In Moskal (2000), a framework for developing scoring rubrics was presented and the issues of validity and reliability were given cursory attention. Although many teachers have been exposed to the statistical definitions of the terms "validity" and "reliability" in teacher preparation courses, these courses often do not discuss how these concepts are related to classroom practices (Stiggins, 1999). One purpose of this article is to provide clear definitions of the terms "validity" and "reliability" and illustrate these definitions through examples. A second purpose is to clarify how these issues may be addressed in the development of scoring rubrics. Scoring rubrics are descriptive scoring schemes that are developed by teachers or other evaluators to guide the analysis of the products and/or processes of students' efforts (Brookhart, 1999; Moskal, 2000). The ideas presented here are applicable for anyone using scoring rubrics in the classroom, regardless of the discipline or grade level.
[1]
The Case for Validity Generalization
,
1990
.
[2]
Adventuring into Writing Assessment.
,
1994
.
[3]
S. Sheppard,et al.
Freshman engineering design experiences and organizational framework
,
1997
.
[4]
Ginette Delandshere,et al.
Assessment of Complex Performances: Limitations of Key Measurement Assumptions
,
1998
.
[5]
K. Yancey.
Looking Back as We Look Forward: Historicizing Writing Assessment.
,
1999
.
[6]
S. Brookhart.
The Art and Science of Classroom Assessment: The Missing Part of Pedagogy
,
1999
.
[7]
J. Gosink,et al.
A Multidisciplinary Engineering Laboratory Course
,
1999
.
[8]
Barbara M. Moskal,et al.
The Design Report Rubric: Measuring And Tracking Growth Through Success
,
2000
.
[9]
Barbara M. Moskal,et al.
Scoring Rubrics: What, When and How?
,
2000
.