|
Test validity is the extent to which a test (such as a chemical, physical, or scholastic test) accurately measures what it purports to measure. In the fields of psychological testing and educational testing, “validity refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of tests.”〔American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999) ''Standards for educational and psychological testing''. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.〕 Although classical models divided the concept into various "validities" (such as content validity, criterion validity, and construct validity),〔Guion, R. M. (1980). On trinitarian doctrines of validity. ''Professional Psychology, 11'', 385-398.〕 the currently dominant view is that validity is a single unitary construct.〔Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. ''American Psychologist, 50'', 741-749.〕 Validity is generally considered the most important issue in psychological and educational testing〔Popham, W. J. (2008). All About Assessment / A Misunderstood Grail. ''Educational Leadership, 66''(1), 82-83.〕 because it concerns the meaning placed on test results.〔 Though many textbooks present validity as a static construct,〔See the otherwise excellent text: Nitko, J.J., Brookhart, S. M. (2004). ''Educational assessment of students''. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.〕 various models of validity have evolved since the first published recommendations for constructing psychological and education tests.〔American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1954). ''Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques''. Washington, DC: The Association.〕 These models can be categorized into two primary groups: classical models, which include several types of validity, and modern models, which present validity as a single construct. The modern models reorganize classical "validities" into either "aspects" of validity〔 or "types" of validity-supporting evidence〔 == Historical background == Although psychologists and educators were aware of several facets of validity before World War II, their methods for establishing validity were commonly restricted to correlations of test scores with some known criterion.〔Angoff, W. H. (1988). Validity: An evolving concept. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), ''Test Validity'' (pp. 19-32). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.〕 Under the direction of Lee Cronbach, the 1954 ''Technical Recommendations for Psychological Tests and Diagnostic Techniques''〔 attempted to clarify and broaden the scope of validity by dividing it into four parts: (a) concurrent validity, (b) predictive validity, (c) content validity, and (d) construct validity. Cronbach and Meehl’s subsequent publication〔Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. ''Psychological Bulletin, 52'', 281-302.〕 grouped predictive and concurrent validity into a "criterion-orientation", which eventually became criterion validity. Over the next four decades, many theorists, including Cronbach himself,〔Cronbach, L. J. (1969). Validation of educational measures. ''Proceedings of the 1969 Invitational Conference on Testing Problems. Princeton'', NJ: Educational Testing Service, 35-52.〕 voiced their dissatisfaction with this three-in-one model of validity.〔Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. ''Psychological Reports, 3'', 634-694.〕〔Tenopyr, M. L. (1977). Content-construct confusion. ''Personnel Psychology, 30'', 47-54.〕〔Guion, R. M. (1977). Content validity–The source of my discontent. ''Applied Psychological Measurement, 1'', 1-10.〕 Their arguments culminated in Samuel Messick’s 1995 article that described validity as a single construct, composed of six "aspects".〔 In his view, various inferences made from test scores may require different types of evidence, but not different validities. The 1999 ''Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing''〔 largely codified Messick’s model. They describe five types of validity-supporting evidence that incorporate each of Messick’s aspects, and make no mention of the classical models’ content, criterion, and construct validities. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「test validity」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|