This study employed item response theory (IRT), exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the measurement invariance of TIMSS science self-concept (SSC) scales for grades 4 and 8 across genders, cultures, and languages in six countries and regions. IRT, and EFA and CFA were utilized to examine the reliability and validity of the SSC scales, respectively. The IRT results revealed substantial variation in each item and test information function values across the six societies. The EFA and CFA results identified two dimensions of SSC scales, that is, positive perception of SSC (SSCp) and negative perception of SSC (SSCn), with satisfactory fit indices. Measurement invariance was confirmed across genders, and cultural and linguistic groups. Recommendations are put forward for TIMSS program developers and researchers regarding the revision of the SSC scales.

This study examines the structural validity of the 2019 Teacher MKT assessment using empirical data from a sample of 645 elementary educators in Florida (USA). The examination of structural validity was supported through a series of complementary analyses, including evaluation of the dimensionality of the underlying latent trait, item performance, reliability, and the standard error of measurement. Evidence from dimensionality analysis pointed to a borderline unidimensional structure, implying that one factor or dimension may be sufficient for measuring the underlying construct. Based on the empirical results, the 2019 Teacher MKT appears to have adequate reliability and provides useful information about a relatively wide range of teacher abilities.

The Woodcock-Johnson V (WJ V; McGrew, Mather, LaForte, et al., 2025) represents the most significant evolution in comprehensive cognitive assessment since the battery was introduced nearly 50 years ago. This article provides an overview of the WJ V Tests of Cognitive Abilities and Virtual Test Library, highlighting key revisions from the WJ IV and examining psychometric properties and interpretive options. The WJ V assessment system comprises 60 co-normed tests across cognitive, achievement, and language domains, making it the most comprehensive assessment battery currently available. Major innovations include a fully digital platform, contemporary post-pandemic norms, enhanced theoretical alignment with current Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theories, and expanded diagnostic capabilities through the new Virtual Test Library. The WJ V Tests of Cognitive Abilities contains 20 tests organized into 17 clusters, including three general intelligence measures, seven CHC broad ability clusters, and six narrow ability/clinical clusters. Significant structural changes include the creation of a new Retrieval Fluency (Gr) broad ability cluster, the removal of Auditory Processing (Ga) from the General Intellectual Ability (GIA) cluster, substantial revisions to the GIA composition, and the relocation of specialized tests to the Virtual Test Library, which incorporates 15 specialized tests, enabling the targeted evaluation of phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and memory functions critical for the identification of dyslexia. Extensive validity evidence supporting the battery’s structure was obtained through a sophisticated three-stage framework employing multiple analytical methods, including exploratory factor analysis, multidimensional scaling, cluster analysis, and psychometric network analysis. Clinical validity studies demonstrate the battery’s effectiveness in differentiating various neurodevelopmental conditions. The WJ V’s four-level interpretive framework emphasizes criterion-referenced proficiency measures alongside traditional norm-referenced scores, providing educationally relevant information for intervention planning. This comprehensive assessment system offers practitioners unprecedented flexibility for hypothesis-driven evaluation while maintaining the psychometric rigor essential for high-stakes educational and diagnostic decisions, positioning it as a transformative tool for evidence-based assessment practices in the digital age.

The Woodcock–Johnson V Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ V COG), published in February 2025, offers the latest edition of the WJ family of tests alongside tests of academic achievement and oral language. The WJ V COG has changed substantially from previous editions regarding administration, which is now entirely digital. Administration and scoring are housed within the Riverside Insight’s online platform. The test battery features several changes, such as the addition of five new tests and the removal of three tests, including measures of Auditory Processing (Ga). The WJ V COG maintains a CHC-based theoretical framework, although updated to align with current theory. Psychometric evidence, including validity, reliability, and item-level analysis, is robust. Evidence is less convincing for children under six. The assessment was co-normed with measures of academic achievement, and the norm sample was gathered post-COVID. Although some may find requirements of digital administration limiting, the WJ V COG offers an engaging and psychometrically sound option for the assessment of intelligence.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Assessment System ver.2 in Swedish and Norwegian contexts (CAS-2). Methodology: A total of 614 students (aged 5 to 18 years) were assessed using the CAS-2. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to investigate the construct validity of three competing models of the Scandinavian version of the CAS-2: a four-factor, a three-factor, and a bifactor model. The measurement invariance was tested for age and sex. Key Findings: The results indicated an acceptable to good fit for all three models. In addition, measurement invariance across sex and age groups was also supported. However, with respect to the four-factor model, the two factors (Planning and Attention) were strongly correlated, raising a discussion on the empirical and theoretical distinctiveness of these factors. Conclusions/Implications: These findings suggest that all three tested models contribute uniquely to understanding the CAS-2 but also underscore the need for further refinement and caution when drawing conclusions about cognitive profiles in the present version.

