Evidências de Validade do Questionário Portilho/Banas de Estilos de Ensino

Batista, Giovani de Paula; Portilho, Evelise Maria Labatut; Rufini, Sueli Édi

doi:10.1590/1982-43272562201505

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Articles • Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto) 25 (62) • Sep-Dec 2015 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-43272562201505 copiar

Evidências de Validade do Questionário Portilho/Banas de Estilos de Ensino

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumo

A utilização de instrumentos com evidências de validade para a pesquisa no campo da educação resulta em avanços na produção de conhecimentos. O objetivo deste estudo foi buscar evidências de validade fatorial e consistência interna dos itens que compõem o Questionário Portilho/Banas de Estilos de Ensino. Participaram da pesquisa 1000 professores de diferentes níveis de ensino. A análise fatorial exploratória indicou uma estrutura de quatro fatores, aos quais se agruparam 55 itens com carga fatorial superior a .30. O trabalho de correlação permitiu identificar o quanto os quatro fatores estabelecem relação entre si. Ao final, o questionário ficou composto de 40 itens, distribuídos em 10 para cada estilo de ensino. Foram encontradas evidências de validade fatorial e consistência interna dos itens que compõem o instrumento. A ANOVA indicou que a escala foi sensível a diferenças individuais na comparação entre os quatro estilos de ensino e as variáveis gênero e nível de ensino.

Palavras-chave:
escalas; análise fatorial; ensino; educação; professores

Item	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Factor 4
1. I plan my class considering the possibility of making changes in the discipline program.	-	-	-	.36
2. I try to make an objective, coherent and structured class plan.	-	-	-	.55
3. I try to select different teaching strategies for each content area.	.46	-	-	-
5. I tend to prioritize teaching strategies with group work.	.54	-	-	-
6. I dedicate more time than planned to work some specific contents.	-	-	-	.32
7. I tend to not follow the planning; I more often improvise.	-	-	.32	-.38
8. I use teaching strategies that promote constructive discussion.	.44	-	-	-
9. I insist that my students review exercises before handing them back to me.	-	.38	-	-
10. In assessments, I prioritize open-ended and lengthy questions.	-	.41	-	-
11. In assessment activities, I demand well-supported answers.	-	.62	-	-
12. I plan my classes in order to cover all details of the content.	-	-	-	.49
13. I notice that my student learned when he/she masters the logic sequence of content worked.	-	-	.30	.37
14. When planning my classes, I seek to articulate theory and practice.	.45	-	-	-
15. I notice that my student learned based on fair results achieved in formal grades.	-	.34	.32	-
16. I plan my classes foreseeing chill-out moments of the groups.	.53	-	-	-
17. I plan my classes to provide plenty of time for students to develop experience with content given.	.58	-	-	-
19. I prioritize students' autonomy when they are doing the proposed activities.	.44	-	-	-
20. I plan my classes seeking to give meaning to content according to students' routine.	.52	-	-	-
21. I enable students to discuss the content given.	.59	-	-	-
22. I use discussion as a teaching strategy, but ideas should be based on previous studies.	.55	-	-	-
23. In tests I recommend students to give short, precise and direct answers.	-	-	.56	-
25. I plan my classes prioritizing teaching strategies that favor the detailed analysis of content.	-	.35	-	.54
26. I seek to work with content by contextualizing subjects and the author, regardless of the discipline.	.32	.35	-	-
27. I give priority to teaching strategies that enable students to search for "reasons" that explain his/her ideas.	.46	.41	-	-
28. I plan my classes prioritizing teaching strategies that promote thought.	.54	.31	-	-
29. I work with content always integrating it to a broader theoretical milestone.	.33	.37	-	-
30. I prefer teaching strategies that promote individual work.	-	-	-	.34
	-	-	-	-

