale within the Malasyan Context using the Rasch Measurement Model. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 2137-2142. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.178
Mojavezi, A., & Poodineh, M. (2012). The Impact of Teacher Self-efficacy on the students’ Motivation and Achievement. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(3), 483-491. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.3.483-491
Malgady, R. (2007). How skew are psychological data? A standardized index of effect size. The Journal of General Psychology, 134(3), 355-359. doi: 10.3200/GENP.134.3.355-360
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320-341. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Meade, A. W., Johnson, E. C., & Braddy, P. W. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 568 – 592. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.568.
Mielniczuk, E., & Laguna, M. (2018). Positive Affect Mediates the Relationship Between Self-efficacy and Innovative Behavior in Interpreneurs. The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol.0, 1-12, doi: 10.1002/joch.364
Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (1998 – 2015). Mplus User's Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Pendergast, L. L., von der Embse, N., Kilgus, S. P., & Eklund, K. R. (2017). Measurement equivalence: A non-technical primer on categorical multi-group confirmatory factor analysis in school psychology. Journal of School Psychology, 60, 65-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2016.11.002
Reise, S.P. Scheines, R., Widaman, K.F., & Haviland, M.G. (2013). Multidimensionality and structural coefficient bias in structural equation modeling: A bifactor perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(1), 5 – 26. doi: 10.1177/0013164412449831
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S.P., & Haviland, M.G. (2016a). Evaluating bifactor models: calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 137 – 150. doi: 10.1037/met0000045
Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74, 107-120. doi: 10.1007/s11336-008-9101-0
Scholz, H., Gutiérerz, B., & Schwarzer; R. (2002). Is General Self-Efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric Findings from 25 countries. European Journal Psychological Assessment, 18(3), 242-251.doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.18.3.242
Smits, I.A.M., Timmerman, M.E., Barelds, D.P.H., & Meijer, R.R. (2015). The Dutch symptom checklist-90-revised: is the use of the subscales justified? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 263-271. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000233
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783 – 805. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W.K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 2(68), 202-248. doi: 10.3102/00346543068002202
Terwee, C.B., Bot, S.D.M., de Boer, M.R., van der Windt, D.A.W.M., Knol, D.L., Dekker, J., Bouter, L.M., & de Vet, H.C.W. (2007). Quality Criteria Were Proposed for Measurement Properties of Health Status Questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
West, S. G., Taylor, A. B., & Wu, W. (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 209–234). New York, NY: Guilford Press
Zinbarg, R. E., Yovel, I., Revelle, W., & McDonald, R. P. (2006). Estimating generalizability to a latent variable common to all of a scale’s indicators: A comparison of estimators for ?h. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30(2), 121-144. doi: 10.1177/0146621605278814