Crossmark

Main Article Content


Abstract

Diagnostic tests are a form of assessment that serves to identify students’ initial abilities, misconceptions, learning difficulties, and needs before and during the learning process. The shift in the twenty-first-century educational paradigm toward differentiated and adaptive learning has further strengthened the strategic role of diagnostic tests in supporting effective, meaningful, and student-centered learning. This article aims to examine the concepts, characteristics, development principles, preparation stages, implementation, and challenges and opportunities associated with applying diagnostic tests in adaptive learning in the digital era. The study employed a library research method with a qualitative descriptive approach through an analysis of books, national and international journal articles, and relevant educational policy documents. The findings indicate that diagnostic tests function not only as tools for measuring initial abilities but have also developed into instruments for data-driven instructional decision-making. The integration of digital technology enables diagnostic tests to be administered automatically, adaptively, rapidly, and accurately, allowing teachers to design learning strategies suited to students’ characteristics and needs. The implementation of diagnostic tests also supports the application of the Kurikulum Merdeka through differentiated learning, formative assessment, and improvements in the quality of student-centered educational services. This study concludes that the effectiveness of diagnostic tests in adaptive learning largely depends on teachers’ competence in designing instruments, interpreting assessment results, and using them as a basis for developing learning strategies. These findings strengthen the literature on educational assessment and emphasize the importance of developing teachers’ competencies and utilizing digital technology to achieve high-quality adaptive learning.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citation Metrics & Similar Scopus Articles

Data source Crossref
0
citations
Citation counts are source-specific and may differ because database coverage, reference matching, and update schedules are different. Counts are not added together. Crossref values represent citation links registered and matched by Crossref.
Check Secondary Documents in Scopus
Open this article in Scopus, then check the Secondary documents tab. Use Manual Citation Fallback only for counts you have verified manually.
Open in Scopus
Similar Scopus Articles
Scopus
  1. Ding S. (2027)
    Digital Renewal of University Education: Barriers, Opportunities, and Contributions to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
    Asean Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 6(2), 229-240
  2. Raime S. (2027)
    Mental Health and Neurodivergence Disclosure Risk Mitigation in Private Higher Education Institutions: An Integrated Risk-Protection Framework to Support Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
    Asean Journal of Educational Research and Technology, 6(1), 183-200
  3. Irawati R. (2027)
    Enhancing accounting students’ writing performance through problem-based learning: Evidence from a vocational higher education context
    Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 9(1)

Article Details

How to Cite
Nuruddin, & Ridho, A. R. (2026). Transformasi Tes Diagnostik dalam Pendidikan: Konsep, Pengembangan, dan Implementasinya untuk Mewujudkan Pembelajaran Adaptif. TSAQOFAH, 6(4), 4347-4360. https://doi.org/10.58578/tsaqofah.v6i4.11288

References

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students (2nd ed.). ASCD. https://www.ascd.org/books/how-to-give-effective-feedback-to-your-students-2nd-edition

Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2019). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (3rd ed.). Pearson. https://www.longmanhomeusa.com/catalog/products/language-assessment-principles-and-classroom-practices/

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. https://www.mheducation.com/highered/product/how-to-design-and-evaluate-research-in-education-fraenkel.html

Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203181522

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2021). Panduan Pembelajaran dan Asesmen Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah (SD/MI, SMP/MTs, SMA/SMK/MA). https://repositori.kemdikbud.go.id/24921/

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2022a). Capaian Pembelajaran pada Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar, dan Pendidikan Menengah pada Kurikulum Merdeka.

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2022b). Panduan Asesmen Diagnosis Kognitif dan Nonkognitif.

Kementerian Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah Republik Indonesia. (2024). Panduan Pembelajaran dan Asesmen. https://bgtkkalteng.kemendikdasmen.go.id/peraturan-juknis/panduan-pembelajaran-dan-asesmen-tahun-2024

Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2009). Measurement and assessment in teaching (10th ed.). Pearson.

Brookhart, S. M., & Nitko, A. J. (2018). Educational assessment of students (8th ed.). Pearson. https://www.pearson.com/en-au/subject-catalog/p/educational-assessment-of-students/P200000000835/9780134807072

OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en

OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en

Pellegrino, J. W. (2014). Assessment as a positive influence on 21st century teaching and learning: A systems approach to progress. Psicología Educativa, 20(2), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pse.2014.11.002

Popham, W. J. (2018). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (8th ed.). Pearson.

Prasetyo, Z. K., & Widodo, A. (2021). Asesmen Diagnostik sebagai Dasar Implementasi Pembelajaran Berdiferensiasi. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 10(3), 512–523.

Purwanto, N. (2017). Prinsip-Prinsip dan Teknik Evaluasi Pengajaran. PT Remaja Rosdakarya.

Retnawati, H. (2016). Analisis Kuantitatif Instrumen Penelitian. Parama Publishing.

Retnawati, H. (2021). Pengembangan Instrumen Asesmen Pendidikan pada Era Digital. Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 25(2), 123–138.

Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment for learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170508700414

Sugiyono. (2023). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Sukardi. (2021). Evaluasi Pendidikan: Prinsip dan Operasionalnya. Bumi Aksara.

Suwarto. (2018). Evaluasi Hasil Belajar. Pustaka Pelajar.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD. https://www.ascd.org/books/how-to-differentiate-instruction-in-academically-diverse-classrooms-3rd-edition

Uno, H. B., & Koni, S. (2020). Assessment Pembelajaran. Bumi Aksara.

Widoyoko, E. P. (2018). Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen Penelitian. Pustaka Pelajar.

Wiliam, D. (2017). Embedded formative assessment (2nd ed.). Solution Tree Press. https://www.solutiontree.com/embedded-formative-assessment-second-ed.html

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/case-study-research-and-applications/book250150

Zainul, A., & Nasution, N. (2019). Penilaian Hasil Belajar. Universitas Terbuka.