Validation of Psychological Resilience Youth Developement Module and Implication for Guidance and Counseling

This study investigated the validation of the psychological resilience scale adaptation from youth development module (RYDM) for secondary school. The psychological RYDM is measured by six factors psychological assets was strongly associated with students academic success. A sample of study is 158 seventh grade students from five secondary schools in Singaraja, Bali Province (75 or 47.4% male and 83 or 52.6% female, with age range 12-13 years). The constructs validation was conduct by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) method, with SPSS 22.0. Five iterations of the EFA reducing 18 original items to 14 items and 6 original factors to 5 factors. Five factors and 14 items produced are consistent with the conceptual basis used in the original RYDM. The stability of new five factors is formed by a split sample analysis method showed the all of the items of factors identified in the earlier testing stable adequacy of forming a common factor in this analysis in the first and second iteration. The results of analysis the item-total correlation on 14 item (n = 158) showed Cronbach's Alpha value of 0.777. Implications the study for guidance and counseling practice in schools is discussed.


INTRODUCTION
A core goal of a school counselor is to provide flexible and responsive services for adolescents who are experiencing mental health challenges that might inhibit transitions to upward-spiraling, positive developmental trajectories (Masten, 2001). One component of this overall effort is to search for and monitor psychosocial experiences via the administration of whole-school surveys as part of universal mental health screening assessments Moore et al., 2015).
Every student has the possibility to dealing with various Difficulties, obstacles and psychological pressure (stress) in academic activities as well as their development tasks. As well as the students in secondary school, they were faced with the task of academic and developmental tasks are complex and can Easily be completed by all students. Students Often doomed to failure, problems of that should be Decided solutions and other obstacles that trigger emotional stress such as high anxiety, social problems, and other issues.
Children and youth develop into mature adults Depending on the extent of intrinsic assets such as perseverance, efficacy, selfesteem, and active avoidance of risk-taking Behaviors, and extrinsic assets such as living in a nurturing environment with supportive parents, having a non-delinquent peer group and experiencing a healthy school climate (Armstrong et al., 2005;Lerner et al., 2003) When faced with adversity and risk, some youth will survive and even thrive while others will succumb to risky and possibly self-destructive behavior , Measurement of resilience can enable identification of modifiable factors that can be used to inform research and policy initiatives to help youth develop the capacity they require to cope with adversity during normative and non-normative developmental transitions.
Resilience is a set of capabilities that students use to successfully come to terms with his failure, emotional, social Overcoming Difficulties that can lead academic activities with high academic achievement results. Resilience is a psychological construct the which includes Several capabilities that contribute positively to students' academic achievement and healthy development to Realize the hopes of the future. Resilience can be defined as a positive adaptation ability to succeed in the face of pressure risk. The proposed model of resilience Benard (1995) suggested that the characteristics of students who have resiliency Characterized by having (1) social competence are the ability to Obtain a positive response from others, Thus forming positive relationships with teachers and peers; (2) the ability to solve problems related to planning and decision-making on an issue that a accommodate the views and self-control as well as strategies to get help from others; (3) Autonomy concerning the identity and the ability to act Independently and control the environment, and (4) positive aspirations and goals that include its realistic goals, expectations of a healthy, persistence, and a view towards a bright future.
The Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is a comprehensive, student self-report tool for monitoring the school environment and student health risks (Hanson & Kim, 2007). The CHKS is a school-focused questionnaire that measures risk and resilience factors through student self-reports. It has been used in research examining factors Influence of smoking and drinking behaviors (Kim & McCarthy, 2006), teenage pregnancy (McDonnell et al., 2007), asthma Among Hispanic and Asian students (Davis et al., 2006), and risk factors associated with school violence (Furlong, et al., 2001). One component of the CHKS is the Resilience Youth Development Module (RYDM; Constantine & Benard, 2001;Constantine et al., 1999;West Ed, 2009), the which is designed to measure protective factors Among youth regarding Reviews their internal assets and external resources.
