Teacher Support Scale

Abstract

The Teacher Support Scale (TSS), developed by Metheny, McWhirter, & O’Neil (2008), is a psychometric instrument designed to assess students’ perception of support from the teaching staff as a collective social phenomenon, rather than focusing on individual teacher interactions. The scale comprises 21 statements rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5). The original structure of the TSS is composed of four distinct subscales: Interested, Positive Regard, Expectation, and Accessible. The scale is widely utilized in educational psychology research to correlate perceived teacher support with various academic outcomes, including career adaptability and general school success.

Keywords

Teacher Support Scale, TSS, Social Support, Educational Psychology, Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Bifactor Model, Internal Consistency, Career Adaptability.

Authors

Metheny, McWhirter, O’Neil.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Teacher Support Scale (TSS) is to quantify the level of perceived social support students receive from the educational institution’s teaching staff as a unified body. This measurement tool is essential for researchers investigating the impact of the school environment—specifically the perceived collective climate of teacher care and expectation—on student psychological well-being, academic engagement, and future planning.

The instrument’s focus is to reflect teacher support as a broad social phenomenon, capturing the student’s belief about the overall supportive atmosphere provided by educators. By assessing support directed toward students generally, the TSS provides a valuable measure suitable for large-scale studies concerning school climate and the effectiveness of educational interventions.

Construct

The TSS measures the construct of perceived Teacher Support, which is operationalized through 21 items. The original conceptual framework of the scale identifies four primary dimensions that contribute to this support:

• Interested: Reflects the perception that teachers care about the student’s future (e.g., “Teachers are interested in my future”).
• Positive Regard: Measures the student’s belief that teachers view them positively (e.g., “Teachers would tell other people good things about me”). This dimension often corresponds to emotional support within Tardy’s social support model.
• Expectation: Assesses the belief that teachers maintain high standards for the student’s academic effort and performance (e.g., “Teachers expect me to work hard in school”).
• Accessible: Gauges how easy it is for students to approach teachers regarding school matters or personal issues (e.g., “Teachers are easy to talk to about school things”).

Validity

While the original English version established a four-factor structure, cross-cultural validation efforts, such as the Czech study referenced, suggest potential issues with factor differentiation and structural validity in translated contexts. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) models—testing both correlated factors (M1) and a hierarchical model (M2)—failed to confirm the initial four-factor structure reported by Metheny et al. (2008) when applied to Czech data.

The CFA results indicated poor fit or inadmissible solutions. M1 (Correlated Factors) showed barely acceptable fit (χ²(183) = 4707, p < .001; CFI = .93; RMSEA = .098; SRMR = .050), with extremely high factor correlations ranging from .71 to .99, strongly suggesting estimation problems due to poorly differentiated factors. M2 (Hierarchical Model) similarly resulted in an inadmissible solution (negative variance of one factor; standardized loading over 1) with comparable fit indices (χ²(185) = 4653, p < .001; CFI = .93; RMSEA = .097; SRMR = .051). Subsequently, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) indicated a lower dimensionality, supporting a robust bifactor model structure. This bifactor model, which achieved a good fit (χ²(172) = 3035, p < .001; CFI = .955; RMSEA = .079; SRMR = .041), posits one strong central factor of general teacher support alongside a specific facet focusing on positive perception/emotional support.

Reliability

The Teacher Support Scale generally demonstrates high levels of internal consistency across various research applications. Previous reports regarding the original English version indicated strong reliability, with internal consistency estimates typically ranging from .91 to .97 (Perry, Liu, & Pabian, 2010).

In the Czech adaptation study, the overall TSS scale maintained high reliability, evidenced by a McDonald’s omega (ω) value of .90. However, the specific facet identified in the bifactor model (items related to positive perception) showed significantly lower internal consistency (McDonald’s ω = .26). Therefore, researchers using the adapted version often rely predominantly on the total TSS score, encompassing all 21 items, to represent overall teacher support.

Factor Analysis

The original conceptualization of the TSS proposed a four-factor structure, which was tested using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in validation studies. The Czech adaptation study found that the CFA models (M1 and M2), estimated in lavaan (version 0.6-2, Rosseel, 2012) using the WLSMV estimator, were problematic due to high factor correlations and inadmissible solutions, indicating that the four factors were not sufficiently distinct in that sample.

Due to the lack of support for the original structure, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted. The EFA supported a bifactor model. This structure includes a general factor that accounts for the majority of the variance across all items, and a specific factor, or facet, defined by items related to positive perception. This facet reflects the specific form of indirect teacher support manifested in the student’s belief that teachers view him or her positively.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychometric Self-Report Scale

Format: 21 statements using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree).

Language Available: English, Czech (validated adaptation).

Population Group: Students (utilized in studies of secondary and vocational education).

Age Group: Typically adolescents/young adults.

Population Details: Validation research has focused on students, particularly those in vocational education settings.

Test Methodology: Quantitative questionnaire battery administered to respondents. Often utilized alongside other psychological instruments, such as the Career Adapt-Abilities Scale (CAAS), to explore correlations with variables like career adaptability and academic success rate.

Keywords

TSS, Student Perception, School Climate, Educational Measurement, Psychometrics, Bifactor Modeling, Internal Consistency, Social Support, Vocational Education.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year (Original Scale): 2008 (Metheny, McWhirter, & O’Neil).

Permissions and Fee Information: Not provided in source content.

Validation Study Reference (2019): The comprehensive analysis of the TSS structure in the Czech context is detailed in: Lazarova, Bohumira & Hlaďo, Petr & Hloušková, Lenka. (2019). Perception of Teacher Support by Students in Vocational Education and Its Associations with Career Adaptability and Other Variables. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art. 12. 47-64. 10.11621/pir.2019.0403.

Reference’s

• Metheny, J., McWhirter, J. J., & O’Neil, J. (2008). Development of the Teacher Support Scale.
• Perry, K. E., Liu, J., & Pabian, P. (2010). Reports on internal consistency of the TSS.
• Lazarova, Bohumira & Hlaďo, Petr & Hloušková, Lenka. (2019). Perception of Teacher Support by Students in Vocational Education and Its Associations with Career Adaptability and Other Variables. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art. 12. 47-64. 10.11621/pir.2019.0403.
• Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
• Savickas, M. L., & Porfeli, E. J. (2012). The Career Adapt-Abilities Scale — International Form 2.0. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(3), 661–670.

Items of the Teacher Support Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Expect me to work hard in school
2. Try to answer my questions
3. Are interested in my future
4. Take the time to help me get better grades
5. Think I am a hard worker
6. Are helpful when I have questions about career issues
7. Are helpful when I have questions about school issues
8. Would tell other people good things about me
9. Push me to succeed
10. Challenge me to think about my future goals
11. Believe I am smart
12. Help me understand my strengths
13. Want me to do well in school
14. Enjoy having me in their classes
15. Care about what happens to me
16. Encourage me to learn
17. Think I should continue my education after high school
18. Support my goals for the future
19. Will listen if I want to talk about a problem
20. Are easy to talk to about school things
21. Are easy to talk to about things besides school