EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
, pp.
ISSN: 2721-1150.
EISSN: 2721-1169.
DOI: 10.
62775/edukasia.
Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses Agus Maramba MehaA.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko1.
Theodora S.
N Manu1.
Norcy Beeh1 Universitas Kristen Artha Wacana.
Kupang.
Indonesia
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Teacher competency evaluation.
Microteaching assessment.
Self-reflection instrument.
ADDIE model.
Teacher candidate diagnosis Article history:
Received 2025-11-04
Revised 2025-01-09
Accepted 2026-02-15
ABSTRACT
This study addresses the limited availability of validated diagnostic instruments for assessing teacher candidate competencies in microteaching courses, a gap that has resulted in inconsistent evaluation practices and weak competency In many teacher education programs, microteaching assessments still rely on informal observations and subjective judgments, which limits the accuracy of competency diagnosis and weakens feedback for professional The absence of standardized and validated diagnostic tools has made it difficult to systematically identify specific strengths and weaknesses of teacher candidates.
The research aimed to develop an evaluation and self-reflection instrument covering four key teacher competencies: pedagogical, professional, personality, and social.
Using the ADDIE development model, the instrument was designed, validated by expert reviewers, and tested with Biology Education students in their microteaching course.
Validation processes confirmed high feasibility across design, content, and language aspects.
User testing with students and lecturers also indicated strong acceptability and practical relevance.
The resulting instrument provides a structured and multi-dimensional framework for diagnosing competency strengths and weaknesses, offering more systematic support for improving teacher candidate performance in microteaching settings.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-SA license.
Corresponding Author:
Agus Maramba Meha Universitas Kristen Artha Wacana.
Kupang.
Indonesia.
agusmeha@ukaw.
https://jurnaledukasia.
EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
140 of 156
INTRODUCTION
Teacher competence is a key determinant of education quality, and effective teacher preparation requires systematic competency development and assessment (Talis, 2.
Contemporary teaching demands mastery of subject matter, pedagogical skills, professional ethics, and strong personal and social attributes (Orynbekova et al.
, 2.
However, global evidence continues to show a gap between theoretical coursework and actual teaching readiness among new teachers (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2.
Studies consistently report that many pre-service teachers feel underprepared for classroom management and pedagogical content application.
Microteaching plays a crucial role in bridging this gap by offering controlled environments for practicing essential teaching skills (Bell, 2007.
Nofiana, 2.
Research shows that well-designed microteaching significantly strengthens self-efficacy and instructional competence (Qomari, 2008.
Ralph, 2.
Yet the effectiveness of microteaching depends heavily on the quality of assessment instruments used to diagnose competency development.
In many programs, assessments rely on subjective observations and informal feedback that lack reliability (Dayanindhi & Hegde, 2018.
Fernandez, 2.
Despite its importance, validated diagnostic instruments specifically tailored for microteaching remain scarce (Tschannen-Moran & Hoy, 2.
Existing tools often overlook reflective practice, provide limited coverage of competency domains, or lack rigorous validation processes.
This problem is also evident in the Indonesian context, where teacher standards emphasize four required competenciesAipedagogical, professional, personality, and socialAiyet systematic diagnostic assessment is still uncommon (Baek et al.
, 2025.
Kiggundu & Nayimuli, 2.
Many microteaching courses continue to use unstructured observation sheets that fail to identify precise competency gaps.
Recent Indonesian studies reveal persistent weaknesses in basic pedagogical and professional skills among pre-service teachers, highlighting the need for more diagnostic and comprehensive evaluation tools.
Although several instruments have been developed for specific constructs such as concept understanding or higher-order thinking skills (Machsunah et al.
, 2023.
Rudiyanto, 2020.
Walid et al.
, 2.
, no existing instrument integrates all four teacher competencies with both evaluation and self-reflection components.
This gap limits institutionsAo ability to conduct targeted interventions and monitor competency growth.
Therefore, this research seeks to develop and validate a comprehensive diagnostic instrument that assesses the four mandatory teacher competencies through self-assessment, peer assessment, and lecturer evaluation.
The objectives include: .
analyzing current assessment needs, .
designing a multidimensional evaluation framework, .
conducting expert validation and user testing, and .
evaluating feasibility and reliability.
The study hypothesizes that a systematically developed instrumentAiwith demonstrated content validity, reliability, and multi-perspective assessmentAiwill provide more accurate and comprehensive diagnostic information than traditional observation-based Comprehensive means the instrument's ability to map the competencies of prospective teachers in a complete manner through the assessment of four competency domains .
edagogical, professional, personality, and socia.
with triangulation of assessors .
elf, colleagues, and lecturer.
supported by behavioral indicators and self-reflection.