The full of RYDM contains 56 items that were designed to measure the internal assets (personal strengths) and external resources (protective factors), all of the which have been linked to positive developmental outcomes (Benard & Slade, 2009). There is an elementary and secondary version. However, the focus of this article is on the secondary version for internal assets subscales. This analysis uses the internal assets the original 18 items were developed to measure six-core constructs based on Benard's resilience model (Benard & Slade, 2009). As the RYDM has been used in California and additional analyses completed, clarifications to its underlying structure and content have been Reported. In a detailed analysis, Hanson and Kim (2007) found that the number of items could be reduced due to differential item functioning (across racialethnic groups or by gender), inconsistent factor loading patterns or cross-loading items across factors. Therefore, this study uses the 12 internal asset items identified by Hanson and Kim (2007) that measure four areas of personal strength: self-efficacy, empathy, problemsolving, and self-awareness.
Previous research conducted Hanson & Kim (2007) have Provided evidence supporting the psychometric properties of the instrument RYDM this and show that at the school level sub-scale psychological or internal assets are positively related to Index (API) rankings Academic Performance higher (Hanson & Austin, 2002). However, given that this RYDM developed as population-based surveys, there is limited evidence supporting the use and interpretation of the youth students in Indonesia, into account individual differences (cultural, racial, demographic, and so on). Therefore, the purpose of this investigation is to adapt the psychological subscale version RYDM secondary school into Indonesian and Determine its validity. This study uses 18 original items from RYDM psychological subscale that measures the ability of cooperation and communication, self-efficacy, empathy, self-awareness, problem-solving and goal aspirations (Constantine & Benard, 2001;Constantine et al., 1999). The results of this research into information to the school counselor or school psychologist in Indonesian to integrate this scale in the context of the general assessment.

METHOD
Translation Process of the Psychological Resilience Youth Sub-scales Development Module (RYDM) from English to Indonesian involving linguists from UPT Language Ganesha Education University, Singaraja. The administrating scale was done through a survey using respondent amounted to 158 of 7th-grade students from five secondary schools at Singaraja. From the 158 respondents, 75 or 47.4% were male and 83 or 52.6% female, with age range 12-13 years. Charging is done by the respondent resilience scale by selecting one of four alternative answers are provided for each item, (1) not at all true, (2) a little true, (3) pretty much true, (4) very much true. The scoring procedure of the respondent's responses is to give a score of 1 for not at all true, two a little true score, score 3 for pretty much true and score 4 for very much true. Construct validity of methods using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the which is done use SPSS 22.0.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The results of the analysis of item-total correlation in 18 items (n = 158) showed Cronbach's Alpha value is 0.775. The first iteration of EFA (18 items, n = 158) showed the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) is 0.638, and the Barlett's test was significant (p <0.001), indicating that the sample size adequacy. Antiimage Matrices value in item 7 is 0.484 (p>0.5), so this item 7 is deleted. The second iteration EFA (17 items, n = 158) showed a value of 0.655 KMO and Barlett's test values were significantly (p <0.001). Anti-image Matrices in all items (17 items) show significant values (p> 0.5). Extraction commonalities of item 8 are 0.432, less than the required extraction (> 0.5). Thus item deleted from the analysis. Analysis of the third iteration(16 items, n = 158) show KMO is 0.658 and significant Barlett's test (p<0.001), Anti-image value of items 4 amounted to 0.493 (<0.5) thus deleted from testing. Analysis of fourth iteration (15 items) KMO value 0.691 and indicates the significant value of Barlett's test. Anti-image output Matrices on all items show anti-image value significantly (p> 0.5).
However, the value extraction commonalities item 1 of 0.477 less than the required extraction (> 0.5), thus deleted from the analysis. Five iteration EFA (14 items) shows the KMO value 0.688 and significant Barlett's test (p <0.001). Anti-image value on all items (14 items) is above 0.5, (p>0.5).
