No field or profession can prescribe what is or isn’t validity or efficacy evidence. Different fields have distinctive ways of asking questions, addressing a literature, criticizing ideas, and presenting arguments. The differences make sense from a socio-cultural perspective as each of these stakeholders—you might call them customers if you are in marketing or users if you are in product development—is coming from a different culture of evidence and set of life experiences. But this seems chaotic if you are trying to collect validity or efficacy evidence and construct an argument with it.
If you have been following along over the last five blog posts, you may be experiencing some discomfort at the prospect of intentionally crafting the communication of a validity argument to support or challenge a particular score interpretation and use. Maybe you want to simply present the validity argument and let the chips fall whereContinue reading “The Last Word—Making a Judgement About the Validity Argument“
In this blog, we turn the tools to develop and communicate a validity argument upside down and explain how to develop, represent, and effectively communicate arguments skeptical of the intended score interpretation and use! In past blogs, we have given you tools to effectively develop and communicate a validity argument. Those past blogs assumed youContinue reading “Challenging the Validity Argument“
In our last blog, we described how to develop and use narratives as a tool to help the test developer communicate a validity argument to a nontechnical audience. In this blog, we give you two additional tools to help you effectively communicate a validity argument supporting the intended score interpretation and use: A thesis statement,Continue reading “Themes and Theses: More Tools to Effectively Communicate a Complex Validity Argument“