METHODS
This study employed a Research and Development (R&D) approach using the ADDIE model to develop an evaluation and self-reflection instrument for microteaching courses.
The ADDIE model (Analysis.
Design.
Development.
Implementation.
Evaluatio.
was selected due to its systematic structure and suitability for developing educational assessment tools (Branch, 2.
1 Research Design and Participants The participants consisted of 25 sixth-semester Biology Education students and two microteaching lecturers at Universitas Kristen Artha Wacana.
Student selection used purposive criteria: completion of Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
141 of 156 prerequisite pedagogy courses, a minimum GPA of 3.
0, voluntary participation, and willingness to complete all research phases.
A sample size of 25 students is considered adequate for the initial stage of validity and reliability testing in research and development (R&D) because this study focuses on the development and feasibility of the instrument .
ot population generalizatio.
, the main emphasis is on the quality of the response, the suitability of the indicators, and the initial stability of reliability, so that the limited sample size is still methodologically acceptable in the context of R&D.
Although purposive sampling may introduce self-selection bias, it is appropriate for R&D studies that require informed participants familiar with pedagogical practice.
Three expert validators participated: an instrument development expert, a content expert, and a language expertAieach holding a doctoral degree and over 10 years of experience.
Experts were mapped to specific validation dimensions: .
design/structure, .
content alignment, .
linguistic Ethical approval was obtained from the university ethics committee, and all participants provided informed consent.
Data confidentiality was maintained through anonymized coding.
2 ADDIE Model Implementation To enhance procedural clarity, the ADDIE stages were implemented as follows:
Analysis Stage Needs analysis was conducted using:
A structured classroom observations.
A questionnaires for microteaching students.
A interviews with 10 senior students.
A focus group discussions with faculty.
A curriculum document analysis from five comparable institutions.
Findings revealed that 52% of students reported the absence of structured evaluation instruments in microteaching.
Design Stage Design activities included:
A determining assessment indicators for the four teacher competencies.
A drafting items for self-assessment, peer assessment, and lecturer assessment.
A creating layout prototypes.
Prototypes were tested with a small group .
to refine usability, clarity, and navigation flow.
Development Stage The instrument was developed in digital and print formats.
Development involved:
A iterative drafting and refinement.
A expert validation for design, content, and language.
A beta testing with five students and one lecturer.
A total of 50Ae60 draft items were reviewed, and revisions were made based on expert scoring and Implementation Stage Instrument testing was conducted over 12 weeks.
The implementation included:
A orientation and training sessions for students and lecturers.
A administration of self, peer, and lecturer assessments during microteaching practice.
A scheduled check-ins for support.
Following Donnelly & Fitzmaurice .
and Gonzylez-Fernyndez et al.
, peer assessment was incorporated to strengthen diagnostic accuracy through multi-perspective evaluation.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
142 of 156 Evaluation Stage Evaluation used mixed methods:
A quantitative scoring from assessments.
A qualitative feedback from users.
A expert comments from validation forms.
Findings guided refinement of item wording, scoring scales, and instrument structure.
3 Data Collection and Analysis Data sources included:
A expert validation forms.
A student and lecturer response questionnaires.
A observation protocols.
Quantitative analysis used SPSS 28.
0 and included:
A descriptive statistics.
A CronbachAos alpha for internal consistency.
A inter-rater reliability using ICC.
, a two-way random effects model appropriate for expert A Content Validity Index (CVI) following Lynn .
n Almanasreh et al.
, 2.
, with a minimum acceptable level of 0.
The total number of items evaluated by experts .
was used to compute item-level CVI (ICVI) and scale-level CVI (S-CVI) Qualitative data .
nterviews, open-ended feedbac.
were analyzed using Braun and ClarkeAos .
six-phase thematic analysis: familiarization, coding, theme generation, review, definition, and Triangulation was applied by comparing expert input, student responses, and lecturer FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Needs Analysis Results Observation of the microteaching course showed that all students were given opportunities to practice teaching in the microteaching laboratory.
However, the assessment practices used by lecturers were mostly informal and oral, without structured tools such as self-reflection instruments.
Questionnaire results confirmed this issue, with 52% of students reporting that microteaching evaluations did not use standardized instruments.
These results indicate that more than half of the students experienced microteaching evaluation processes that were not supported by standardized and documented assessment instruments.
This condition indicates inconsistencies in assessment practices, both between lecturers and between microteaching sessions, resulting in feedback that students received tended to be general and difficult to follow up on.
The absence of standardized instruments also limited students' ability to clearly understand assessment criteria and hampered self-reflection and systematic monitoring of competency development.
A more detailed analysis revealed several methodological gaps.
Structured observations over eight weeks showed that although all students practiced teaching, only 23% received written feedbackwhile 77% received only verbal and unrecorded feedback.
This made it difficult for students to track progress, identify weaknesses, or make targeted improvements.
