The main objective of any school is to ensure learning and development of students. In this complex process, the school climate created through the relationships between members of an educational community is essential. Empirical research has shown that norms, expectations, and belief systems that characterize school climate shape individual experience and student learning and, thus, influence their behavior and relationships (Thapa et al., 2013). Actually, school climate has been shown to be one of the main determinants of student academic achievement and school climate reform supports effective violence prevention (Gendron et al., 2011; Wang & Eccles, 2013). Because of this fact, and of the potential malleability of school climate, a great deal of school reform initiatives focus on improving such a climate (Durlak et al., 2011).

School climate represents an inherently multidimensional construct for which there is no universal definition (Anderson, 1982; Wang & Degol, 2015). The National School Climate Council (2007) defines school climate as “patterns of people’s experiences of school life that reflects norms, goals, values, interpersonal relationships, teaching and learning practices, and organizational structures” (p. 4). However, very different definitions have been used to describe it, which have led to a lack of theoretical coherence in many school climate measures and a lack of consensus regarding dimensions that should be regularly measured (Clifford et al., 2012; Thapa et al., 2013). In addition, Cohen et al. (2009) pointed out that schools often use homemade instruments to assess school climate. The importance of using psychometrically sound measures lies in the need to assess school climate in a valid and reliable way in order to make data-driven decisions, which allows optimizing schools resources such as effort, time, and money. Therefore, efforts to progress in the measurement of school climate and to develop reliable and useful instruments for schools are still needed.

Over the last years, different measures have been developed to assess school climate, most of them based on student perceptions. However, recent studies suggest that student perceptions of school climate may actually be based on what occurs in smaller ecologies, such as classroom, where students spend most of their time (Mitchell & Bradshaw, 2013). In addition, certain aspects that school climate encompasses (e.g., leadership or quality of relationships among teachers) would not be so evident or relevant from student perspectives because of their role within school (Koth et al., 2008). In this context, teacher perspectives become relevant since they perceive and are sensitive to school climate, but also play a critical role in facilitating a supportive classroom climate for students (Künsting et al., 2016; Reeve, 2006). Therefore, it is worth asking which are the aspects of school climate that may condition the work and efficacy of teachers.

Prior research has shown that a leadership in which responsibilities are shared, participation in school decisions is encouraged, and opportunities to improve teaching are provided is related to a high-quality pedagogy among teachers (Sun & Leithwood, 2015). Similarly, support received from other colleagues is essential to develop an identity as a resilient teacher and influences teacher commitment and retention (Johnson et al., 2015). Teachers’ perceptions of students have been shown to influence their effort and the teaching strategies they use (Wenglinsky, 2000) and, often, student behavior patterns influence teacher attrition and frustration (Robers et al., 2012). In addition, teachers’ perceptions of parental involvement are related to sense of self-efficacy and expectations teachers hold about students (Hauser-Cram et al., 2003).

Another aspect that has received less attention, but significantly related to a teacher’s efficacy, is school goal structure. According to the achievement goal theory, there are two types of goal orientations: a mastery or learning goal structure and a performance goal structure (Midgley et al., 1995; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011). The former defines an environment in which success is based on learning and improvement, student effort is recognized, and mistakes are considered a part of the learning process. In contrast, a performance goal structure defines an environment in which success is based on social comparison, achievement of high marks is emphasized, and competition is often encouraged. Research has shown that when students perceive a learning-goal structure they tend to pursue these types of goals and tend to use more effective learning strategies, while students who perceive a performance-goal structure tend to use surface-level cognitive strategies (Ames & Archer, 1988; Midgley et al., 1995). More recent studies have shown that when teachers perceive that school emphasizes the importance of learning they also tend to adopt teaching goals oriented towards student learning (Cho & Shim, 2013). In addition, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2011) found that teachers feel a greater sense of school belonging and greater job satisfaction when a learning-goal structure is emphasized.

In an effort to integrate the above aspects, the School Climate Questionnaire for Secondary and High School Teachers (Quijada et al., 2020) was developed. The initial study supported a seven-factor structure assessing the quality of leadership, quality of relationships among teachers, learning-goal structure, performance-goal structure, teacher-student relationships, student-student relationships, and parental involvement. Measures already exist that provide an inclusive perspective of school climate by evaluating leadership, quality of relationships among students, appearance and resources of school, discipline environment, faculty relationships, and parental involvement (e.g., School Climate Assessment Instrument by Alliance for the Study of School Climate, 2004; School Climate Teacher Survey by Liu et al., 2014). Other existing measures provide a school climate perspective useful to evaluate bullying prevention program effects by assessing rules and safety at school as well as the existence of respectful relationships between teacher and students (e.g., Delaware School Climate Survey-Teacher/Staff by Bear et al., 2014; Authoritative School Climate Survey by Huang and Cornell (2015). However, from a perspective focused on school climate aspects that can improve student learning, it is essential to take into account school goal structure while other aspects, such as safety and school resources, become less relevant (Wang & Degol, 2015). In this regard, SCQ-SHST constitutes a school climate measure especially useful for schools interested in articulating interventions aimed at improving learning environment. The initial validation of SCQ-SHST provided evidence of its validity and reliability to be used with Spanish teachers at secondary and high schools.

