Development and Psychometric Validation of the Political Silence Scale

ABSTRACT Introduction Anxiety is central to the psychotherapy process, yet psychotherapists routinely infer a client's anxiety intensity from observable behaviour rather than from formal measurement, with no widely accepted framework to organise which observable markers indicate which levels of anxiety. This exploratory study examined how therapists make such classifications. Method Ninety‐one mental health professionals were randomly assigned to classify 41 text‐described behavioural and physiological markers using either a 5‐level or a simplified 3‐level category system, both derived from an integrated model of state anxiety in psychotherapy. Results Response distributions departed significantly from uniformity for nearly all markers in both formats, and the rank ordering of markers by intensity was highly consistent across formats, suggesting that therapists may share broad intuitions about relative marker intensity. Which markers elicited agreement, however, was far less reproducible, depending substantially on the response format. Convergence also depended on where the agreement criterion was set, declining from 90.2% to 51.2% of markers in the 3‐level format and from 63.4% to 22.0% in the 5‐level format as the criterion rose from > 0.50 to > 0.70. The 3‐level format yielded more classifiable markers at every criterion, although this advantage was not consistent across indices, whereas the 5‐level format elicited fewer ‘Insufficient to Determine’ responses. Markers placed at the highest intensity levels were classified most consistently. Discussion These findings offer preliminary groundwork for research on marker operationalisation, contextualised rating tasks and the development of training materials for psychotherapy process research.

Student engagement positively influences academic achievement, yet instruments suited to the Indonesian cultural context remain limited. This study aimed to develop a valid, reliable, and user-friendly student engagement scale for high school students. Using a quantitative descriptive design, the study involved 295 male and female students aged 15–18 years recruited through convenience sampling. The scale comprised three dimensions: behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. The results showed that the scale demonstrated a good model fit based on the goodness-of-fit indices (χ2/df = 1.60; CFI = 0.966; TLI = 0.962; SRMR = 0.074; RMSEA = 0.045) and good reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.844 for emotional engagement, 0.753 for behavioral engagement, and 0.782 for cognitive engagement. The developed scale can be used by teachers, counselors, and educational researchers to identify students’ levels of engagement and inform the development of programs to improve student engagement.

Teacher assessment literacy has received increasing attention, yet evidence remains fragmented across studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized 18 studies comprising 21 independent samples using the ALI, CALI, and TALQ instruments. The pooled mean score was 16.48 (95% CI [14.86, 18.10]) on a 35-point scale, indicating low assessment literacy, with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I² = 99.21%). Publication year, geographical region, instrument type, teacher status, teaching level, and subject specialization were not significant moderators. This review provides the first quantitative benchmark of teacher assessment literacy across the ALI, CALI, and TALQ instruments and highlights the need to strengthen assessment literacy through pre-service education, continuous professional development, and context-responsive educational policies.

The validity of assessment instruments is a crucial aspect in ensuring the quality of learning evaluations in Islamic Religious Education (PAI). However, there are still evaluation instruments that are developed without considering the alignment of indicators, constructs, and measurement objectives, which may result in inaccurate data. This study aims to examine the concepts, types, testing procedures, and methods for determining the validity of assessment instruments through a literature review. The method used is library research with a descriptive qualitative approach. Data were obtained from various books, scientific journals, and relevant documents, and then analyzed descriptively. The results of the study indicate that the validity of an instrument encompasses logical validity and empirical validity, which complement each other in ensuring the accuracy of measurements. Validity testing was conducted systematically through construct definition, development of a test blueprint, expert validation, instrument pilot testing, and statistical analysis. A valid instrument is capable of producing data that is accurate, credible, and supports sound educational decision-making.

This study examined teachers’ readiness and perceived effectiveness in implementing Makabansa and Araling Panlipunan under the revised K to 10 (MATATAG) Framework across 33 public schools in the Schools Division of Parañaque City during School Year 2025–2026. Specifically, it sought to determine whether teacher readiness significantly predicted perceived effectiveness and to identify which readiness domains most strongly influenced outcomes. Employing a quantitative-correlational design, the study utilized stratified random sampling to ensure proportional representation across grade levels and supervisory contexts. The study involved 271 public school respondents, composed of 227 teachers handling learners in Key Stages 1–3 and 44 immediate coordinators, namely head teachers and master teachers. Data were collected through validated researcher-made survey instruments measuring readiness and perceived effectiveness and were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression techniques. Findings revealed that both teachers and coordinators demonstrated very high levels of readiness and effectiveness. Correlation analysis confirmed a significant positive relationship between readiness and effectiveness, while regression analysis demonstrated that readiness significantly predicted effectiveness. Teacher readiness explained 22.4% of the variance in perceived effectiveness (R² = .224, β = .473, p < .001), while coordinator readiness explained 53.9% (R² = .539, β = .734, p < .001). As a practical output, the study developed a Teacher Readiness Toolkit for Makabansa and Araling Panlipunan.