Matrices Anti-image, as well as the value extraction commonalities, show anti-image value at 14 items was tested is above 0.5 (> 0.5). Thus the factor analysis of five iterations, using 14 items have met the test requirement exploratory factor analysis. The next step is an assessment of the factors that are formed are summarized in table 1.  Interpretation of the items forming the five factors in Table 1 is based on significant loading factor. Loading factor under 0.40 is not written, and the items are sorted by loading each item in each factor. Factor 1, 2, 3 and 4 have three items with significant loading and factor 5 has two items. Each factor is given a labeled name of factor based on the items that form. Factor 1 is formed by items 10, 11 and 12, are based on factors originated from factor problem solving then it remains to be named as problem-solving. Factor 2 was formed by items 13, 14 and 15 are labeled as self-awareness factor. Factor 3 is formed by items 2 and 3 (derived from the factor of cooperation and communication) and item 9 (derived from factors Empathy), to reflect two of the determining factors are then given a new name as social skills. Factor 4 is formed by items 16,17 and 18 were named factors goal and Aspirations. Factor 5 was formed by items 5 and six remains named as a factor of selfefficacy.
Validation of factors is an important step in the factor analysis, especially when trying to determine the underlying structure between variables. Optimally, the measure used is a factor validation analysis via confirmatory factor analysis, such as structural equation models, but the type of follow-up is often not feasible. Another way, which can be used in the validation effort is a factor with a separate sample analysis or analyze a new sample (Hair et al., 2010). In this study, the way used to test the stability factor is formed by way of a split sample analysis.
The first step in the validation process of these factors has split the sample into two equal samples of 158 respondents, the estimation models to examine the appeal factor. Table 2 shows the loading factor on varimax rotation for a two-factor model, as well as extract value commonalities. As can be seen, the two rotation varimax quite comparable regarding loading and commonalities for all items. Based on the results of Table 2, all items that forming factors identified in the earlier testing stable adequacy of forming a common factor in this analysis in the first and second iteration. The results of the analysis of itemtotal correlation on item 14 (n = 158) showed Cronbach's Alpha value of 0.777. With this result can reasonably believe that the factors which form stable at these samples and fit for use in the wider population. Table 3 show summarizes the means, standard deviations, and t-values of each factor and the overall sample by gender. This test involves a sample of 158 respondents comprising 75 Male (47.4%) and 83 Female (52.6%). The comparative factors in the subscale psychological resilience by gender shows that there are significant differences between respondents of women and men in selfawareness factor with the value of t are -3.043 (p <0.05) and the factor of self-efficacy with t -1.068 (p <0.05). While on other factors, namely problem solving, social skills and goals and aspirations, as well as the overall resilience, is not a significant difference.
Constructs validation results RYDM psychological subscale version of junior high school students have produced 14 items of 18 items tested, which make up five a factor of 6 original factor in RYDM. The results of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in round five showed that the results of the analysis showed five factors formed of 14 items used remains consistent with the conceptual foundation applies. These results are in line with the testing that has been done before by Hanson and Kim (2007), which shows RYDM psychological subscale version of junior high school students who produced four factors psychological resilience and consistent with the original instruments used and referenced conceptual foundation.
Analysis of all five rounds factors show that factor 1, 2, 3 and four are formed by each of the three items with a factor loading of each significant, meanwhile, a factor of 5 is formed by two items. The results of this analysis, in fact, does not detract from the six factors used in RYDM origin are used. But there is a merger of two factors into one factor. Namely, the factor of cooperation and Communication and empathy factor merge into one factor labeled social skills.
Related with the conceptual underpinnings of resilience models proposed Bernard (1991;1995;2004) that cooperation and communication aspect is part of social skills, which is defined as the ability to work, exchange ideas, and express feelings and establish effective relations with others. Cooperation and communication skills are one of the potentials that encourage students to be able to locate and utilize sources of help from others in the face of academic difficulties. Meanwhile, empathy is also an important part of social skills (Bernard, 1991;1995;2004), which is a skill that directs a person to behave with compassion and give priority to the feelings of others. Empathy is also about understanding and caring attitude with the experience and the feelings of others (Hanson & Kim, 2007). The description indicates that the skills of cooperation or communicate very closely related to empathy, even a single integral part. Skills in cooperation and communicate without being accompanied by empathy can not achieve the result of cooperation and good communication. Because basically, everybody feels comfortable to interact, cooperate or communicate with people who understand and appreciate the feelings and thoughts.
