Psychometric Properties of the Academic Agility Scale: Validity and Reliability Evidence

Abstract

Background; Academic agility has emerged as a critical construct in higher education, reflecting the capacity of institutions and learners to adapt effectively to rapid changes, particularly in digitally mediated and post-pandemic environments. The existing measurement tools require development because of their inability to assess academic agility and their need for context-based validation.

Objectives: The study assessed both the psychometric properties of the Academic Agility Scale and its validity and reliability through testing with university students.

Methods: The study used a quantitative cross-sectional design which included 380 university students as research participants. The forward–backward translation method was used to translate the instrument. SPSS (Version 26) software was used to conduct data analysis. The researchers assessed construct validity through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) testing while using convergent and discriminant validity indices (AVE, CR, HTMT) for their analysis. The researchers used regression analyses and known-groups comparisons to test criterion-related validity. The researchers tested reliability through three methods which included Cronbach’s alpha, split-half reliability, and McDonald’s omega.

Results: The EFA showed that a five-factor model explained 64.5% of total variance, which demonstrated excellent sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.929). CFA results showed that the factors had strong loadings (λ > .70) yet the model fit indices did not reach the required minimum values (CFI = 0.819, TLI = 0.800). The research found that both types of validity were mostly confirmed. Criterion-related validity showed statistically significant but small predictive effects (R² ≈ 0.01). The scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = 0.957), which multiple reliability tests confirmed.

Conclusion: The Academic Agility Scale is a reliable and theoretically grounded instrument with acceptable validity for assessing adaptability in higher education contexts. The measurement model needs additional refinement while researchers must conduct validation studies with various population groups to establish its environmental applicability.