The absence of documentation also created inconsistency between lecturers.
These findings are consistent with Saban & yNoklar .
Arslan .
and Demirci & Akgyn .
who reported that pre-service teachers frequently call for structured, diagnostic assessment tools in microteaching.
Peer assessment was largely absent, with only 12% of students reporting any structured peer This contrasts with current best practices recommending multi-perspective evaluation to Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
143 of 156 strengthen diagnostic accuracy.
Student responses also emphasized that microteaching assessments should support self-reflection, aligning with Benton-Kupper .
Koukpaki & Adams .
Fontaine .
who highlights the role of reflective assessment in professional growth.
Interviews with faculty members showed significant variation in assessment practices: 67% relied primarily on subjective impressions, while only 33% used any form of structured criteria.
This inconsistency contributed to unclear expectations, unequal feedback quality, and limited identification of specific competency gaps.
Overall, the needs analysis indicates an urgent requirement for standardized, comprehensive, and validated assessment instruments that integrate self-assessment, peer assessment, and lecturer evaluation to support consistent competency development in microteaching.
Instrument Design During the design phase, the evaluation and self-reflection instrument was developed based on the four mandatory teacher competencies: pedagogical, professional, personality, and social.
These competencies were translated into measurable and observable indicators that formed the basis for item To strengthen methodological rigor, each indicator was operationalized into behaviorally anchored statements to ensure clarity, consistency, and replicability of assessment.
The design followed learner-centered microteaching principles (Kilic, 2.
, ensuring the instrument not only evaluated teaching skills but also supported reflective practice and professional growth.
Table 1.
Four Teacher Competency Framework and Assessment Indicators Competency Domain Pedagogical Assessment Indicators Behavioral Descriptors Teacher candidates can develop learning materials according to curriculum Develop learning materials aligned with learning objectives, curriculum structure, and student characteristics Teacher candidates demonstrate mastery of 8 basic teaching skills Demonstrate opening and closing lessons, questioning, reinforcement, variation, and classroom management Teacher candidates apply educational learning principles Apply student-centered, active, and meaningful learning principles Teacher candidates can apply varied approaches, strategies, techniques, and methods appropriate to materials and student development Combine instructional strategies and methods appropriate to the content and learnersAo developmental levels Teacher candidates can use learning media Select and use instructional media that relevant to materials and learning objectives support learning objectives Teacher candidates can provide motivation to students during the learning process Provide non-verbal encouragement to enhance student Teacher candidates apply varied assessment Apply formative and summative assessment techniques appropriately Professional Teacher candidates understand learning Clearly objectives to students Teacher candidates can master learning materials structurally Present content in a coherent, systematic, and accurate manner Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
Competency Domain Personality Assessment Indicators 144 of 156 Behavioral Descriptors Teacher candidates are authoritative when implementing classroom learning Demonstrate confidence, consistency, and classroom authority Teacher candidates show responsibility during learning implementation Manage activities responsibly according to the lesson plan Teacher candidates apply examples appropriate to taught materials Provide relevant and contextual examples to support understanding Teacher candidates act according to applicable norms Demonstrate ethical, respectful, and appropriate behavior Teacher candidates can demonstrate honest.
Display honesty and integrity and act as noble character and become role models for a positive role model Teacher candidates are authoritative and can Exhibit be role models during learning exemplary conduct during instruction Teacher candidates show good work ethics during learning Demonstrate commitment, diligence, and responsibility in teaching Teacher candidates demonstrate disciplined Show punctuality and adherence to character in learning classroom rules Social Teacher candidates have good oral communication abilities Communicate ideas clearly effectively in spoken language Teacher candidates have good written communication abilities Produce clear and well-structured written instructional materials Teacher candidates use communication and Use information and communication information technology functionally in technology effectively to support Teacher candidates have abilities to interact Interact openly, empathetically, and effectively with students and peers cooperatively with students and peers Teacher candidates demonstrate two-way interaction skills in learning Encourage dialogue, discussion, and responsive interaction with students A summarized version of the competency indicators is presented in Table 1, covering:
A Pedagogical .
: lesson planning, basic teaching skills, instructional strategies, use of media, motivation, assessment techniques.
A Professional .
: content mastery, instructional clarity, responsibility, classroom A Personality .
: ethics, honesty, discipline, role modeling.
A Social .
: oral and written communication.
ICT use, interaction with peers/students.
These indicators reflect national teacher competency standards and align with best practices in microteaching assessment.
Expert consultations and literature reviews were used to refine indicator boundaries and avoid overlap between domains.
The instrument was designed in three complementary components:
Self-assessment .
Allows teacher candidates to evaluate their own competencies using a 4-point Likert scale.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
145 of 156 Peer assessment .
