A Suggested Change in Terminology and Emphasis Regarding Validity and Education
By Robert Lissitz, K. Samuelsen. 2007
256 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Education, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ae233767df414423352767f59f04f879eebecf25
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
- Richard D. West
- B. Madison
- M. Carlson
- M. Oehrtman
- Nicole Engelke
- Robert J. Mislevy
- Stephen R. Porter
- G. Cizek
In Management Science and Operations Research
- M. Oehrtman
- Robert J. Mislevy
- M. Carlson
- Stephen R. Porter
- G. Cizek
- S. Embretson
- S. Sireci
- Nicole Engelke
Citations in the corpus
- Validity by Design (2007, background): “by Robert J. Mislevy Lissitz and Samuelsen (2007) argue that the unitary conception of validity for educational assessments is too broad to guide applied work.”
- The Precalculus Concept Assessment: A Tool for Assessing Students’ Reasoning Abilities and Understandings (2010, methodology): “Lissitz and Samuelsen (2007) have argued that the most critical issue in instrument development is the process used to establish the content validity of the tool.”
- On Validity Theory and Test Validation (2007, background): “Lissitz and Samuelsen describe this as “sometimes an important consideration and sometimes worth studying” (p. 444). I think evaluation of testing consequences is a necessary part of any serious validation effort. First, it should be noted that Messick (1989b) did not use the term consequential vali”
- Do College Student Surveys Have Any Validity? (2011, background): “(Se Kane, 2001, and Lissitz and Samuelsen, 2007, for brief historical overviews of validity from the early 20th century to the present.)”
- Validating test score meaning and defending test score use: different aims, different methods (2016, background): “…broad endorsement of the importance of validity and agreement on many tenets of modern validity theory, there are also areas of disagreement (see, for example, Borsboom, Craver, Kievit, Scholter, & Franic, 2009; Borsboom, Mellenbergh, & van Heerden, 2004; Hood, 2009; Lissitz & Samuelsen, 2007).”
- A Study of Students’ Readiness to Learn Calculus (2015, background): “…Represent and interpret inequalities A3 Use and solve systems of equations A4 Understand and use function notation to express one quantity in terms of another Lissitz and Samuelsen (2007), the development of a valid examination should always begin by identifying the constructs worthy of assessment.”
- Construct Validity: A Universal Validity System or Just Another Test Evaluation Procedure? (2007, background): “by Susan E. Embretson Lissitz and Samuelsen (2007) have proposed a framework that seem- ingly deems construct validity evidence irrelevant to supporting educa- tional test meaning.”