Stability testing of five factors (14 items) resulting from the analysis of five rounds to use methods split sample analysis. The analysis showed that the 14 items forming five factors identified in the earlier testing stable adequacy of each fixed form factor similar to the analysis in the first and second rounds. Meanwhile, the item-total correlation analysis on the 14 items (n = 158) showed Cronbach's Alpha value of 0.777. With this result can reasonably believe that the factors which form stable at these samples and fit for use in the wider population.
Comparative analysis of the factors in the sub-scale psychological resilience by gender shows that there are significant differences between respondents of women and men in self-awareness factor with a value of t are -3.043 (p <0.05) and self-efficacy factor with a value of t -1.068 (p <0.05). While on other factors, namely problem solving, social skills and goals and aspirations as well as the resilience of the overall no significant differences between the samples of men with women.

Research Limitations
Although this study has successfully demonstrated the validation of Indonesian RYDM psychological subscale secondary school version, the sample is limited only involves students in grade 7. To get a more varied response, future studies require involving a sample of students in grade 7-9 with involving the school population more lots and in the wider region. Also, this study is limited to only a test of the psychological subscales (internal resilience assets), future research should also perform testing involves sub-scale for external assets resilience.

Research Implications for Guidance and Counseling Practice
Guidance and counseling is one component of the formal education system in Indonesia. School counselors as a personnel executive are responsible for developing the psychological aspects that support the academic achievement and healthy development. In signs Implementation Guidance and Counseling in Schools (ABKIN 2007) also mentioned that the guidance and counseling in school settings have a primary urgency to helping grow blossoms various potentials of each student in overcoming various difficulties or problems, realizing mental health, and success in academic, career and social. This description indicates that the school counselor as key actors in guidance and counseling services in schools has a strategic role in developing academic resilience as a realization of optimal development of students. One of the efforts is the organization of counseling to help students overcome psychological stress, helping students develop the ability to solve problems, improve the readiness of emotional and social competence as well as providing the positive support needed for students when faced with difficulties, failures, problems in the academic and life.
Understanding the factors that shape and influence the development of the resilience of the theory by Bernard & Slades (2009) also by Grotberg (1999;, there are two approaches that can be done in an effort to improve the resilience is through optimizing the quality factors of individual (internal assets resilience) and revitalize external factors of a social environment that support the development of the assets of a student's resilience (Winders, 2014;Nicoll, 2014). Correspondingly, Masten et al. (2008) also suggested the school counselors, teachers, principals and staff roles administration, the school together as a promotive and protective factors in the lives of students to developing learning skills of students, a wide range of competencies, skills self-management, and other skills in carrying adapt to their social environment. School counselors contribute to the resilience of the students in a variety of academic guidance and counseling program that's independence, as well as efforts to promote a positive relationship between teachers and students, between students and the staff of the school to all students. Through the efforts of advocacy or interventions aimed at protecting students from the negative influence of risk factors. School counselors can promote programs involving teachers, the policy of principals, administrative staff and all the students as collaborative partners in creating a climate conducive school environment at school. As well as a partnership or collaboration with the parents to create a conducive climate care at home.
Measurement of the psychological aspects students resilience is one of the efforts for school counselors and school psychologists to understand students potential of strength. This is important, because the practice of counseling and psychology in the school setting today are challenged to look at students as individuals who have the potential, assets, or strengths and sources of potential from the environment that needs to be developed so that students can overcome difficulties and dynamics in life (Seligman, 1999;Gallasi & Akos 2007;Gallasi et al., 2008). This is also consistent with the Comprehensive and Developmental Counseling paradigm (ASCA, 2012).

CONCLUSION
Measurements of resilience can enable it to do identification of influencing factors and can be used as information research and policy ideas to help students develop the capacity they need to overcome the difficulties during their developmental stages. Through the identification of resilience student, school counselor or school psychologist can design and conduct educational programs that are relevant socio-emotional resilience based on the condition of students.Based on the above, it can be argued that resilience is an aspect of a potential or strength of students is important to be understood by a school counselor or school psychologist. Understanding the condition of the resilience of students associated with the resilience measurement efforts that require a measuring instrument. Results validation of RYDM psychological subscale is beneficial for school counselors as part of the instruments used to understand the psychological aspects that developing student resilience.