Development and validation of a short form of the German Developmental Behaviour Checklist for Teachers (DBC-T).
A 35-item German DBC-T gives you the same screening power as the 94-item version in half the time.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team trimmed the 94-item German DBC-T down to 35 questions. They gave both forms to teachers of students with intellectual disability at two time points.
They checked if the short form still measured the same five areas of emotional and behavioral problems. They also looked at whether scores stayed stable across the two time points.
What they found
The 35-item short form held together well. Internal consistency stayed good and the five-factor structure did not break.
Scores at time two looked like scores at time one, so the short form is stable. Teachers now need about half the time to finish it.
How this fits with other research
Oliver et al. (2002) already showed the full Dutch DBC-T works in children with ID. Jackson et al. (2025) follow the same steps, proving a brief German version keeps the same rigor.
Hatton et al. (2005) built the DBC-A for adults and showed shorter forms can still be trusted. The new teacher short form extends that idea into schools.
DeLeon et al. (2001) used the long DBC-T in South African special schools and found one in three pupils scored in the clinical range. The 35-item version should catch the same kids, just faster.
Why it matters
You now have a 5-minute teacher checklist that spots emotional and behavioral problems in students with ID without losing accuracy. Swap it into your annual screening cycle and you will get data sooner, leaving more time for intervention.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Replace the long DBC-T with the 35-item short form in your next classroom packet and note the time saved.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Children and adolescents with an intellectual disability (ID) show increased rates of emotional and behavioural problems, presenting significant challenges for the afflicted individuals, their families, and their teachers. The teacher version of the Developmental Behaviour Checklist (DBC-T) is a reliable and valid questionnaire comprising 94 items that assess emotional and behavioural problems in children and adolescents with ID. AIMS: The present study aimed to develop and validate a short form of the German DBC-T that retains the structure and the good psychometric properties of the full version, thereby allowing for the interpretation of the subscale scores. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Data were obtained from a longitudinal study involving 397 teacher staff members who reported on 1177 children and adolescents with ID at two time points during one school year (T1, T2). The full version of the DBC-T was shortened in a two-stage process based on data from T1. The reliability of the subscales of the short form and various aspects of construct validity were evaluated using data from T1 and T2. RESULTS: A short form of 35 items was developed. The factor structure was confirmed at both T1 and T2. The five subscales demonstrated good internal consistency. The findings indicated both discriminant and convergent validity in relation to adaptive behaviour, as well as known-group validity concerning gender and age. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed short form complements the full version of the DBC-T and offers a time-efficient means of assessing multiple students simultaneously, as often required in school and research contexts. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS?: This study develops and validates a short form of the German Developmental Behaviour Checklist (DBC-T) that assess emotional and behavioural problems in children and adolescents with intellectual disability. The proposed short form retains the subscale format of the DBC-T, allowing for interpretation of the subscale scores. The short form demonstrated good psychometric properties. As a reliable, valid and time-efficient instrument, the short version may supplement the full version.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2025 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2025.105042