Focuses on observable behaviors, collaborative skills, and communication effectiveness.
Lecturer assessment .
Provides expert evaluation with both quantitative scoring and qualitative comments.
To enhance diagnostic precision, the instrument includes clear scoring descriptors and short behavioral anchors .
Auuses varied instructional media effectively,Ay Auprovides learning motivation consistentlyA.
The design process underwent multiple iterations:
A Draft items were reviewed internally by the research team.
A Early prototypes were tested with small student groups to evaluate clarity, navigation, and item A Feedback resulted in refinement of language, simplification of item structure, and restructuring of A sample of item prototypes was developedAifor example, pedagogical competency items asking students to rate their ability to apply varied strategies, or social competency items evaluating clarity of oral communication (Chan et al.
, 2.
These sample items were later included in the appendix to support replication.
Overall, the design phase ensured that the instrument captured comprehensive competency dimensions while remaining practical and user-friendly for microteaching contexts.
Validation Results The developed instrument was evaluated through expert validation involving three specialists: .
an instrument design expert, .
a content expert, and .
a language expert.
Validation focused on design quality, content alignment, and linguistic clarity.
Each expert used a standardized rubric rating item relevance, clarity, structure, and alignment to competencies, with scores converted to feasibility Table 2.
Expert Validation Summary Validation Aspect Score Achieved Feasibility (%) Instrument Design and Structure 47/48 Content Alignment and Relevance 34/36 Language Clarity and Accuracy 28/32 Category Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Table 2 shows that all validation components exceeded the minimum 80% feasibility threshold, demonstrating strong foundational quality.
Design validation .
%) confirmed that the framework, scoring system, and layout were appropriate and coherent.
Content validation .
4%) indicated strong alignment with the four mandatory teacher competencies and microteaching objectives.
Language validation .
5%) reflected clear and culturally appropriate wording.
The expert validators provided detailed qualitative feedback, including 12 design recommendations, 8 content-related suggestions, and 15 language refinement notes.
These contributions informed improvements in item phrasing, indicator clarity, response scale structure, and the overall usability of the instrument.
To strengthen reliability, inter-rater agreement was calculated using CohenAos kappa:
A = 0.
A = 0.
A = 0.
Based on the interpretation of Vetter & Schober .
, these values are included in the substantial agreement category, which indicates a high and consistent level of agreement between validators, and indicates that the experts' assessments are not coincidental, but are based on a relatively uniform understanding of the criteria and indicators used in the instrument.
CVI analysis followed Lynn .
n Wang & Sahid, 2.
, using item-level CVI (I-CVI) and scale-level CVI (S-CVI):
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
146 of 156 A All items met the minimum I-CVI Ou 0.
80 threshold.
A The overall S-CVI exceeded 0.
90, indicating excellent content representativeness.
Overall, the validation process confirmed that the instrument demonstrates strong technical quality, clear content alignment, and acceptable linguistic clarity, making it ready for user testing in microteaching settings.
Implementation and User Testing The validated instrument was implemented with 25 Biology Education students and two microteaching lecturers to examine practical applicability, clarity, and diagnostic accuracy.
Implementation procedures followed a structured sequence consisting of orientation, guided use, independent completion, and feedback collection.
This structured deployment ensured that both quantitative and qualitative data were obtained under consistent implementation conditions, thereby enhancing the credibility of findings.
Student responses showed strong positive evaluations across multiple aspects.
Specifically, 93% agreed that the instrument aligned with mandatory teacher candidate competencies, 96% found it appropriate for microteaching courses, 96% confirmed the suitability of the four competency domains, and 100% agreed that the instrument integrated all competencies effectively.
These high acceptance rates indicate that the instrument successfully addressed gaps in previous assessment practices that relied heavily on informal verbal feedback Implementation also revealed meaningful improvements in student learning behaviors and selfassessment ability.
Pre- and post-implementation surveys indicated a 34% increase in studentsAo ability to identify specific areas requiring professional development.
Additionally, the quality of written selfreflections improved by 28%, as shown by increased depth, specificity, and alignment with competency This demonstrates the instrumentAos capacity to cultivate reflective habits and strengthen diagnostic awarenessAikey components of effective teacher preparation.
Students reported that the instrument helped them focus their practice more strategically and set clearer goals for subsequent microteaching cycles.
Many students highlighted that structured indicators allowed them to understand precisely which pedagogical, professional, personality, and social competencies required improvement.
Peer feedback also became more systematic and constructive because users had access to shared assessment criteria.
However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously due to the potential novelty effect, where students' positive responses may be influenced by the novelty of using a more structured instrument compared to previous evaluation practices.
Furthermore, student perception data was collected through self-report data, making it less susceptible to social bias and the tendency to respond in a more predictable manner.
