Teacher's Report Form

Submitted by mholliday on Mon, 09/10/2012 - 16:03

Overview

Acronym: 
TRF
Author(s): 
Achenback, Thomas, M.
Citation: 

Achenbach, T.M. & Rescorla, L.A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.

Obtain(Email/Website): 

Go to publisher's website: www.aseba.org/ordering

Cost: 
Cost Involved
Copyrighted: 
Yes
Measure Description: 

The 2001 Teacher’s Report Form (TRF) is a teacher-report measure that assesses problem behavior and can identify 8 syndromes. It also assesses academic performance and adaptive functioning. One or more teachers, or other school personnel, who have known the child in the school setting for more than 2 months, can complete the measure independently. The TRF is a parallel form to the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), completed by the caretaker, and the Youth Self-Report (YSR), completed by youths.

It is designed for use in conjunction with these measures to give an overall understanding of the child’s functioning in multiple environments. Cross-informant reports are available.

Domain(s) Assessed : 
Anxiety/Mood (Internalizing Symptoms)
Externalizing Symptoms
Cognition & Development
Language(s) : 
English
Afrikaans
Albanian
American Sign Language
Amharic
Arabic
Armenian
Auslan
Bahasa
Bangla
Bengali
Bosnian
Bulgarian
Cambodian
Catalan
Chinese
Creole
Croatian
Czech
Danish
Dutch
Estonian
Finnish
Flemish
French
Ga
German
Greek
Gujarati
Haitian
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Italian
Japanese
Kannada
Kiembu
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Maltese
Marathi
Nepalese
Norwegian
Papiamento
Pashto
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Sami
Samoan
Sepedi
Serbo-Croatian
Sinahala (ese)
Slovene (ian)
Sotho
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Thai
Tibetan
Turkish
Ukrainian
Urdu
Vietnamese
Zulu
Other Language(s) Available: 
Tagalog, Iranian
Age Range: 
6-18
Measure Type: 
General Assessment
# of Items: 
113
Measure Format: 
Questionnaire
Average Time to Complete (min): 
15
Reporter Type: 
Teacher/Day care provider
Average Time to Score (min): 
10
Periodicity: 
2 months
Response Format: 

Consists of 2 response formats:
1) 3-point Likert-type scale: 0=Not True, 1=Somewhat or Sometimes True, and 2=Very True or Often True
2) Fill-in-the-blank questions

Materials Needed: 
Paper/Pencil
Sample Item(s): 
DomainsScaleSample Items
CompetenceAcademic CompetenceHow hard is he/she working?
CompetenceAdaptive Functioning 
CompetenceInattentionFidgets
CompetenceHyperactivity-ImpulsivityDisturbs others
CompetenceSocial ProblemsToo dependent
CompetenceThought ProblemsHears things
InternalizingAnxious/depressedHurt when criticized


       

 

Information Provided: 
Areas of Concern/Risks
Clinician Friendly Output
Continuous Assessment
Diagnostic Info DSM IV
Graphs (e.g. of elevated scale)
Percentiles
Raw Scores
Standard Scores
Strengths
Written Feedback From a Computer Program

Training

Training to Interpret: 
Manual/Video
Prior Experience Psych Testing/Interpretation
Training by Experienced Clinician (4+hours)

Parallel/Alternate Forms

Parallel Form: 
No
Alternate Form: 
No
Different Age Forms: 
Yes
Altered Version Forms: 
Yes
Describe Alternative Forms: 

FORM FOR DIFFERENT AGES
The Caregiver-Teacher Report Form is completed by teachers for children aged 1½-5.

ALTERED VERSIONS
The Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 6-18 (CBCL 6-18) is completed by parents, and the Youth Self-Report (YSR) is completed by the child.

Psychometrics

Norms : 
Age Groups
Gender
Notes on Psychometric Norms: 

The normative sample for the 2001 TRF revision consisted of 4,437 youth ages 6 to 18. There were 976 newcomers. The sample was augmented
with data from previous versions of the TRF of the statistical analysis, showing that there was no statistical difference in the groups. The sample included children who were not considered to have “serious behavioral/emotional problems” within the previous 12 months.

The normative sample included the following demographic characteristics:
48% boys and 52% girls
SES: 38% upper-class, 46% middle-class, 16% lower-class
Ethnicity: 72% non-Latino White, 14% African American, 7% Latino, 7%
Mixed or Other
Region: 19% Northeast, 23% Midwest, 36% South, and 23% West

Clinical Cutoffs: 
Yes
If Yes, Specify Cutoffs: 
T-Scores: 65-69 (Borderline), 70+ (Clinical), no T-score >100 or < 50 are generated for narrow band scales. T-scores as low as 26 are generated for Total Problems and as low as 10 for Total Competence.
Reliability: 
Type:RatingStatisticsMinMaxAvg
Test-RetestAcceptablePearson's r0.60.960.85
Internal ConsistencyAcceptableChronbach's alpha0.720.97
Inter-raterQuestionablePearson's r0.510.760.51
References for Reliability: 

All reliability was reported for Scaled Scores. Inter-Rater scores reflect ratings between teachers.

Content Validity Evaluated: 
Yes
References for Content Validity: 

Extensive literature searches were conducted, mental health professionals and educators were consulted, and pilot tests were run in creating this measure. The current TRF measure has been refined after years of use. Old items that failed to discriminate significantly have been replaced, and slight changes were made in the wording of various items to make them clearer. Currently, all the items discriminate between referred and nonreferred demographically similar children (p<.01).

Construct Validity Evaluated: 
Yes
Construct Validity: 
Validity TypeNot knownNot foundNonclincal SamplesClinical SamplesDiverse Samples
Convergent/ConcurrentYesYes
DiscriminantYesYes
Sensitive to ChangeYesYes
Intervention EffectsYes
Longitudinal/Maturation EffectsYes
Sensitive to Theoretically Distinct GroupsYes
Factorial ValidityYesYes
Criterion Validity Evaluated: 
Yes
Criterion Validity: 
Not KnownNot FoundNonclinical SamplesClinical SamplesDiverse Samples
Predictive Validity:YesYesYes
References for Criterion Validity: 

ASEBA does not report positive or negative power because the results are confounded with the cut points and sample characteristics.

Overall Psychometric Limitations: 

Psychometrics for this study are very good.

Translation Quality

Language(s) Other Than English: 
Language:TranslatedBack TranslatedReliableGood PsychometricsSimilar Factor StructureNorms AvailableMeasure Developed for this Group
1. Spanish Castilian/LatinoYesYes
2. French (Canadian/Parisian)Yes
3.Tagalog (Philipines)Yes
4. VietnameseYes
5. ChineseYes
6. American Sign Langugage Yes
7. Farsi Yes
8. Polish Yes
9. Russian Yes
10. UrduYes

Population Information

Population Used For Measure Development: 

The 1986 original sample used to develop the measure comprised 1,700 students receiving mental health or special education services in diverse settings. The sample was ethnically and socioeconomically diverse. Detailed demographic information is provided in the 1986 Manual, pp. 12-14.

Measure has demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity in which populations?: 
Physical Abuse
Sexual Abuse
Domestic Violence
Neglect
Other
Use with Diverse Populations: 
Population Type: Measure Used with Members of this GroupMembers of this Group Studied in Peer-Reviewed JournalsReliableGood PsychometricsNorms AvailableMeasure Developed for this Group
1. Developmental DisabilityYesYes
2. DisabilitiesYesYes
3. Lower socio-economic statusYesYesYesYesYes
4. Rural populationsYesYesYesYesYes
5. Child AbuseYesYes Yes
6. LatinoYesYesYesYes

Pros & Cons/References

Pros: 

1. Well researched and widely used.
2. Newly revised measure.
3. DSM-IV oriented.
4. Provides information on strengths of the child.
5. Inexpensive to administer and score.
6. Computer-generated reports are available with clinician-friendly feedback.
7. Parallel forms are available. Can use up to 8 various parallel forms per child.
8. A computer utility called “A2S” is available from ASEBA to easily export data to SPSS.

 

Cons: 

1. Can be a time-consuming measure to complete.
2. Potential for self-report bias.
3. No assessment of profile validity.

Author Comments : 

No comments from the author, but the author did read and make corrections on the review and granted permission to post sample items.

References: 

To obtain a full list of references, please see the following or contact ASEBA: Bérubé, R.L., & Achenbach, T.M. (2005). Bibliography of published studies using ASEBA instruments: 2005 edition. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families Numbers provided are based on the manual and the author. A Psych Info search (5/05) for “Teacher Report Form” or “TRF” anywhere revealed that the measure has been referenced in 836 peer-reviewed journal articles. Below is a sampling:

1. Achenbach, T.M., Howell, C., McConaughy, S.H., & Stanger, C. (1995). Six-year predictors of problems in a national sample of children and youth: I. Cross-informant syndromes. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 336-347.

2. Achenbach, T.M., & Rescorla, L.A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.

3. Erol, N., Simsek, Z., Oner, O., & Munir, K. (2005). Effects of internal displacement and resettlement on the mental health of Turkish children and adolescents. European Psychiatry, 20(2):152-7.

4. Descheemaeker, M.J., Ghesquiere, P., Symons, H., Fryns, J.P., & Legius, E. (2005). Behavioural, academic and neuropsychological profile of normally gifted Neurofibromatosis type 1 children. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(Pt 1):33-46.

5. Backman, M.L., Santavuori, P.R., Aberg, L.E., & Aronen, E.T. (2005). Psychiatric symptoms of children and adolescents with juvenile neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(Pt 1):25-32.

6. Deng, S., Liu, X., & Roosa, M.W. (2004). Agreement between parent and teacher reports on behavioral problems among Chinese children. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 25(6):407-7).

7. Oncu, B., Oner, O., Oner, P., Erol, N., Aysev, A., & Canat, S. (2004). Symptoms defined by parents' and teachers' ratings in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: Changes with age. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 49(7):487-91.

Developer of Review: 
Maiken Thorvaldsen, B.A.
Editor of Review: 
Nicole Taylor, Ph.D., Robyn Igelman, M.A., Madhur Kulkarni, M.S.
Last Updated: 
Thu, 03/13/2014
0