A Suggested Change in Terminology and Emphasis Regarding Validity and Education

This article raises a number of questions about the current unified theory of test validity that has construct validity at its center. The authors suggest a different way of conceptualizing the problem of establishing validity by considering whether the focus of the investigation of a test is internal to the test itself or focuses on constructs and relationships that are external to the test. They also consider whether the perspective on the test examination is theoretical or practical. The resulting taxonomy, encompassing both investigative focus and perspective, serves to organize a reconceptualization of the field of validity studies. The authors argue that this approach, together with changes in the rest of the terminology regarding validity, leads to a more understandable and usable model.

[1]  Jon S. Twing,et al.  The Texas Model for Content and Curricular Validity , 2000 .

[2]  P. Holland.  Causal Inference, Path Analysis and Recursive Structural Equations Models. Program Statistics Research, Technical Report No. 88-81. , 1988 .

[3]  R. Brennan.  Elements of generalizability theory , 1983 .

[4]  F. Galton.  Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into its Laws and Consequences , 1914, Nature.

[5]  Alija Kulenović,et al.  Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing , 1999 .

[6]  R. Ebel.  The Practical Validation of Tests of Ability , 1983 .

[7]  Linda Crocker,et al.  Teaching for the Test: Validity, Fairness, and Moral Action , 2005 .

[8]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and Discriminant Validity by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix,” Psychological Bulletin (2), March, pp. . , 1959 .

[9]  Alfred Binet,et al.  The Development Of Intelligence In Children , 1916 .

[10]  R. Almond,et al.  Leverage Points for Improving Educational Assessment , 2000 .

[11]  A. Goldberger,et al.  Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences. , 1974 .

[12]  R. Linn.  Educational measurement, 3rd ed. , 1989 .

[13]  P. Moss.  Shifting Conceptions of Validity in Educational Measurement: Implications for Performance Assessment , 1992 .

[14]  S. Whitely.  Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span. , 1983 .

[15]  D. Blustein,et al.  The Unificationist View: A Context for Validity , 1991 .

[16]  J. P. Guilford,et al.  New Standards For Test Evaluation , 1946 .

[17]  L. Crocker,et al.  The Evolution of Validity Theory: Public School Testing, the Courts, and Incompatible Interpretations , 1994 .

[18]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  S. Sireci.  The Construct of Content Validity , 1998 .

[20]  L. Cronbach,et al.  Construct validity in psychological tests. , 1955, Psychological bulletin.

[21]  Norm-Referenced and Criterion- Referenced Tests: An Overview , 1993 .

[22]  P. H. Dubois.  A history of psychological testing , 1970 .

[23]  M. Reckase.  Consequential Validity from the Test Developer's Perspective. , 2005 .

[24]  P. Moss.  The Role of Consequences in validity Theory , 2005 .

[25]  Michael T. Kane,et al.  Certification Testing as an Illustration of Argument-Based Validation , 2004 .

[26]  J. Loevinger.  Objective Tests as Instruments of Psychological Theory , 1957 .

[27]  Samuel Messick,et al.  THE STANDARD PROBLEM: MEANING AND VALUES IN MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION , 1974 .

[28]  L. Shepard.  Evaluating Test Validity , 1993 .

[29]  W. Edwards Deming,et al.  Out of the Crisis , 1982 .

[30]  S. Urbina.  Essentials of Psychological Testing , 2005, PsyPag Quarterly.

[31]  P. Holland.  CAUSAL INFERENCE, PATH ANALYSIS AND RECURSIVE STRUCTURAL EQUATIONS MODELS , 1988 .

[32]  John W. Wick.  Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology. , 1980 .

[33]  Denny Borsboom,et al.  The attack of the psychometricians , 2006, Psychometrika.

[34]  Barbara S. Plake,et al.  Technical Quality Criteria for Evaluating District Assessment Portfolios Used in the Nebraska STARS. , 2005 .

[35]  R. Brennan.  Misconceptions at the Intersection of Measurement Theory and Practice. , 2005 .

[36]  Steven M. Downing,et al.  Test Item Development: Validity Evidence From Quality Assurance Procedures , 1997 .

[37]  A. Nitko.  Educational Assessment of Students , 1996 .

[38]  M. Reckase.  The Past and Future of Multidimensional Item Response Theory , 1997 .

[39]  L. Delbeke.  Quasi-experimentation - design and analysis issues for field settings - cook,td, campbell,dt , 1980 .

[40]  Robert L. Linn,et al.  Evaluating the Validity of Assessments: The Consequences of Use , 2005 .

[41]  Jeremy D. Finn,et al.  Measurement and Evaluation. , 1973 .

[42]  The Word-Dexterity Test, a Better Measure of College Aptitude , 1944 .

[43]  S. Messick.  The Interplay of Evidence and Consequences in the Validation of Performance Assessments , 1994 .

[44]  K. Jöreskog.  A General Method for Estimating a Linear Structural Equation System. , 1970 .

[45]  D. Borsboom,et al.  The concept of validity. , 2004, Psychological review.

[46]  S. E. Phillips.  Legal Implications of High-Stakes Assessment: What States Should Know. , 1993 .

[47]  Lorrie A. Shepard,et al.  Chapter 9: Evaluating Test Validity , 1993 .

[48]  Susy Macqueen,et al.  Validity , 1973, Just Algorithms.

[49]  Roger T. Lennon,et al.  Assumptions Underlying the Use of Content Validity , 1956 .

[50]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[51]  K. Maccorquodale,et al.  On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. , 1948, Psychological review.