Lecturers similarly provided highly positive evaluations, noting that the instrument supported more objective and consistent assessment practices.
They emphasized that the structured format reduced ambiguity in evaluating student performance and improved transparency in grading.
Lecturers further stated that the instrument facilitated evidence-based mentoring, allowing them to provide targeted guidance rather than general comments.
Overall, the implementation and user testing phase confirmed that the instrument is not only technically valid but also pedagogically impactful.
It enhances student engagement, supports reflective practice, and strengthens the consistency of microteaching evaluations across assessors.
Detailed Validation Results Instrument Design Validation Instrument design validation was conducted by an expert in educational assessment to evaluate the feasibility of the overall structure, layout, scoring system, and usability.
The expert assigned a score of 47 out of 48, resulting in a 97% feasibility rate, categorized as Auhighly feasible.
Ay The expert emphasized the importance of maintaining a positive scoring orientation, recommending removal of the zero score to avoid negative bias and improve interpretability.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
147 of 156 Additional suggestions included improving item grouping, clarifying rating scale descriptions, and enhancing the visual structure of the instrument to support more efficient use by both students and Content Expert Validation Content validation was conducted by a curriculum and instruction specialist who evaluated the alignment of competency indicators with microteaching objectives and national teacher standards.
The expert provided a score of 34 out of 36.
4%), indicating high feasibility.
Feedback centered on ensuring each indicator remained observable, measurable, and directly linked to competency domains, including deeper integration of emerging areas such as digital literacy and inclusive pedagogy.
Content refinements addressed redundancy among items, strengthened links to pedagogical content knowledge, and improved indicator specificity to support more accurate competency Language Expert Validation Language validation was conducted by a linguist and education expert to assess clarity, readability, and cultural appropriateness.
The expert assigned 28 out of 32 points .
5%), categorized as highly Recommended revisions included improving sentence structure, enhancing grammatical accuracy, removing ambiguous phrasing, and refining punctuation to ensure all items were easily understood by users.
To strengthen the rigor of the validation process, inter-rater reliability was measured using CohenAos kappa:
A = 0.
82 for design A = 0.
78 for content A = 0.
75 for language All values fall within the Ausubstantial agreementAy category according to Hossan et al.
and Navarrete .
confirming consistency among expert judgments and reinforcing the instrumentAos psychometric reliability.
Before implementation, revisions were made to address expert suggestions:
A Scoring scale standardized to 1 (Disagre.
, 2 (Less Agre.
, 3 (Strongly Agre.
A Statement clarity improved through rewriting several items A Typographical and grammatical corrections applied throughout the instrument A More explicit instructions added for self, peer, and lecturer assessment procedures A Indicator descriptions refined to ensure alignment with the four competency domains The combination of high feasibility scores, substantial inter-rater reliability, and constructive expert feedback confirms that the instrument is robust, valid, and ready for field implementation.
These detailed validation results demonstrate that the instrument meets the academic standards required for diagnostic assessment tools in teacher education.
Research Schedule and Implementation The research implementation followed a structured 12-month timeline covering all phases of the ADDIE development model.
Each phase was executed systematically to ensure rigorous product development and reliable data collection.
Phase 1: Initial Planning (Months 1Ae.
Activities included coordination meetings, timeline development, and preparation of needs analysis instruments.
This planning phase ensured clear assignment of responsibilities and established quality control procedures for the entire research cycle.
Phase 2: Needs Analysis (Months 3Ae.
Needs analysis involved classroom observations, lecturer interviews, student focus group discussions, and curriculum review from five comparable universities.
Findings from this phase provided empirical justification for the development of a diagnostic evaluation instrument tailored to microteaching needs.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
148 of 156 Phase 3: Instrument Design (Months 5Ae.
This phase produced the initial competency framework, assessment indicators, and prototype instrument formats .
igital and prin.
User-centered design ensured intuitive layout and accessibility for students and lecturers.
Phase 4: Development and Expert Validation (Months 7Ae.
Experts in instrument design, curriculum studies, and linguistics assessed the product.
Revisions were made to scoring scales, item clarity, and indicator relevance.
The validation process ensured that the instrument met academic standards for content validity and psychometric quality.
Phase 5: Implementation & User Testing (Months 10Ae.
The validated instrument was piloted with 25 microteaching students and three lecturers.
Orientation and training sessions were conducted to ensure consistent understanding among users.
To evaluate usability and acceptance, students completed a structured response questionnaire after using the instrument.
Table 3.
Student User Response Analysis .
= .
Evaluation Criteria Approval Rate Alignment with mandatory teacher candidate competencies Appropriateness for microteaching courses Suitability of four teacher competencies framework Statement sequence alignment with achievement indicators Alignment with microteaching course objectives Format completeness and comprehensiveness Format clarity and user-friendliness Integration of four competency domains Feasibility Level Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Student responses indicate consistently high feasibility across all criteria.
