This study examines the validity and reliability of a formative assessment instrument designed to measure students’ conceptual understanding in physics. Using a psychometric validation approach, data were collected from 220 secondary school students who had studied wave-related topics. The instrument consisted of 12 essay items. Construct validity was tested using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), while reliability was assessed using McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha. The results show that the model meets factor analysis assumptions and demonstrates acceptable fit. Reliability coefficients exceed 0.90, indicating strong internal consistency and supporting the instrument's use in formative physics assessment.
AikenL. R. (1980). Content validity and reliability of single items or questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 40(4), 955–959. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448004000419
2.
AlaviM.BirosE.ClearyM. (2024). Notes to factor analysis techniques for construct validity. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 56(2), 164–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/08445621231204296
3.
AMM. A.HadiS. (2021). Implementation of item response theory at final exam test in physics learning: Rasch model study. Proceedings of the 6th International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE 2020), 541(Isse 2020), 336–342. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210326.048
4.
AMM. A.PurnamaE. (2024). Exploring innovative approaches and evaluation techniques in physics education at Madrasah Aliyah Negeri [Paper Presentation]. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Current Issues in Education (ICCIE) 2023, Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (pp. 20–29). https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-245-3_4
5.
Anohina-NaumecaA. (2019). Concept map-based formative assessment of students’ structural knowledge: Theory and Practice. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
6.
ArasS. (2024). Building up formative assessment practices through action research: A study in early childhood teacher education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 45(1), 2–15. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2023.2217413
7.
AsriadiM.HadiS. (2021). Analysis of the quality of the formative test items for physics learning using the Rasch model in the 21st century learning. JIPF (Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Fisika), 6(2), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.26737/jipf.v6i2.2030
8.
Asriadi AMM.HadiS. (2023). Developing a diagnostic test of critical thinking skills in physics lessons. Journal of Research and Educational Research Evaluation, 12(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.15294/jere.v12i1.57286
9.
Asriadi AMM.HadiS.IstiyonoE.SanamA. I.SultanJ.KassymovaG. K. (2025). Enhancing student achievement: Developing a differentiated instruction formative assessment model (DIFAM). REID (Research and Evaluation in Education), 11(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v11i2.87869
10.
Asriadi AMM.SanamA. I. (2025). Psychometric evaluation of diagnostic test instruments on physics wave material. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 29(1), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v29i1.84655
11.
Asriadi AMM.SetiawatiF. A. (2023). Examining the psychometric properties of the career commitment instrument through classical test theory and the graded response model. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(3), 455–468. https://doi.org/10.23887/jere.v7i3.59619
12.
AustL.SchützeB.HochweberJ.SouvignierE. (2024). Effects of formative assessment on intrinsic motivation in primary school mathematics instruction. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39(3), 2177–2200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00768-4
13.
BalbiA.BonillaM.CurioneK.IbarraA.MeneseP. (2025). Impact of a professional development program in formative assessment for mathematics teachers. Professional Development in Education, 51(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2024.2433051
14.
BoxC. (2019). Formative assessment in United States classrooms: Changing the landscape of teaching and learning. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03092-6
15.
BrookhartS. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. ASDC.
16.
DoguO.CinarN.ErkorkmazU. (2018). Development of an oral anticoagulant-use attitude scale, and assessment of its validity and reliability. Saudi Medical Journal, 39(12), 1242–1248. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2018.12.23138
17.
El FougourW.ErradiM. (2026). Enhancing formative assessment with AI: Supporting cognitive development through adaptive feedback. In Reimagining curriculum and assessment in the age of generative AI (pp. 307–332). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-7579-3.ch010
18.
EvansD. J. R. (2020). Designing and using formative assessment in anatomy. In Teaching anatomy: A practical guide (pp. 431–441). Springer Science+Business Media. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43283-6_42
19.
FraenkelJ. R.WallenN. E. (2009). How to design research in education and evaluate. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
20.
GezginD. M.KurtçaT. T. (2025). Developing the ailessphobia in education scale and examining its psychometric characteristics. Education and Information Technologies, 30(4), 4471–4491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12984-6
21.
GravenM.VenkatH. (2021). Piloting national diagnostic assessment for strategic calculation. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 33(1), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00291-0
22.
GupitasariV.RetnawatiH. (2024). Teachers’ strategy in conducting assessments in the new normal era. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 18(2), 350–359. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v18i2.20907
23.
HaghayeghiM.MoghadamzadehA.RavandH.JavadipourM.KareshkiH. (2025). Development of a cognitive assessment checklist for first-grade mathematics: Utilizing hierarchical cognitive diagnostic modeling in elementary education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 43(1), 88–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829241290277
24.
HairJ. F.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th edn). Cengage Learning.
25.
HartonoW.HadiS.RosnawatiR.RetnawatiH. (2023). Exploration of student cognitive mathematics ability diagnostic instruments: Validity, reliability, and item characteristics. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 13(3), 386–394. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.03.39
26.
