Development of a psychosocial diagnostic assessment instrument for elementary school students

Abstract

Despite the growing emphasis on adaptive and inclusive learning in basic education, diagnostic assessments used in elementary schools remain predominantly academic and cognitive in orientation, providing limited insight into students’ psychosocial readiness for learning. This gap is particularly evident in the absence of validated instruments capable of diagnosing students’ sense of safety, learning comfort, enjoyment, and learning preferences as foundational conditions for differentiated and responsive instruction. Addressing this conceptual and methodological gap, this study aims to develop and psychometrically validate a psychosocial diagnostic assessment instrument for elementary school students to support adaptive learning practices. Using a quantitative Research and Development (R&D) design, the study was conducted through stages of needs analysis, construct formulation, content validation, and field testing. The instrument was administered in seven elementary schools in Kapanewon Pengasih, Kulon Progo Regency, Indonesia, involving 7 principals, 16 teachers, and 255 fourth- and fifth-grade students. Data were analyzed using Aiken’s V to examine content validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to confirm construct structure, and Cronbach’s Alpha to assess internal consistency reliability. The results indicate that the developed instrument comprises four coherent psychosocial dimensions—sense of safety, learning comfort, learning enjoyment, and learning preferences—with high content validity (V = 0.89) and excellent reliability (α = 0.87). These findings demonstrate that the instrument meets key psychometric criteria and is suitable for use as an early diagnostic tool to inform formative and differentiated learning strategies. In conclusion, this study contributes to the advancement of holistic assessment theory by extending diagnostic assessment beyond academic domains and offers a validated methodological framework for psychosocial diagnostics in primary education. Practically, the instrument provides educators with an evidence-based tool to design adaptive, inclusive, and student-centered learning aligned with contemporary curriculum demands.

Keywords
  • Elementary Education
  • Exploratory Factor Analysis
  • Formative Assessment
  • Psychosocial Diagnostic Instrument
References
  1. Al-Fakhri, I., & Alabdullah, T. T. Y. (2021). The evolution of a robust and reliable brand experience scale in the Malaysian context: An empirical evidence.
  2. Alfageh, D. H., York, C. S., Hodge-Zickerman, A., & Xie, Y. (2024). Elementary Teachers’ Use of Adaptive Diagnostic Assessment to Improve Mathematics Teaching and Learning: A Case Study. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 19(1).
  3. Auliya, H. R., Christianti, M., & Hidayat, B. (2025). Development of Multi-Tier Diagnostic Tests in Primary Schools: A Systematic. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 13(1), 59–74.
  4. Clanton Harpine, E. (2024). Creating an Intrinsically Motivating Learning Environment: Promoting Student Engagement and Intrinsic Motivation. In Service Learning in Higher Education: From Pedagogy to Practice (pp. 59–76). Springer.
  5. Elangovan, N., & Sundaravel, E. (2021). Method of preparing a document for survey instrument validation by experts. MethodsX, 8, 101326.
  6. -0Ghafar, Z. (2023). The influence of self-confidence on English language learning: A systematic review. International Journal of Applied Educational Research (IJAER), 1(1), 55–68.
  7. Ghanad, A. (2023). An overview of quantitative research methods. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 6(08), 3794–3803.
  8. Hagos, T., & Andargie, D. (2024). Effects of formative assessment with technology on students’ meaningful learning in chemistry equilibrium concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 25(1), 276–299.
  9. Husain, H., & Aziz, H. (2022). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to measure the validity and reliability constructs of historical thinking skills, Tpack, and application of historical thinking skills. International Journal of Education, Psychology, and Counseling, 7(46), 608–623.
  10. Iqbal, J., Asghar, M. Z., Ashraf, M. A., & Yi, X. (2022). The impacts of emotional intelligence on students’ study habits in blended learning environments: the mediating role of cognitive engagement during COVID-19. Behavioral Sciences, 12(1), 14.
  11. Ismail, S. M., Rahul, D. R., Patra, I., & Rezvani, E. (2022). Formative vs. summative assessment: impacts on academic motivation, attitude toward learning, test anxiety, and self-regulation skill. Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), 40.
  12. Mohamed Hashim, M. A., Tlemsani, I., & Matthews, R. (2022). Higher education strategy in digital transformation. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3), 3171–3195.
  13. Nasir, M., Rijal, M. K., Primarni, A., Lima, L., & Prastawa, S. (2024). Philosophical foundations of holistic education in the 21st century. International Journal of Educational Narratives, 2(6), 471–482.
  14. Noor, N. H. M., & Fuzi, A. M. (2025). Assessment of Validity, Reliability, and Normality in Quantitative Study: A Survey Instrument Analysis with IBM SPSS. 8th ASNet International Multidisciplinary Academic Conference, 27–43.
  15. Ortega Grefa, J. A. (2025). Summative Assessment in English Teaching and Its Implications for Students’ Emotional State. Riobamba, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo.
  16. Prasetiya, B., & Halili, H. R. (2024). Improving The Capability Of Madrasah Teachers In Conducting Diagnostic Assessments And Differentiation Learning In Tiris District Probolinggo. Jurnal Penelitian IPTEKS, 9(2), 189–201.
  17. Rona, R. (2025). DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT IN THE INDEPENDENT CURRICULUM: A LITERATURE REVIEW. International Journal of Teaching and Learning, 3(6), 1028–1039.
  18. Sahito, Z. H., Khoso, F. J., & Kerio, G. A. (2025). Developing Innovative Educational Assessment Practices for the 21st Century: A Study on Formative, Summative, and Adaptive Testing. Review Journal of Social Psychology & Social Works, 3(1), 257–267.
  19. Surtini, S., & Muhtar, T. (2024). Teachers’ pedagogic competence in strengthening character education of students in elementary schools: Exploring effective strategies. Jurnal Paedagogy, 11(3), 568–579.
  20. Toni, M., & Sudin, M. (2024). Research and development (R&D) interactive media that is effective, efficient and fun for students. Asian Journal of Social and Humanities, 2(6), 1239–1252.
  21. Tzenios, N. (2022). Learner-centered teaching. International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science, 4(12), 916–919.
  22. Zhao, J. (2023). Innovative design and research on cooperative learning of English and a Second Foreign Language in a multimedia environment. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 88–105.