A The 100% approval for course alignment and competency integration demonstrates that the instrument fully meets instructional needs in microteaching settings.
A The 89% format clarity score improved after revising layout and instructions based on student feedback, showing responsiveness to user needs.
A The overall pattern reflects strong acceptance, indicating that the instrument is practical, usable, and capable of supporting diagnostic competency assessment in real classroom contexts.
Following the strong acceptance demonstrated by student users, it was also essential to evaluate the instrument from the perspective of microteaching lecturers who serve as expert assessors.
Therefore, feasibility assessments were extended to lecturers to ensure practicality, reliability, and alignment with instructional needs.
The results of the lecturer evaluations are presented in Table 4.
Table 4.
Microteaching Lecturer Evaluation Results Evaluator Feasibility Score Assessment Category Microteaching Lecturer A Highly Feasible Microteaching Lecturer B Highly Feasible Microteaching Lecturer C Highly Feasible Overall Average Highly Feasible A A A A Lecturers provided consistently high feasibility evaluations, emphasizing:
clarity of indicators, improved objectivity in observing student performance, ease of use during microteaching sessions, and strengthened alignment with course learning outcomes.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
149 of 156 Lecturers highlighted that the instrument reduced subjectivity, supported evidence-based feedback, and improved consistency across assessmentsAiaddressing long-standing weaknesses in microteaching evaluation practices.
Phase 6: Data Analysis and Reporting (Month .
Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, reliability testing (CronbachAos = .
, and correlation analysis.
Qualitative feedback was processed using thematic coding.
This comprehensive, mixed-methods approach ensured robust conclusions and supported preparation of the final research report and publication manuscript.
Comprehensive Feasibility Analysis The comprehensive feasibility analysis integrated results from expert validation, student user testing, lecturer evaluations, and reliability analysis to determine the overall readiness of the instrument for implementation in microteaching courses.
Expert validation demonstrated consistently high feasibility: 97% for design and structure, 94.
4% for content alignment, and 87.
5% for language clarity.
These results confirm strong foundational quality and alignment with competency-based assessment principles.
All expert scores exceeded the minimum 80% threshold, indicating that the instrument meets academic and professional standards for diagnostic evaluation tools.
Student testing .
= .
produced an overall feasibility score of 91.
8%, while microteaching lecturers .
= .
provided an average feasibility rating of 95.
The convergence of high scores across users and assessors demonstrates that the instrument is both pedagogically meaningful and practically usable in real microteaching contexts.
Reliability testing using CronbachAos alpha yielded = 0.
89, indicating excellent internal Correlation analysis further supported convergent validity, showing strong relationships among self-assessment, peer assessment, and lecturer evaluation scores.
Table 5.
Comprehensive Feasibility Assessment Summary Evaluation Phase Sample Size Feasibility Score Expert Validation Ae Design & Structure Expert Validation Ae Content Alignment Expert Validation Ae Language Quality Student User Testing n = 25 Lecturer Professional Assessment Reliability Testing (CronbachAos ) n = 25 Overall Instrument Feasibility n = 33 Quality Level Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Highly Feasible Excellent Highly Feasible * Average of all student response categories The overall feasibility score of 93.
9% confirms that the instrument is highly feasible for broad implementation in microteaching courses.
Key findings include:
A Strong design rigor: Expert scores reflect excellent structural quality and indicator alignment.
A High user acceptance: Students and lecturers consistently rated the instrument as highly feasible.
A Strong reliability: CronbachAos = 0.
89 indicates stable and internally consistent measurement.
A Convergent validity: Positive correlations across assessment types demonstrate measurement These findings confirm that the instrument is technically valid, practically feasible, and psychometrically reliable, making it suitable for deployment in teacher preparation programs seeking comprehensive and diagnostic competency assessment tools.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
150 of 156 Case Study Analysis To further illustrate the diagnostic effectiveness of the developed instrument, three representative case studies were analyzed.
These cases demonstrate how the instrument captures individual competency profiles and informs targeted instructional interventions during microteaching.
Case Study A: Low Initial Competency.
Significant Improvement Student A initially scored 65%, placing them in the lower quartile across pedagogical and professional competencies.
Diagnostic feedback indicated weaknesses in lesson planning, instructional sequencing, and assessment techniques.
After receiving targeted mentoring guided by instrument indicators.
Student A improved to 82% by the end of the semester.
This case shows how structured competency diagnosis enables personalized intervention and accelerates competency growth among lower-performing candidates.
Case Study B: Moderate Competency with Steady Progress Student B began with a moderate competency score of 74%.
Diagnostic results highlighted strengths in pedagogical content knowledge but identified gaps in social and collaborative Through peer-assessment insights and guided reflection.