HosseiniS. A.FeiziA.YaghoubizadehF. (2026). Validity and reliability assessment of the health behaviour inventory (HBI-20) among Iranian women. International Journal of Women’s Health, 18, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S578301
KarakayaY. E.AyçiçekS. D.GelbalS.DeveciogluS.SevimFÖMYenenE. T.DikmenM. (2026). Development and psychometric evaluation of the e-sports attitude scale. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 13(1), 308–329. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1662535
30.
KeskiC.TasI. D. (2025). The perception scale for curriculum leadership: Validity and reliability study. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 12(2), 367–386. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1518335
31.
LiangW.-J.ChengM. (2011). Developing and testing the reliability and validity for airport operators’ work-related stress. ICTIS 2011: Multimodal Approach to Sustained Transportation System Development: Information, Technology, Implementation—Proceedings of the International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety , 2032–2038. https://doi.org/10.1061/41177(415)256
32.
Mata-LópezW. A.Juárez-HernándezL. G.TobónS.Montesinos-LópezO. A. (2021). Analysis of construct validity and reliability of two instruments to evaluate professional oriented activities. Revista Espanola de Orientacion y Psicopedagogia, 32(2), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.5944/REOP.VOL.32.NUM.2.2021.31278
33.
McKayJ.MurphyD. J.BowieP. (2007). Development and testing of an assessment instrument for the formative peer review of significant event analyses. BMJ Quality & Safety, 16, 150–153. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2006.020750
34.
Medina-ZutP.Soria-ValenciE.Ulloa-GuerrO.Deroncele-AcostA. (2023). Learning analytics-mediated formative assessment in STEAM education: A systematic literature review. Meta: Avaliacao, 15(48), 480–508. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.22347/2175-2753v15i48.3918
35.
NiaH.SheL.SomasundramS.Khoshnavay FomaniF.KavehO.HosseiniL. (2023). Validity and reliability of Persian version of the 12-item expectations regarding aging survey. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 96(2), 248–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/00914150221084650
36.
Nurhasanah, HidayatullahZ.YansaH.ArifM. B. S.AsriadiM. (2025). Integrating technology and psychometrics: Developing an app-based diagnostic tool using the partial credit model to uncover student misconceptions. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 11(12), 861–872. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v11i12.12305
37.
OcyD. R.SarifahI., & Riyadi. (2025). EFA and CFA analysis: Development and validation of a test instrument for mathematical abstraction skills. Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education, 10(2), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v10i2.7601
38.
ÖzmenK.ÖzdemirÖF (2019). Conceptualisation and development of the physics related personal epistemology questionnaire (PPEQ). International Journal of Science Education, 41(9), 1207–1227. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1597397
39.
PalsF. F. B.TolboomJ. L. J.SuhreC. J. M. (2023). Development of a formative assessment instrument to determine students’ need for corrective actions in physics: Identifying students’ functional level of understanding. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 50, Article 101387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101387
40.
PhilhowerJ. K (2025). Investigating the supports and obstacles of teachers’ formative assessment practices. SRATE Journal, 34(1), 1–14. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1464898
41.
PisaniL.SeidenJ.WolfS. (2022). Longitudinal evidence on the predictive validity of the International Development and Early Learning Assessment (IDELA). Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 34(2), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09374-8
42.
PlavskinA.SamuelsW. E.CalzoneK. A. (2023). Construct validity analysis of the genetics and genomics in nursing practice survey: Overcoming challenges in variable response instruments. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 31(2), 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1891/JNM-2021-0007
43.
PolatM.ToramanÇTurhanN. S. (2022). Reliability analysis of PISA 2018 Reading Literacy Student Questionnaire based on item response theory (IRT): Turkey sample. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 14(1), 1004–1028. https://ijci.net/index.php/IJCI/article/view/906/469
44.
Rodríguez-MartínB.García-Camacha GutiérrezI.Caro-AlonsoP. A.SuhonenR.García-Camacha GutiérrezA. (2022). Individualised Care Scale-Nurse: Construct validity and internal consistency of the Spanish version. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 36(2), 404–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.13051
45.
SullivanS. (2024). Formative assessment: Strategies for a high school mathematics class. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 16(1), 1–5.https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1441797
46.
SultanaN.NguyenT. T.HossainA.AsaduzzamanM.NguyenM. H.JahanI.DuongT. V. (2022). Psychometric properties of the Short-Form Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-SF) and its associated factors among the elderly in Bangladesh. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(13), Article 7935. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19137935
WymanJ.KurniawatiF.RaharjoM. (2023). Indonesia’s national assessment and the state of early numeracy foundations. International Journal of Educational Development, 94, Article 102657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2022.102657
49.
YamamotoS. H. (2024). Preliminary psychometric assessment of STEM attitude measure for U.S. high school students with disabilities. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 42(3), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231218767
50.
YunosJ. M.MukhtarI. M.AliasM.LeeM. F.TeeT. K.RubaniS. N. K.HamidH.YunusF. A. N.SulaimanJ.SumarwatiS. (2017). Validity of vocational pedagogy constructs using the Rasch measurement model. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 9(2), 35–45. https://publisher.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/JTET/article/view/1595
51.
ZhangL.LuoW. (2019). Application of exploratory factor analysis in language assessment. In Quantitative data analysis for language assess. Volume I: Fundamental techniques (pp. 243–261). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315187815-12
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
