Teachers' norms and teacher-parent agreement on the Missouri children's behavior checklist

Joum,o,SrhodPryrhology, Vol. 26, pp. 413-416. Pergamon Press plc Printed in the USA

1988 0

1988 The Journal

0022.4405/88/$3.00 + .OO ofSchool Psychology. Inc.

Teachers’ Norms and Teacher-Parent Agreement on the Missouri Children’s Behavior Checklist jacob 0. Sines University

of Iowa

Normative data are reported for a 68-item teacher’s form of the Missouri Children’s Behavior Checklist (MCBC-T). Sex differences comparable to those found in parents’ ratings were found but teachers’ average ratings were significantly lower than parents’ ratings. The correlations between teachers’ and parents’ ratings are comparable to those found in the literature and provide evidence for convergent and discriminant validity of the MCBC scales.

This report presents psychometric

and normative

data for the teacher’s form of

the Missouri Children’s Behavior Checklist (MCBC-T), a 68-item true-false questionnaire that can be completed in 10 to 15 min by a child’s classroom teacher. (A copy of the MCBC-T, the scoring directions, and the standard score conversion tables can be obtained at no charge from the author.) The MCBC-T yields scores on the following six scales: Aggression (items such as Fights, Destroys or defaces property, Hits smaller children), Inhibition-Withdrawal (items such as Is apathetic or underactive, Does not try new situations, Is seclusive (and) prefers to be by self), Activity Level (items such as Moves constantly, Jumps from one activity to next -does not finish tasks, Speaks rapidly-words come tumbling out fast), Somatic Complaints (items such as Becomes so upset by changes that the child may vomit or have stomach aches, Complains of pains in head, Worries a great deal), Sociability (Prosocial Behavior) (items such as Expresses appreciation for others’ acts, Expresses delight over the happiness of others, Talks easily with adults other than parents), and Depression (items such as Talks about or has attempted to harm self, Talks about feeling worthless, Looks sad). The MCBC-T includes all of the items from the parents’ form (MCBC-P) (S ines, 1986) that are scored on those six scales.

SUBJECTS AND PROCEDURES The parents of 874 children whose ages ranged from 9 through 15 years provided written consent for a questionnaire study of their children’s behavior at home and at school.

The teachers

of those children

(459 boys, 415 girls)

Received September 9, 1987; final revision received March 17, 1988. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Jacob 0. Sines, PhD, Department gy, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242.

413

of Psycholo-

414

The journal

completed

the MCBC-T

of School

and the parents

Psychology

of 370

boys

and 3 11 girls

completed

the MCBC-P. The

internal

lations

consistency

of scale

separately.

the

scale,

child’s

the interscale age

were

were also calculated

and parents’

by both

of each

with

Correlations

teachers’ rated

scores

responses

teachers

between

for the 681

correlations,

calculated scale

children

and corre-

for boys scores

whose

and

girls

derived

behavior

from

had been

and parents.

RESULTS The

descriptive

sented

in Table

consistency scales

data

for scales

1. The

KR-20

for

most

were highly

As was the case were

significantly

scales.

of the

related with

been

scales

parent

of the

ratings

MCBC-T

an acceptable

MCBC-T.

score

(Sines,

on all but

separate

standard

teacher-completed

indicate

are

degree

None

pre-

of internal

of the

MCBC-T

to age.

different

For this reason

appropriate

on the values

1986),

scores

the Depression

norms

for boys and girls

conversion

tables

for boys

scale

of the

and

are necessary,

for MCBC-T

scale

girls

MCBC-T and the

scores

have

constructed.

The

MCBC-T

correlations they

indicate

The

major

Activity for both The

interscale

found

with

correlations

parents’

that the MCBC-T exception

Level forms

for boys and girls,

of the MCBC

correlations

ers’ and parents’

scales

is the correlation

scales

between ratings

highly

are only .59 and

in Table

checklist

scores

MCBC-T

Sexa

xi?

SD

Aggression* (19 items) Inhibition* (14 items) Activity Level* (10 items) Somatic Complaints* (8 items) Sociability* (10 items) Depression (7 items)

Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls

2.99 1.36 1.79 2.60 2.11 1.26 .37 .49 3.29 4.49 31 .25

3.92 2.71 2.18 2.79 2.16 1.75 .83 1.03 2.42 2.40 .74 .60

**p<

the Aggression

and other. and

correlations

derived none

from

.90 .88 .75 .81 .76 .74 .57 .68 .75 .73 .57 .42

Correlation wth age .12** .07 .06 .13** .04 -.06 -.04 -.03 .02 -.02 .07 .oo

teach-

of the values

Scales

KR-20

.05

to each

interscale

3. Although

Scale

interscale 1986)

2.

scale

in Table

at .05 level.

related

.53 between The

to the (Sines,

modestly

respectively.

