Introducing the Student Experience Index (SEI)

Abstract

The Student Experience Index (SEI) is a brief self-report instrument I developed to measure a broad set of student-centred domains relevant to learning and wellbeing. Unlike screening tools that target a single construct (e.g., PHQ-9 for depressive symptoms), the SEI covers seven theoretically grounded domains: Cognitive Focus, Emotional Energy, Social Belonging, Academic Engagement, Behavioral Activation, Support Perception, and Routine Consistency. The instrument comprises 28 items (4 per domain) rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1–5). This manuscript describes the rationale, instrument design, scoring method, normalization, and a worked example.

1. Introduction

Students' experience at school or college influences learning outcomes, mental health, and long-term trajectories. Existing standardized brief screening tools (e.g., PHQ-9; GAD-7) are clinically useful but focus primarily on mood or anxiety. Educational outcomes and day-to-day student functioning are influenced by multiple non-clinical domains such as attention, energy, sense of belonging, engagement, initiative, perceived support, and daily routines. I developed the Student Experience Index (SEI) to capture a broader, policy-relevant snapshot of student experience that schools and colleges can act upon.

1.1 Problem Statement

Single-construct brief instruments are limited for operational school use: they may flag clinical risk but do not capture domains schools can systematically change (e.g., teacher support, class engagement strategies). There is a need for a short, actionable instrument that is (a) easy to administer, (b) interpretable by non-clinical stakeholders, and (c) covers multiple domains that relate to academic and wellbeing outcomes.

1.2 Objectives

1. Design a 28-item instrument spanning seven theoretically-plausible domains that are relevant to student experience.
2. Provide a simple scoring method that is transparent and accessible to school administrators.

2. Theoretical Framework

The SEI's seven domains were chosen by synthesizing educational psychology, well-being frameworks, and practical perspectives on school-based interventions:

• Cognitive Focus: Attention and sustained concentration are core to learning; poor focus predicts lower academic gains.
• Emotional Energy: Motivation and energy influence participation and persistence on tasks.
• Social Belonging: Sense of belonging is linked to attendance, engagement, and reduced dropout risk.
• Academic Engagement: Interest and active participation drive learning outcomes and self-regulation.
• Behavioral Activation: Initiative-taking and task activation are practical indicators of functioning and agency.
• Support Perception: Perceived availability of support (teachers/mentors) moderates stress and promotes help-seeking.
• Routine Consistency: Daily routines (sleep, meals, study patterns) are behavioral correlates of cognitive, emotional, and academic functioning.

3. Methodology: Instrument Design

3.1 Items and Response Format

The SEI contains 28 items, 4 items per domain. Each item uses a 5-point Likert scale:

Responses are coded numerically from 1 (least) to 5 (most).

3.2 Raw Scoring

For domain k (where k = 1..7), there are four item scores Q_k,1, ..., Q_k,4. The domain raw score D_k is the unweighted sum:

The total SEI raw score is the sum of domain scores:

3.3 Normalization

To allow domain comparisons and to keep the scale compatible with weighted aggregation, each domain score is normalized to the interval [0, 1] using linear min–max scaling:

The normalized SEI score is then computed as the average of the seven normalized domain scores:

4. Worked Example (Raw and Normalized Scoring)

Below is an example respondent's answers, raw scoring, and normalized values.

Table 1: Example respondent: item-level answers, domain raw scores, and normalized scores

5. Discussion

The SEI is designed to be short, actionable, and interpretable by educational stakeholders. The raw scoring approach (sum of 28 items) keeps transparency. Domain scores (out of 20) give clear targets for school-level interventions (e.g., if Social Belonging is low, target peer and group strategies). The normalization step further allows meaningful cross-domain and cross-student comparisons.

Advantages:

• Multi-domain coverage (actionable to schools)
• Simple scoring and reporting (raw totals and normalized scores)

6. Conclusion and Future Directions

The SEI is a practical tool to provide an integrated snapshot of student experience across seven actionable domains. Next steps are: larger multisite validation, translation and cross-cultural adaptation, integration into a digital dashboard for schools, and exploration of predictive validity with academic outcomes and attendance.

Appendix A: Full Item List