In a second study conducted as part of a project for the Ministry of Public Education of Costa Rica (Alonso-Tapia, 2017), the proper functioning of the SCQ-SHST under a different factor structure from the initially proposed was proved. In this case, dimensions of SCQ-SHST were considered as independent questionnaires, and the underlying factor structure of each of them was explored. Learning-goal structure and performance-goal structure were considered as a single questionnaire with two correlated factors. The dimensions referred to teacher-student and student-student relationships were also considered as a single questionnaire with three first-order factors and a second-order factor labeled quality of student attitudes. Quality of leadership was considered as a single questionnaire, as well as quality of relationships among teachers, and parental involvement. The first two questionnaires model included a second-order factor, while the parental involvement questionnaire was unidimensional.

Although the seven-factor structure initially proposed proved useful to assess teacher perceptions of school climate, factor structures tested in Costa Rica context offer two advantages. First, the joint use of these questionnaires provides schools with a comprehensive perspective of school climate through the scores obtained in each one of them. In addition, schools may decide to use only some of these questionnaires and/or supplement their use with other scales that they consider of interest according to school needs. Second, and more important, multilevel factor structure underlying those questionnaires, including first- and second-order factors allows to obtain scores not only on the general construct, but also on specific aspects of each construct assessed. Therefore, it provides a more detailed information on school strengths and on those aspects susceptible to improvement, which is especially useful to guide an intervention.

This analytic strategy proved useful in assessing perceptions of Costa Rican teachers in a valid and reliable way as well as in designing future interventions for schools involved. However, factor structures proposed were not tested in the Spanish context, so there may be significant differences across both cultures. Although we did not find studies comparing teachers’ perceptions of school climate cross-culturally, there is some evidence suggesting that school climate perceptions vary according to gender, race, ethnicity, and culture. For example, in the context of North American schools Black and Hispanic students were found to perceive school climate less favorably and reported lower levels of security and connectedness to school than their White peers (Voight & Nation 2015). Yang et al. (2013) conducted a cross-cultural study among Chinese and American students. Researchers found that the latter tended to perceive school climate less favorably while Chinese students attributed more importance to academic achievement, respect for teachers, and social harmony. Likewise, significant differences have been found in the importance attributed by Arab and Jewish schools to certain values (Daniel et al., 2013). These findings suggest the importance of considering possible differences in school climate perceptions and justify the need to continue exploring such discrepancies, especially among cultures. Therefore, the present study had two objectives: 1) to test the fit of Spanish data to the models validated in Costa Rica and 2) to test whether there are differences across the two countries and to deduce implications for measurement and intervention if such differences are present.

The aim of this study was to explore whether there are differences in teacher perceptions of school climate across different cultural contexts as well as theoretical and practical implications. A secondary purpose was to provide evidence on a different factor structure than that initially proposed for the SCQ-SHST in support of its use among schools. Results of this study are discussed in light of these two objectives.

First of all, the results based on the different CFAs indicate that questionnaires have a well-estimated factor structure and are valid in the context of Costa Rica and Spain. This means that, to the extent that schools promote and emphasize the set of aspects measured and evaluated by these questionnaires, they will be able to create a positive school climate for most teachers. Likewise, results obtained supported the use of SCQ-SHST as modified in this study. The individual use of each questionnaire provides schools with detailed information on different components of the school climate assessed, which makes it possible to detect those aspects to be modified. In addition, to the extent that these questionnaires are used together, they provide an overview of the school climate perceived through the facets evaluated. This information will be useful to detect the strengths of a school and potential areas of intervention as well as the impact of intervention programs, especially of those aimed at improving learning environment.

Second, results of this study support and extend findings of previous studies (e.g., Yang et al., 2013) showing that differences in school climate perceptions are present when comparing teachers from different cultural contexts. A priori, there is not a strong cultural contrast between the two countries included in this study since, for example, both share the same language. However, our results point out that there are significant differences in the way teachers perceive school climate as well as in the value they attribute to some aspects of it. For example, when it comes to leadership quality, Costa Rican teachers consider more important aspects related to school management (i.e., encouraging cooperative work among teachers). In contrast, Spanish teachers value the fact that the school’s management team involves the teaching staff in decision-making and considers their opinions and needs. In Spain, teachers who are part of a school can decide who will play the principal’s role, while in Costa Rica teachers do not have the opportunity to decide on this school’s aspect. Therefore, often, in Spanish schools the principal is a teacher who has been part of the teaching staff and perhaps, for this reason, teachers consider that it is more important that their demands and opinions are heard by him/her. However, this is only a possible explanation for these findings and further research is needed.