This study examined the temporal stability of the Model Minority Stereotype-Response Scale (MMS-RS) in assessing Asian American STEM students’ responses to the model minority stereotype (MMS) over time. Data from 188 Asian American STEM students were analyzed using longitudinal measurement invariance testing. The findings showed that the subscale scores of the MMS-RS, Negative Response to Stress (NRS) and Positive Response and Endorsement (PRE), reliably assess negative and positive responses across time, respectively, and can be meaningfully tracked for their changes over time, although one item in each subscale was not invariant. The residual invariance finding suggested that observed score differences reflect true changes. Overall, the MMS-RS subscale scores proved to be stable and reliable for measuring responses to the MMS. Specifically, the findings from the longitudinal measurement invariance suggest that the comparison of mean scores across time is viable. Thus MMS-RS subscales can be useful in tracking changes in response to interventions or policy changes that are aimed at supporting Asian American STEM students who experience the MMS.

The Winston Essential Skills Survey (WESS) 3.0, the first social-emotional learning (SEL) assessment designed for students with learning disabilities (SwLD), has evidence for reliability and validity in a specific population of teachers. To build on this evidence, 180 educators responded to the WESS 3.0, along with new items and the Devereux Student Strengths Assessment (DESSA), to assess a sample of 397 SwLD. Minor modifications to the WESS 3.0 resulted in the WESS 4.0, which demonstrated internal consistency, an eight-factor structure, and convergent validity with the DESSA. The WESS 4.0 addresses a critical gap in SEL assessments for SwLD, providing researchers and educators with a valid and reliable method to assess SwLD's social-emotional skills. This survey may inform school interventions, policy decisions on SEL programming, and advance understanding of SEL in SwLD, potentially improving educational outcomes and well-being for this population.

Post-secondary students are exposed to a wide variety of stressors, and mental health-related concerns continue to increase among this population. The development and improvement of mental health services hinges on the use of valid and reliable measurement tools to assess student stress and evaluate the efficacy of interventions. To date, there has been no comprehensive overview of available instruments intended to evaluate post-secondary student stress. The purpose of this study was to conduct a rigorous scoping review of published works detailing the use of instruments to evaluate post-secondary student stress, and evaluate the psychometric properties of these tools as well as their suitability for use among post-secondary populations. Four academic databases were searched, including HaPI, CINAHL, Medline, and PsycINFO, including peer-reviewed records published in English between 2012 and 2024. Articles were independently screened for inclusion by title, abstract, and full-text review. A total of 62 records and 11 instruments were screened into the review. The majority of instruments included in our review did not meet the criteria for suitability, nor did they have published, comprehensive psychometric evaluations. The Post-Secondary Student Stressors Index emerged as the most appropriate instrument for evaluating post-secondary student-specific stress owing to both its suitability and strong psychometric properties. The Perceived Stress Scale and Stress Overload Scale were deemed to be the most appropriate instruments for evaluating general stress levels.

Fear of failure undermines individuals’ motivation and well-being globally. However, measuring fear of failure remains challenging due to the lack of brief questionnaires, and existing measures have primarily been developed and used in Western contexts. Hence, engaging in cross-cultural validation of fear of failure measures is needed. This study aimed to explore the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Performance Failure Appraisal Inventory-Short Form (PFAI-SF). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), concurrent validity, and convergent validity were investigated with 1670 Chinese students. Results of the EFA and CFA indicated satisfactory psychometric properties, suggesting a unifactorial model. The concurrent and convergent validity of the Chinese version of PFAI-SF was supported by positive correlations with the long-form Performance Failure Appraisal Inventory and its related psychological constructs. These findings provide substantial evidence for the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the PFAI-SF, supporting its use as a succinct and culturally appropriate tool for assessing fear of failure among Chinese students.

Mental health and academic success are increasingly interdependent challenges for university students worldwide. This study developed and validated dynamic Bayesian models to predict academic performance and psychological risk across semesters using probabilistic approaches. We analyzed a cohort of 3,276 undergraduates and externally validated findings against an independent cohort of 5,112 students. Dynamic Bayesian Networks (DBN) and Bayesian Networks (BN) were trained using psychological scores (PHQ-9, GAD-7, PSS-10, CD-RISC) to model psychological risk and academic records to model academic outcomes. Ten-fold temporal cross-validation was conducted internally, and comparative analyses involved Random Forests, XGBoost, Deep Neural Networks, and TabTransformer models. DeLong’s tests compared AUCs and permutation tests assessed Brier scores. Internally, BN achieved 91.0% accuracy, an AUC of 0.84 (95% CI 0.81–0.87), and a Brier score of 0.128, while DBN achieved 94.2% accuracy, an AUC of 0.86 (95% CI 0.84–0.89), and a Brier score of 0.124. In external validation, BN achieved 90.0% accuracy and an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI 0.85–0.90), and DBN achieved 92.0% accuracy and an AUC of 0.91 (95% CI 0.88–0.93). Top predictors included GPA, stress scores, depression scores, and intervention engagement. Posterior predictive p-values exceeded 0.44 across GPA and both outcome domains, indicating adequate calibration. Dynamic Bayesian modeling enables accurate, uncertainty-resilient prediction of both psychological risk and academic outcomes among university students.