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.
As assessment designers and developers, we can do better than we do now building assessments that positively impact our customers’ lives. But using principled assessment design (PAD) is not enough. PAD is a collection of assessment design approaches including construct-centered measurement, cognitive design system, evidence-centered design, principled design for efficacy (PDE), and assessment engineering. SeeContinue reading “Why Is Principled Assessment Design Not Sufficient To Build Successful Assessment Products?”
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“
In our last blog, we explained how to use a graph and an outline to develop and represent a validity argument for the interpretation and use of scores from the AP World History test. But a validity argument by itself is going to be difficult to understand in either graph or outline form. In thisContinue reading “Effectively Communicating a Complex Validity Argument“
This is the first in a series of six blogs as a tutorial to help practitioners in educational measurement develop, represent, and effectively communicate validity arguments to stakeholder audiences. This first blog explains how to address stakeholder concerns when developing and communicating your validity argument. Before planning how to develop and effectively communicate a validity argumentContinue reading “Addressing Stakeholder Concerns in a Validity Argument“