Teacher Questionnaire on First-Grade Student Adaptation Test

How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- Yes
- No
- Yes
- No
- Yes
- No
Teacher Questionnaire on First-Grade Student Adaptation Test - Description and methodology of the test
Teachers can use the Teacher Questionnaire on First-Grade Student Adaptation Test when a child’s learning pace, classroom behavior, stamina, or readiness is difficult to understand. The profile gathers observations so educators can identify areas for attention and discussion with families. A first-grade adaptation questionnaire supports practical planning without reducing the child to one score.
What This Assessment Explores
Teachers can organize observations about learning, energy, attention, movement, emotional maturity, motivation, family support, and readiness. The profile describes tendencies linked with school adjustment, while a teacher adaptation assessment is most useful when several observations point in the same direction.
The displayed scales are:
- Impairments in Intellectual Functioning (0-10) flags academic difficulty-Low 0-3, Moderate 4-7, High 8-10; School Unreadiness (0-5) flags readiness-Well-prepared 0-1, Some unpreparedness 2-3, Marked unpreparedness 4-5.
- Asthenic Syndrome (0-9) reflects fatigability and reduced work capacity-Low 0-2, Moderate 3-5, High 6-9; Nervous System Inertia (0-8) reflects slowed reactions and attention shifts-Low 0-2, Moderate 3-5, High 6-8.
- Hyperkinetic Syndrome (0-7) reflects increased motor activity and impulsivity-Low 0-2, Moderate 3-5, High 6-7; Neurotic Symptoms (0-7) reflect symptoms that may hinder adaptation-Low 0-2, Moderate 3-5, High 6-7.
- Infantilism (0-7) reflects immature behavior and emotional responses-Low 0-2, Moderate 3-5, High 6-7; Left-Handedness (0-2) indicates a possible adjustment factor-Not indicated 0-0, Indicated 1-2.
- Parental Attitude (0-1) reflects family attitudes that may affect adjustment-Unfavorable attitude 0-0.99, Supportive attitude 1-1; Maladaptation Level (0-100) reflects adjustment difficulty-Well adapted 0-39, Marked maladjustment 40-100; Low Learning Motivation (0-7) reflects motivation-Adequate motivation 0-2, Moderately low motivation 3-5, Low motivation 6-7; Insufficient Voluntary Regulation of Mental Functions (0-7) reflects control difficulty-Low difficulty 0-2, Moderate difficulty 3-5, High difficulty 6-7.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each item asks the teacher to select Yes or No about school behavior, learning responses, physical or emotional signs, and family-school context. The binary format turns observations into grouped profile scores. Used as a school adjustment test, the result should be read through each displayed range and band; the questionnaire does not state a point-per-answer rule.
Conceptually, the grouping is consistent with Rumjanceva (2012), which treats first-grade adaptation as a psychological and pedagogical process involving learning, behavior, readiness, and adult support. It is also consistent with Marcineková et al. (2020), whose work examines transition into primary school and structured adaptation support. This questionnaire is not presented as an adaptation of either source.
This online format has no stated normative standardization, so its bands organize a profile rather than establish clinical cutoffs. Teacher perspective, familiarity with the child, recent events, and changing state can affect responses; an elevated result identifies an area for contextual review, not a diagnosis.
- Rumjanceva, L. N. (2012). Psychological and Pedagogical Support of the Adaptation Period of First-Graders: Educational and Methodological Manual. Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk: Sakhalin State University. ISBN 978-5-88811-425-4.
- Marcineková, T., Borbélyová, D., & Tirpáková, A. (2020). Optimization of children’s transition from preschool and family environment to the first grade of primary school in Slovakia by implementation of an Adaptation Programme. Children and Youth Services Review, 119, 105483. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105483
Updated: