PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Journal of Educational Measurement· 2013Q1

Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores

Michael T. Kane

Short summary

A new argument-based approach validates proposed interpretations and uses of test scores, not the tests themselves, by evaluating the coherence and plausibility of the claims and assumptions linking test responses to score-based decisions.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Validation focuses on proposed score interpretations and uses, not the test or scores.
  • The strength of evidence supporting claims determines the validity of interpretations/uses.
  • More ambitious claims (e.g., construct interpretations) are more useful but harder to validate.
  • Evaluation of score uses must consider their consequences; negative outcomes can lead to rejection.
  • Rejecting a score use does not automatically invalidate its underlying interpretation.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

To validate an interpretation or use of test scores is to evaluate the plausibility of the claims based on the scores. An argument‐based approach to validation suggests that the claims based on the test scores be outlined as an argument that specifies the inferences and supporting assumptions needed to get from test responses to score‐based interpretations and uses. Validation then can be thought of as an evaluation of the coherence and completeness of this interpretation/use argument and of the plausibility of its inferences and assumptions. In outlining the argument‐based approach to validation, this paper makes eight general points. First, it is the proposed score interpretations and uses that are validated and not the test or the test scores. Second, the validity of a proposed interpretation or use depends on how well the evidence supports the claims being made. Third, more‐ambitious claims require more support than less‐ambitious claims. Fourth, more‐ambitious claims (e.g., construct interpretations) tend to be more useful than less‐ambitious claims, but they are also harder to validate. Fifth, interpretations and uses can change over time in response to new needs and new understandings leading to changes in the evidence needed for validation. Sixth, the evaluation of score uses requires an evaluation of the consequences of the proposed uses; negative consequences can render a score use unacceptable. Seventh, the rejection of a score use does not necessarily invalidate a prior, underlying score interpretation. Eighth, the validation of the score interpretation on which a score use is based does not validate the score use.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Educational Measurement, 2013 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Management Science and Operations Research

Management Science and Operations ResearchDecision Sciences