Table 1 Information About

+I boys=459; n girls=415. *Sex difference significant

similar

on the MCBC-P

are presented behavior

are presented

Descriptive

are

ratings

415

Sines

MCBC-T

Table 2 for 459 Boys Above Diagonal

Scale Intercorrelations

Aw Aggression

-

Inhibition

.oo (.25) .53 (.47) .29

Activity Level Somatic

Inh

Complaints

Sociability Depression

Act

and 415 Girls Below Diagonal

.08

.59

.18

(.26) -

(.56) .13

(.29) .30

(.25) -

(.29) .20

.29

(.33) -

.04 (.18) .32

(.26) -.15 (-.13) .40

(.41) -.30 (-.20) .31

(.25) -.03 (.03) .26

(.02) .34

(.42)

(.24)

(.27)

(.25)

Dep

SOC

SOIll

-.29 (-.lO) -.25 (-.29) -.18 (-.06) -.05

.25 (.42) .36 (.33) .20 (.42) .18

(.12) -

-.03

(.43) -.14 (-.08) -

-.22 (-.08)

Noti. Values in parentheses are the comparable interscale correlations for the Parent Form Checklist for 370 boys and 311 girls. 13 significant at .05 level; .15 significant at .Ol level.

are large,

all but one of the correlations

between

corresponding

of the

scales (the

values on the diagonal) exceed the correlations off the diagonal, indicating a moderate degree of discriminant as well as convergent validity for the checklist scales. There

is a great deal of evidence

that even though

similar dimensions

children’s behavior have been identified in ratings provided by teachers,

of par-

ents, and clinicians (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1979; Quay, 1986), there is only moderate to low agreement between teachers’ and parents’ ratings of the same children (Achenbach, McConaughy, & Howell, 1987). The average correlation between teachers’ and parents’ ratings was .27. Although that value indicates some degree of convergent validity for parents’ and teachers’ ratings, it does not address the question of discriminant dimensions of behavior.

Correlations

Between Parent Children

validity of the measures of the various

Table 3 (MCBC-P) and Teacher Rated by Both Teachers

(MCBC-T) Scale Scores for 681 and Parents

Parent Aggr

Teacher (MCBC-T) SC& scores

.12 significant

Aggression Inhibition Activity Level Somatic Complaints Sociability D epression at < .02

.28 .04 .21 .06 -.19 .17

(MCBC-P)

scale scores

Inh

Act

Som

.oo .36 .05 .15 -.19 .14

.25 .Ol .26 .16 -.12 .ll

-.06 .ll .Ol .22 -.06 .08

sot -.ll -.13 -.06 .lO .22 -.06

Dep .ll .13 .16 .15 -.ll .17

416

The journal

of School

Psychology

The pattern of correlations between the six scales that are scored for both the teachers’ and parents’ form of the Missouri Children’s Behavior Checklist indicates a reasonable degree of both convergent and discriminant validity for the MCBC-T. The low level of those correlations is generally consistent with reports by others (Achenbach et al., 1987; Goyette, Conners, and Ulrich, 1978; Lindholm 8t Touliatos, 1982; Touliatos & Lindholm, 1981) and is most often attributed, at least in part, to the fact that the home environment and the school environment exert quite different demands on children. This hypothesis is supported by recent data indicating

that objectively

measured

character-

istics of children’s home and family environments are more closely related to their behavior in the home than to their behavior at school (Sines, 1987). More important than the degree of agreement between parents’ and teachers’ ranking of children on the several dimensions of behavior is the clinical significance of that agreement or disagreement. The use of measuring instruments such as the MCBC-T and the parents’ form of the checklist that consist of the same items and the same scales may facilitate such cross-situational assessment of children’s behavior and treatment planning. Those kinds of data are presently being collected on children Clinic at the University of Iowa.

seen in the Psychology

Department

REFERENCES Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. S. (1979). The Child Behavior Profile: II. Boys aged 12-16 and girls aged 6-11 and 12-16.J ournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 223-233.

Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987). Child adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: Implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 213-232. Goyette, C. H., Conners, C. K., & Ulrich, R. F. (1978). Normative data on revised Conners Parent and Teacher Rating Scales. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6, 221-236.

Lindholm, B. W., & Touliatos, J. (1982). Checklist agreement among observers of children. Psychology in the Schools, 19, 548-551, Quay, H. C. (1986). Classification. In H. C. Quay&J. S. Werry (Eds.), Psychopatholo,@cal disorders of childhood (3rd ed.; pp. l-34). New York: Wiley. Sines, J. 0. (1986). Normative data for the revised Missouri Children’s Behavior Checklist -(MCBC-P). Journal ofAbnormal Child Psycholo~, 14, 89-94. Sines, J. 0. (1987, March). Relations between childreni home environment and school behavior. Paper presented at meeting of National Association of School Psychologists, New Orleans. Touliatos, J., & Lindholm, B. W. (1981). C on g ruence of parents’ and teachers’ ratings of children’s behavior problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psycholo~, 9, 347-354.