The Consequences of Consequential Validity

Mehrens, William A.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1997.tb00588.x

Cited by 85 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Test‐based accountability programs have a range of potential benefits and costs (Hamilton, ; Kane, ; Koretz & Hamilton, ; Lane, Parke, & Stone, ; Linn, ; McNeil, ; Mehrens, ). The potential benefits include increases in student achievement on the content areas covered by the tests (Linn, ) and possibly improvements in public confidence in the schools.…”

Section: Score Usesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some authors have argued for a much more limited definition of validity that primarily involves score interpretations and excludes the evaluation of most consequences, especially social consequences (Borsboom et al, ; Cizek, ; Green, ; Mehrens, ; Popham, ; Reckase, ; Sackett, ; Scriven, ; Wiley, ). I do not have the space to analyze these different positions, but I do want to make a few general points about the implications of not addressing consequences as part of validation.…”

Section: Score Usesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores

Kane

2013

J Educational Measurement

1,439

1,356

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Score Usesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Score Usesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores

Kane

2013

J Educational Measurement

1,439

1,356

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although some writers have argued that social consequences have no place in validity, their argument tends to be based on a misconception that social consequences are about test use and, in particular, test misuse (cf. Brennan 2006;Mehrens 1997;Popham 1997). First, the focus is on consequences, not use.…”

Section: Social Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity and the Consequences of Test Interpretation and Use

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While there is some controversy over the use of perception data to measure validity (Linn, 1997;Mehrens, 1997;Popham, 1997;Shepard, 1997), there appears to be overwhelming support for the importance of addressing what we call the &dquo;so what&dquo; question -did the assessment achieve the purpose for which it was intended (Haertel, 1999;Kane, 2002;Lane, Parke, & Stone, 1998;Lane & Stone, 2002;Linn, 1997Linn, , 1998Ryan, 2002;Shepard, 1997 ) ? While there is some controversy over the use of perception data to measure validity (Linn, 1997;Mehrens, 1997;Popham, 1997;Shepard, 1997), there appears to be overwhelming support for the importance of addressing what we call the &dquo;so what&dquo; question -did the assessment achieve the purpose for which it was intended (Haertel, 1999;Kane, 2002;Lane, Parke, & Stone, 1998;Lane & Stone, 2002;Linn, 1997Linn, , 1998Ryan, 2002;Shepard, 1997 ) ?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of Large-Scale Alternate Assessment Systems and Their Influence on Instruction —What Are the Consequences?

Towles-Reeves

Garrett

Burdette

et al. 2006

Assessment for Effective Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In conjunction with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA; PL 105-17), the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 (NCLB; PL 107-110) calls for enhancements to existing assessment and accountability systems within specific timelines. The NCLB Act also stresses the importance of using reliable and valid data for decision making. This study examined the consequential validity of a large-scale alternate assessment system for students with severe cognitive disabilities in one midwestern state. Three hundred and four teachers completed a survey designed to measure their perceptions of the alternate assessment's influence on instruction and the development of individualized education programs (IEPs). Findings indicated the assessment had a strong influence on instruction and a strong, but lesser influence on the development of IEPs.

show abstract

The Consequences of Consequential Validity

Cited by 85 publications

References 5 publications

Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores

Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores

Validity and the Consequences of Test Interpretation and Use

Validation of Large-Scale Alternate Assessment Systems and Their Influence on Instruction —What Are the Consequences?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About