In the case of school, significant differences across countries were found in motivational orientation and parental involvement. Considering mistakes as a natural part of the learning process, praising students who achieve higher grades, and encouraging smarter students is valued more positively in Costa Rica than in Spain. Likewise, the interest and effort of parents in their children’s learning is valued more positively in Costa Rica, while Spanish teachers value to a greater extent that parents encourage respect for the teacher and student discipline. Consequently, it is convenient to take into account these differences when conducting cross-cultural studies or when promoting actions aimed at creating a positive school climate for teachers. However, it is interesting to reflect on the possible consequences of emphasizing the importance of achieving high marks or praising the smartest students to be a role model for the rest of the students. Cho and Shim (2013) found that some teachers with a high sense of efficacy consider that a performance motivational orientation is also important and, thus, constitute a desirable goal for teaching. However, the existing literature has consistently reported the benefits of a learning-oriented climate versus a performance-oriented climate. Research has pointed out that when teachers create a learning-oriented classroom climate, students tend to pursue these kinds of goal and use more effective learning strategies such as discriminating relevant information from the one that is not, trying to integrate the new information with the one they know, being more persistent and creative, and taking on more challenging tasks. Conversely, students who perceive a performance-oriented climate tend to endorse this goal and use surface-level strategies such as rereading the text, memorizing, guessing and show cheating behaviors (Ames & Archer, 1988). Likewise, Skaalvik, and Skaalvik (2017) found that teachers’ perception of a performance-goal structure is related to the experience of greater emotional exhaustion and motivation to leave the teaching profession, and a lower sense of self-efficacy and job satisfaction. Therefore, it is convenient to reflect on the type of goals that are considered desirable and that are emphasized at school, especially when trying to improve the conditions that favor student learning.

Third, the results of this study suggest that not all components of school climate are part of it in the same degree or in the same way. The results of each questionnaire taken individually indicate that they reliably evaluate each of the six components of school climate. However, the reliability of all of them taken together as part of the same questionnaire is not adequate, probably due to the degree to which they contribute to school climate. Leadership quality, support among teachers, and learning motivational orientation represent aspects directly related to the teaching staff. Therefore, it makes sense that these three components considered together show adequate reliability.

When it comes to performance motivational orientation, there are important differences across countries, since Spanish teachers consider that this aspect negatively defines school climate, while Costa Rican teachers consider that it is an aspect that contributes positively to this climate. In addition, this component showed the lowest factor loading on the higher-order factor referred to school climate. Thus, it makes sense that the reliability of the questionnaire decreased when this aspect was included.

Student attitudes were referred to the behavior of students both with teachers and with their classmates. Therefore, although these are aspects on which school and teachers exercise an active role, they are also aspects that do not depend totally on them, which could explain why reliability of the model decreased when this component was included.

Finally, parental involvement can be very variable due to multiple factors that do not depend on school itself such as sociocultural level or working conditions (Eccles & Harold, 1996). Therefore, although it is a relevant aspect of school climate, it often constitutes an aspect external to school.

These results reflect school climate’s complex reality, since there are multiple aspects that compose it and there are differences in terms of level of involvement in school (e.g., parental involvement) and the responsibility that school has over them (e.g., student attitudes). This fact may have important implications in the effectiveness of interventions carried out by school. Those aspects on which school has a more direct control (e.g., quality of leadership or support among teachers) may be more easily malleable and susceptible of improvement compared to those aspects that do not depend directly on school or teachers (e.g., student attitudes or parental involvement). Therefore, these findings should be considered by schools when assessing school climate and deciding on what aspects are worth investing more time and effort.

Fourth, the results of correlation analyses showed that, in both samples, leadership was the aspect most strongly related to satisfaction with school. Again, differences were found in the way performance motivational orientation was related to satisfaction as a function of the country. In line with results discussed above, it was found that Spanish teachers consider that such motivational orientation is negatively related to their satisfaction with school, while for Costa Rican teachers performance motivational orientation contributes positively to their satisfaction both with school and with students and families. The results of the regression analysis also supported the conclusion that leadership is the aspect that most contributes to explaining satisfaction of both Spanish and Costa Rican teachers with school. This finding is consistent with previous studies that show the relationship of leadership not only with satisfaction of teachers, but also with the capacity for innovation, commitment of teachers to implement interventions adopted by the school, and motivation of teachers (Pietsch & Tulowitzki, 2017; Sun & Leithwood, 2015). In addition, because principals control important school-wide conditions, it seems appropriate to consider quality of leadership when evaluating and planning an intervention focused on school climate improvement, especially when it comes to foster motivation and commitment of teachers and, ultimately, to improve student learning.

Finally, the results and conclusions presented should be interpreted considering the limitations of the current study. In the first place, the sample of teachers from Costa Rica is limited by its size, which makes it difficult to generalize the results obtained. In addition, the difference in sample size between the two countries can decrease the power to detect measurement equivalence across samples (Chen, 2007). Second, the language of the questionnaires was adapted to the Spanish spoken in Latin America before being administered. However, the questionnaires were initially developed in the Spanish context, so it is possible that they do not capture aspects of school climate more specific to Latino culture.