Abstract
BACKGROUND: To effectively navigate the growing complexities and rapid changes in today's environment, universities must cultivate agility among their members. Over the past decade, students have encountered a variety of experiences related to E-Learning and the provision of educational services through electronic platforms. This study aimed to develop and validate a Questionnaire of Educational Agility (QEdu-Agility) to assess the capacity of educational institutions to adapt to these evolving demands. METHOD: This survey research aimed to validate QEdu-Agility. The statistical sample consisted of 372 students from Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in Iran, who had completed at least one academic year online during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2022. Participants were selected using the Cochran formula. The initial questionnaire was based on three standard instruments related to organizational agility and adapted for educational contexts. After establishing face and content validity, the preliminary version was validated by a focus group of five educational experts, comprising 30 items across five dimensions: responsiveness, adequacy, flexibility, speed, and integrity, measured on a 5-point Likert scale. To confirm the construct validity, the questionnaire was randomly distributed to students via email. Data analysis was conducted using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) with varimax rotation, employing SPSS 24 software. RESULTS: The content validity was confirmed with Content Validity Ratio (CVR) = 0.847, Content Validity Index (CVI) = 0.877, and the reliability with internal consistency was confirmed with R = 0.944. The CVI sub-components for relevance, clarity, and simplicity were obtained as 0.867, 0.853, and 0.847, respectively. According to EFA, the sample adequacy was confirmed with Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) index = 0.928 and significant Bartlett's test (P < 0.001). The total variance explained of the QEdu-Agility was about 60%. The first component of responsiveness accounted for 38.79% of the variance, followed by adequacy (7.99%), flexibility (5.17%), speed (3.91%), and integrity (3.57%) in subsequent components. CONCLUSION: The findings of the construct validity indicated a good fit of the QEdu-Agility. Given that the concept of agility is highly contingent on the context, this tool could be retested for measuring educational agility in educational organizations, such as universities.