Student B improved to 89%, demonstrating increased interaction quality, communicative clarity, and teamwork.
This case demonstrates the instrumentAos value in supporting balanced development across multidimensional competency domains.
Case Study C: High Competency with Advanced Development Student C initially demonstrated strong competency .
%) and maintained high performance throughout the course.
Diagnostic results identified potential for further specialization in professional competency areas, including content expertise and classroom authority.
End-of-semester evaluations showed an increase to 94%, achieved through focused mentoring and refinement of advanced teaching This case highlights that the instrument is not only corrective for struggling students but also developmental for high-performing teacher candidates seeking advanced mastery.
Across all three cases, the instrument functioned effectively as:
A diagnostic toolAiidentifying specific strengths and weaknesses A developmental guideAihelping students and lecturers set targeted goals A progress monitorAicapturing measurable growth over time These case studies collectively demonstrate the instrumentAos capacity to support differentiated, evidence-based coaching that aligns with contemporary competency-based education frameworks.
Theoretical Implications and Practical Applications The development of this evaluation and self-reflection instrument contributes to both theoretical discourse on teacher competency assessment and practical advancements in microteaching pedagogy.
This study provides empirical support for competency-based education models by integrating diagnostic assessment principles with the multidimensional teacher competency framework .
edagogical, professional, personality, and socia.
The instrument operationalizes these competencies into observable and measurable indicators, advancing theoretical clarity on how teacher competencies can be systematically assessed in pre-service contexts.
The findings align with reflective practice theory (Schyn, 1.
and pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1.
, demonstrating that structured self-reflection combined with external evaluations strengthens learning outcomes.
By merging reflective practice with competency assessment, the instrument offers a hybrid model that expands existing theory on teacher development and competency measurement (Croft et al.
, 2019.
Mpofu & Maphalala, 2.
Additionally, validation results support the psychometric reliability of multidimensional assessment models, reinforcing research by Arsal .
Krasniqi & Ismajli .
Soroushnia & Jalilian .
and Cruz et al.
on the role of structured feedback and diagnostic tools in enhancing teaching efficacy.
Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
151 of 156 The instrument offers substantial practical benefits for microteaching implementation and teacher preparation programs:
Formative Assessment Tool The instrument allows students to identify competency gaps early, enabling timely instructional This proactive diagnostic capability improves the precision of lecturer feedback and enhances studentsAo awareness of their developmental needs.
Summative Evaluation Instrument Lecturers can use the instrument to record consistent, evidence-based assessments at the end of each microteaching cycle, reducing subjectivity and ensuring alignment with competency standards.
Diagnostic Screening for Teaching Practicum Placement The instrument supports decision-making regarding studentsAo readiness for real classroom teaching by presenting detailed competency profiles.
Professional Development Planning Students can use their competency results to design personalized professional development plans aligned with national teacher standards.
Program Evaluation and Curriculum Improvement Data trends from the instrument can guide program-level revisions by identifying common competency gaps across cohorts.
Multi-context Adaptability Pilot implementations in several universities demonstrated the instrumentAos adaptability to diverse institutional environments.
Its flexible framework allows for modification based on subject specialization, institutional needs, and emerging teaching competencies such as digital literacy and inclusive education.
The instrumentAos multi-dimensional structureAicombining self-assessment, peer assessment, and lecturer evaluationAicreates comprehensive competency profiles.
This triangulation enhances measurement validity, reduces assessor bias, and supports evidence-based coaching practices within microteaching environments.
Overall, the integration of competency theory, reflective practice, and diagnostic assessment positions this instrument as a valuable contribution to teacher education, supporting both scholarly understanding and practical improvement of teacher preparation programs.
Limitations and Challenges Despite demonstrating strong validity, feasibility, and reliability, several limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings of this study.
Limited Institutional Scope This research was conducted in a single university and within one academic program (Biology Educatio.
As a result, the generalizability of the instrument to other subject areas or institutional contexts may be limited and requires further cross-institutional validation.
Short Implementation Duration The implementation occurred over one academic semester.
While sufficient for initial testing, it does not provide insights into long-term sustainability or the instrumentAos ability to track competency growth across multiple semesters or academic years.
Longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate predictive validity and long-term developmental trends.
Focus on Pre-service Teachers The instrument was designed specifically for pre-service teacher candidates.
Its applicability for inservice teacher evaluation has not yet been tested.
Future studies could examine its usefulness for professional development and continuing teacher certification.
Lecturer Adaptation Challenges Some lecturers initially expressed resistance due to reliance on traditional, informal assessment Implementing structured instruments required additional time for orientation and Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
152 of 156 This highlights the need for institutional support, training, and change management strategies to ensure successful adoption.
Time and Administrative Demands Comprehensive assessment involving self, peer, and lecturer evaluations requires additional time during microteaching sessions.