Item	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Factor 4
31. In assessed activities, I promote competitiveness.	-	-	.44	-
34. I use teaching strategies that promote construction of practical and fast solutions.	-	-	.54	-
35. I promote discussion of subjects, problems and/or real situations.	.54	-	-	-
36. I try to not spend too much time with theoretical explanations.	-	-	.43	-
37. I perceive that my student learned when they study the content outside of the classroom.	-	.33	-	-
38. I prefer group work in my classes.	.57	-	-	-
39. I use listening as the basis for thinking about learned subjects.	.51	-	-	-
40. I use didactic resources that enable students to do detailed analyses of situations.	.39	-	-	.37
41. I use class activities in the classroom that require, from my end, structure and objectivity.	-	-	-	.50
42. I prefer, during my classes, activities that enable students to work with observation and detailing of the proposed subject.		.33		.41
43. In tests, I seek to include fewer questions.	-	-	.47	-
44. I plan my classes foreseeing the control of the class, to avoid discursion.	-	-	-	.40
45. I use teaching strategies that promote solving of daily life problems.	.44	-	-	-
46. In handouts, I try to give clear instructions concerning procedures to be done.	-	.34	-	-
47. I never assign another activity until all analysis and arguments of possibilities of the present topic have ended.	-	.44	-	-
48. During tests, I request that students answer questions in a logical and coherent manner.	-	.65	-	-
49. In assessment activities, I prefer to elaborate summaries with clear concepts.	-	.64	-	-
50. I give plenty of time for students to complete tests.	-	.47	-	-
51. I notice that my student learned when he/she can formulate examples based on the theory.	-	.51	.30	-
52. In tests, I consider it relevant when the student argues about a point of view.	.30	.48	-	-
53. I notice that my student learned when he/she could transfer the content to a practical situation.	.38	.32	-	-
54. In tests, I create questions that require detailed analysis of contents presented in the classroom.	-	.55	-	-
55. I substitute explanation for practical activities.	.37	-	.46	-
56. I use teaching strategies that work with experience and activities related to the students' environment.	.60	-	-	-
57. I stimulate students to participate in presentations and discussions.	.62	-	-	-
58. In tests, I prioritize practical questions.	-	-	.60	-
59. In tests, I demand that students answer questions directly and briefly.	-	-	.58	-
60. I seek to diversify didactic resources used in classes.	.51	-	-	-

Variable	Factor 1	Factor 2	Factor 3	Factor 4
ED ¹	1	-	-	-
EA ²	.59	1	-	-
ES ³	.24	.42	1	-
EP ⁴	.51	.70	.37	1

	Sex						F	p
	Female			Male
	n	M	SD	n	M	SD
ED ¹	729	4.02	.43	269	3.94	.47	6.44	.01
EA ²	729	3.93	.48	270	3.96	.46	0.83	.36
ES ³	729	3.07	.57	269	3.14	.57	2.74	.09
EP ⁴	730	3.93	.47	270	3.87	.49	3.07	.07

	Children's Education			Primary School			High School			Primary/High School			Higher Education			Children's Education/Primary School			F	p
	M	N	SD	M	N	SD	M	N	SD	M	N	SD	M	N	SD	M	N	SD	F	p
ED ¹	4.19	77	.39	3.98	484	.42	4	131	.49	3.99	290	.45	3.97	8	.26	3.86	8	.2	3.48	.00
EA ²	3.7	77	.53	3.91	484	.48	4.01	131	.48	4.03	291	.42	3.75	8	.32	3.68	8	.49	7.7	.00
ES ³	2.89	76	.55	3.04	484	.58	3.17	131	.53	3.21	291	.54	2.3	8	.43	3.02	8	.36	9.14	.00
EP ⁴	3.85	77	.51	3.9	484	.49	3.96	132	.47	3.95	291	.46	3.43	8	.47	3.82	8	.45	2.64	.02

Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Filosofia Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia Av.Bandeirantes 3900 - Monte Alegre, 14040-901 Ribeirão Preto - São Paulo - Brasil, Tel.: (55 16) 3315-3829 - Ribeirão Preto - SP - Brazil
E-mail: paideia@usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Correspondence address: Giovani de Paula Batista. Secretaria de Estado da Educação do Paraná. Rua Araucária, 493, casa 08, Jardim Guraituba. CEP 83410-080. Colombo-PR, Brazil. giovanip_batista@hotmail.com