Questionnaire of teaching strategies of university Physical Education teachers (QTSUPET): validity and reliability of a new proposal
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v70.114915Keywords:
Teaching strategies, university teaching, Physical Education, teaching quality, psychometricsAbstract
Introduction: Identifying and monitoring the way in which teaching strategies are executed in university teaching is fundamental.
Objective: The purpose of the study was to design and confirm the validity and reliability of the questionnaire of teaching strategies of university physical education teachers (QTSUPET) in the Peruvian context from the students' perception.
Method: 1295 students of the Professional School of Physical Education (653 men and 642 women) from four universities in Peru participated in the study.
Results: Content validity reported optimal values of agreement and agreement among experts (≥0.92). Confirmatory factor analysis corroborated the validity of the model with three factors (planning, interaction and evaluation) approved by the experts, demonstrating optimal construct validity (2/gl=3.956, SRMR=.027, RMSEA=.069, CFI=0.974 and TLI=0.973). Concurrent validity confirmed that the QTSUPET and the external criterion measured similarly (0.916, with p < .01). The invariance showed that the results could be compared between students from universities on the coast, in the highlands and in the jungle. Finally, the internal consistency reliability (≥0.929) and test-retest reliability (≥0.871) reported adequate values.
Discussion: The QTSUPET is the first questionnaire that responds to the new normal and to the measurement of the interaction procedures of the teaching process applied by university Physical Education teachers from the students' perspective.
Conclusions: The results showed that the QTSUPET is a valid and reliable instrument that objectively and invariably measures the interaction procedures of the teaching process.
References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2018). Estándares para pruebas educativas y psicológicas (M. Lieve, Trans.). American Educational Research Association (Original work published 2014). https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvr43hg2
Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2012). Factor Analysis. Exploratory and Confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock, L. M. Stapleton, & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2011.626376
Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118619179
Chumpitaz, L., & Lomba-Portela, L. (2024). Enseñanza de competencias investigadoras en educadores, mediada por la tecnología en Educación Superior. Revisión sistemática. Revista de Investigación En Educación, 22(2), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.35869/reined.v22i2.5381
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. In Nucl. Phys. (Vol. 13, Issue 1). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Díaz, B., Mármol, M. C., Piñero, L. del R., & Cejas, M. F. (2021). Software para el diseño de recursos didácticos durante la pandemia del Covid-19. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 26(6), 680–696. https://doi.org/10.52080/rvgluz.26.e6.41
Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and Connective Knowledge: essays on meaning and learning networks. In National Research Council Canada, http://www. …. National Research Council Canada. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Connectivism+and+Connective+Knowledge+Essays+on+meaning+and+learning+networks#0
Fabrigar, L. R., & Wegener, D. T. (2012). Exploratory Factor Analysis. Oxford University Press. http://scioteca.caf.com/bitstream/handle/123456789/1091/RED2017-Eng-8ene.pdf?sequence=12&isAllowed=y%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2008.06.005%0Ahttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/305320484_SISTEM_PEMBETUNGAN_TERPUSAT_STRATEGI_MELESTARI
Finch, W. H., & French, B. F. (2018). A Simulation Investigation of the Performance of Invariance Assessment Using Equivalence Testing Procedures. Structural Equation Modeling, 25(5), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2018.1431781
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B. A., & Paik, M. C. (2013). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Wiley.
Fuller, R., Joynes, V., Cooper, J., Boursicot, K., & Roberts, T. (2020). Could COVID-19 be our ‘There is no alternative’ (TINA) opportunity to enhance assessment? Medical Teacher, 42(7), 781–786. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1779206
George, C. E., & Glasserman, L. D. (2022). Elaboración y análisis de confiabilidad de un cuestionario para medir desde la perspectiva del estudiante, las competencias digitales del docente en entornos no presenciales de enseñanza. Revista Complutense de Educación, 33(3), 413–424. https://doi.org/10.5209/rced.74467
González, H. (2023). Reflexiones sobre la estrategia europea para las universidades. Educación Médica, 24(4), 100811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2023.100811
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. Cengage Learning EMEA.
Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238
Hein, G. E. (1991). Constructivist Learning Theory. The Museum and the Needs of People CECA (International Committee of Museum Educators) Conference, Jerusalem, Israel, 15–22 October, 1–10. https://www.exploratorium.edu/education/ifi/constructivist-learning
Herrera, D., Ríos, D., Díaz, C., & Salas, F. (2022). Elaboración y validación de cuestionario sobre la enseñanza y aprendizaje en educación remota. Educação e Pesquisa, 48, e256217. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-4634202248256217esp
Hidayati, D., & Saputra, W. A. (2020). Implementation of Online Learning during the Covid-19 Epidemic in Indonesia: Assessment of Higher Education Students’ Use and Implementation of Online Learning Technology. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(10), 4514–4519. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081019
Holmes, W. (2020). Exploratory Factor Analysis. Sage Publications.
Illeris, K. (2018). Learning, Development and Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315620565
Kerlinger, F., & Lee, H. (2002). Investigación del comportamiento. Métodos de investigación en ciencias sociales. McGraw-Hill.