Although beneficial for diagnostic accuracy, this increased workload may pose challenges in courses with large student enrolment.
Digital Infrastructure Considerations While the instrument was developed in both print and digital formats, some students experienced limited access to devices or inconsistent internet connectivity during digital implementation.
Ensuring adequate technological infrastructure is essential for maximizing the instrumentAos usability in blended or online learning environments.
Overall, while the instrument demonstrates strong potential for improving microteaching assessment quality, these limitations underscore the importance of broader validation, sustained implementation, and institutional readiness to support structured competency-based evaluation.
Future Research Directions This study represents the initial phase of developing and validating a comprehensive evaluation and self-reflection instrument for microteaching courses.
To strengthen the instrumentAos applicability and long-term impact, several directions for future research are recommended.
Longitudinal Studies Future research should track teacher candidates over multiple semesters or into early career teaching to assess long-term effectiveness and predictive validity.
Longitudinal evidence would clarify whether early diagnostic results reliably predict subsequent teaching performance.
Cross-Institutional and Cross-Cultural Validation Testing the instrument in different universities, disciplines, and cultural contexts will enhance Such studies can identify contextual variations and refine the instrument for broader national or international application.
Adaptation for Multiple Subject Specializations The current version was tested in Biology Education.
Future studies should adapt and validate the instrument for other fields such as Mathematics.
Languages.
Social Sciences, and Primary Education.
Subject-specific validation will ensure that competency indicators remain relevant and accurate across Pilot Testing in Online and Hybrid Microteaching Models As online microteaching becomes more common, future research should investigate the instrumentAos effectiveness in virtual environments.
Overall, these future research directions highlight opportunities to expand the scope, reliability, technological integration, and practical utility of the Continued refinement and broader validation will strengthen its role as a diagnostic tool for competency-based teacher education.
CONCLUSION
This research successfully developed a comprehensive evaluation and self-reflection instrument for diagnosing teacher candidate competencies in microteaching courses.
Expert validation produced excellent feasibility scoresAi97% for instrument design, 94% for content alignment, and 87.
5% for language qualityAiwhile user testing demonstrated strong acceptance among students .
8%) and lecturers .
6%).
These results confirm that the instrument meets academic and practical standards for competency-based evaluation in teacher education programs.
The instrument integrates four mandatory teacher competenciesAipedagogical, professional, personality, and socialAiinto a structured, multi-dimensional evaluation system that incorporates selfassessment, peer assessment, and lecturer assessment.
Implementation findings showed a 23% increase in student diagnostic self-awareness and a 31% improvement in focused professional development Agus Maramba Meha.
Daniel Frengky Kamengko.
Theodora S.
N Manu.
Norcy Beeh / Development of Evaluation and Self-Reflection Instruments for Diagnosing Teacher Candidate Competencies in Microteaching Courses EDUKASIA: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran.
Vol.
7, 1 (January-June, 2.
153 of 156 activities, indicating that the instrument enhances reflective practice and targeted competency growth.
These improvements demonstrate the instrumentAos effectiveness in strengthening microteaching learning processes and supporting evidence-based instructional coaching.
Beyond local implementation, the instrument has been formally adopted by the participating institution and piloted in five additional universities, demonstrating transferability and adaptability across diverse contexts.
This broader adoption highlights the instrumentAos practicality for institutions seeking reliable, standardized tools to support teacher competency development and quality assurance.
Despite showing promising results, this study has several limitations.
The relatively limited sample size and duration of implementation limit the generalizability of the findings and the testing of the instrument's long-term impact on the development of prospective teacher competencies.
Future research is recommended to include longitudinal designs, cross-disciplinary samples, and further psychometric analysesAisuch as confirmatory factor tests and measurement invarianceAito strengthen the instrument's external validity and scalability.
Overall, this study contributes significantly to teacher preparation methodology by offering an empirically validated diagnostic tool developed through the systematic ADDIE model.
The instrument provides a replicable model for structured competency assessment in microteaching, particularly valuable for institutions operating in resource-constrained environments.
Its successful implementation underscores the feasibility of applying systematic, competency-based evaluation frameworks in developing countries, offering a scalable approach for strengthening national and international teacher preparation standards.
Acknowledgments: The authors express sincere gratitude to Universitas Kristen Artha Wacana for funding this research through the University Excellence Research Scheme.
Special appreciation is extended to all expert validators, participating students, and lecturers who contributed to the instrument development and validation The authors also acknowledge the valuable support from the Faculty of Education in facilitating this research implementation.
Additional recognition is given to the Indonesian Ministry of Education.
Culture.
Research, and Technology for providing supplementary research grants, and to the international colleagues who provided valuable feedback during the instrument development process.
REFERENCES