Kukulska-Hulme, A., Bossu, C., Charitonos, K., Coughlan, T., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Gaved, M., Guitert, M., Herodotou, C., Maina, M., Prieto-Blázquez, J., Rienties, B., Sangrà, A., Sargent, J., Scanlon, E., & Whitelock, D. (2022). Innovating Pedagogy 2022. Exploring new forms of teaching, learning and assessment, to guide educators and policy makers. The Open University. https://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/innovating/?p=774
Kukulska-Hulme, A., Bossu, C., Charitonos, K., Tim, C., Rebecca, F., Elizabeth, F., Mark, G., Guitert, M., Christothea, H., Maina, M., Prietp-Blázquez, J., Bart, R., Sangrà, A., Sargent, J., Scanlon, E., & Denise, W. (2023). Innovating Pedagogy 2023. Exploring new forms of teaching, learning and assessment, to guide educators and policy makers (Issue July). The Open University. https://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/innovating/?p=784
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
Li, C.-H. (2016). The performance of ML, DWLS, and ULS estimation with robust corrections in structural equation models with ordinal variables. Psychological Methods, 21(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000093
Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., & Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: Una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicologia, 30(3), 1151–1169. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2023). Virtual Reality in Education: A Review of Learning Theories, Approaches and Methodologies for the Last Decade. Electronics, 12(13), 2832. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12132832
Molina-Soria, M., López-Pastor, V. M., Hortigüela-Alcalá, D., Pascual-Arias, C., & Fernández-Garcimartín, C. (2023). Formative and Shared Assessment and Feedback: an example of good practice in Physical Education in Pre-service Teacher Education. Cultura, Ciencia y Deporte, 18(55), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.12800/ccd.v18i55.1986
Moreno-Murcia, J. A., Silveira, Y., & Belando, N. (2015). Questionnaire evaluating teaching competencies in the university environment. Evaluation of teaching competencies in the university. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 4(1), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2015.1.106
Naciones Unidas. (2018). La Agenda 2030 y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible: Una oportunidad para América Latina y el Caribe. Naciones Unidas. https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/40155/24/S1801141_es.pdf
Narduchi, F., & Struchiner, M. (2023). Educação Física e saúde na escola pública. Movimento, 29, e29020. https://doi.org/10.22456/1982-8918.128492
Nøhr, L., Hvid Stenalt, M., & Hagood, D. (2023). University Teachers’ Agency in Relation to Technology Use in Teaching: A Quantitative Investigation. Edutec. Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa, 86, 40–61. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2023.86.2915
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hili, Inc.
Osborne, J. W. (2014). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis. CreateSpace Independent Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995627.d8
Pérez-Gil, J. A., Chacón Moscoso, S., & Moreno Rodríguez, R. (2000). Validez de constructo: El uso de análisis factorial exploratorio-confirmatorio para obtener evidencias de validez. Psicothema, 12(SUPPL. 2), 442–446.
Price, L. R. (2017). Psychometric methods: Theory into practice. The Guilford Press. https://lccn.loc.gov/2016013346
Redecker, C. (2020). Marco Europeo para la Competencia Digital de los Educadores: DigCompEdu. (Trad. Fundación Universia y Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional de España). Secretaría General Técnica del Ministerio de Educación y Formación Profesional de España (Ori. https://www.libreria.educacion.gob.es/libro/marco-europeo-para-la-competencia-digital-de-los-educadores-digcompedu_182024/
Sangrà, A., Guitert-Catasús, M., & Behar, P. A. (2023). Competencias y metodologías innovadoras para la educación digital. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 26(1), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.26.1.36081
Solera-Alfonso, A., Delfa-de-la-Morena, J. M., Marconnot, R., Mijarra-Murillo, J.-J., García-González, M., Romero-Parra, N., & Bores-García, D. (2025). Percepción del alumnado universitario sobre la aplicación de una metodología cooperativa en la formación inicial del profesorado de Educación Física: Un estudio cualitativo. Retos, 63, 306–316. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v63.108 012
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson.
Tobón, S. (2013). Formación integral y competencias. Pensamiento complejo, currículo, didáctica y evaluación. ECOE. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/4575/457545095007.pdf
Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley.
Urrutia, M. E., & Guevara, R. (2013). Estrategias docentes en el primer año de la carrera de Médico Cirujano y nivel de aprovechamiento académico. Investigación En Educación Médica, 2(6), 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-5057(13)72690-5
Valle, R., Alaminos, I., Contreras, E., Salas, L. E., Tomasini, P., & Varela, M. (2004). Student Questionnaire to Evaluate Basic Medical Science Teaching (METEQ-B). Revista Medica Del Instituto Mexicano Del Seguro Social, 42(5), 405–411. https://www.medigraphic.com/cgi-bin/new/resumenI.cgi?IDARTICULO=10449
Veiga-Simão, A. M., Flores, M. A., Barros, A., Fernandes, S., & Mesquita, D. (2015). Perceptions of university teachers about teaching and the quality of pedagogy in higher education: A study in Portugal. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 38(1), 102–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2014.996408
Wood, P. (2008). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. The American Statistician, 62(1), 91–92. https://doi.org/10.1198/tas.2008.s98
World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053
Zambrano, R., Gil, N., Lopera, E., Carrasco, N., Gutiérrez, A., & Villa, A. (2015). Validez y confiabilidad de un instrumento de evaluación de estrategias docentes en la práctica de la enseñanza universitaria. Magister, 27(1), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.magis.2015.06.002
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Daniel Agustin Patricio-Avila, Angel Anibal Mamani-Ramos, Jorge Alber Quisocala-Ramos, Henry Quispe-Cruz, Carlos Vidal Cutimbo-Quispe, Jhony Ruben Rodriguez-Mamani, Yudy Yaneth Tapia-Centellas, Cesar Milton Gomez-Velasquez, Danitza Luisa Sardón-Ari, Kandy Faviola Tuero-Chirinos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and ensure the magazine the right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of authorship of the work and the initial publication in this magazine.
- Authors can establish separate additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (eg, to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Is allowed and authors are encouraged to disseminate their work electronically (eg, in institutional repositories or on their own website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as to a subpoena more Early and more of published work (See The Effect of Open Access) (in English).
This journal provides immediate open access to its content (BOAI, http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm#openaccess) on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. The authors may download the papers from the journal website, or will be provided with the PDF version of the article via e-mail.
